UNIT 22

CONCEPT OF CULTURE AND

FUNCTION - MALINOWSKI

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Structure
22.0

Objectives

22.1

Introduction

22.2

Precursors of Malinowski
22.2.0 Evolutionists
22.2.1 Diffusionists
22.2.2 Birth of Social Anthropology

22.3

Concern with Data Collection

22.4

Culture as a Functioning and Integrated Whole

22.4.0 Malinowskis and Tyiors Definitions of Culture
22.4.1 Techniques for Studying Culture

22.5

Theory of Needs
22.5.0 Biological Impulses
22.5.1 Types of Needs

22.6

The Concept of Function as Developed by Malinowski

22.7

Let Us Sum Up

22.8

Keywords

22.9

Further Reading

22.10 Specimen Answers to Check Your Progress

22.0

OBJECTIVES

After reading this unit, you should be able to

z

discuss evolutionist and diffusionist approaches to the study of human

institutions

outline the early twentieth century sociologists concern with the

collection of first-hand information about society and its institutions

describe Malinowskis concept of culture and techniques of studying

the various aspects of culture

define the concept of needs, types of needs as explained by Malinowski

discuss the term function and its application by Malinowski to

analyse his field data from the Trobriand Islands.

22.1 INTRODUCTION
After going through the growth of classical sociology in earlier blocks of
this course, we have now come to the point when in the early twentieth

Max Weber

century sociology entered the phase of contemporary development. This

phase began with the emergence of the functionalist school.
Explaining the concept of functionalism in simple terms, we can say that
even early sociologists, like Comte and Spencer, spoke about a functional
relation between political, economic, religious, and moral phenomena. They
argued that changes in any one of these spheres would bring out
corresponding changes in other spheres. They asserted that discovering
these correspondences or interrelationships between the various social
phenomena was the aim of sociology. Later, Durkheim in France and many
other writers (specially the Victorian anthropologists of the nineteenth
century Britain) wrote voluminous books. These books claimed to show
the laws of origin and function of social institutions. This idea of studying
social phenomena in terms of their functions was transmitted to modern
sociology through early developments in British social anthropology during
the 1920s and 1930s. Bronislaw Malinowski, a brilliant Polish scientist
turned anthropologist, founded the functionalist school in Britain. This
marked a turning point in the history of sociology because under
Malinowskis leadership, functionalism was firmly grounded into the
directly observable and scientifically collected information (also referred
to as empirical reality) about society and its institutions.
This block mainly deals with the way early twentieth century sociologists
used the idea of function to assign meaning to a wide range of social
phenomena. Its first unit is concerned with contributions of Bronislaw
Malinowski. He studied primitive societies as socio-cultural wholes and
explained each aspect of culture in terms of its functions.
To explain the setting in which Malinowskis functionalist approach took
roots, the unit begins with a discussion of precursors of Malinowski and a
gradual appreciation of the significance of collecting data about society
and its institutions. Then, the unit describes Malinowskis concept of
culture, needs, institutions. Lastly, it examines his theory of functionalism,
which helped him to hang together his data collected during his superbly
conducted field work in New Guinea.

22.2

PRECURSORS OF MALINOWSKI

Malinowskis work was largely a product of the ideas of his predecessors.

Leach (1957: 137) concluded his essay on Malinowski by saying that
Malinowski... was in bondage to his predecessors; he resented their
existence because he was so much indebted to them. In a way this can be
said about any thinker who has advanced the thought of his or her times.
Let us examine here the case of Malinowski.

The eighteenth century scholars, like David Hume, Adam Smith and Adam
Ferguson in Britain, Montesquieu and Condorcet in France, were interested
in finding out the origins of human institutions (see Box 22.1). They thought
that by examining primitive societies they could know about the origins of
their own social institutions. They deduced theories about primitive societies
without ever collecting any evidence about them. Inevitably their theories
were based on principles prevailing in their own times and cultures. But

what is significant about them is that these scholars considered human

societies as an important subject of study. They thought that, as in the
natural sciences, universal laws of society could be discovered by studying
human social institutions. This is the reason why we think of these
eighteenth century scholars as forerunners of twentieth century sociology.
Their successors in the nineteenth century, known as evolutionists, were
also interested in social evolution and the progress of human culture.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Box 22.1 Interest in the Origin of Human Societies

The eighteenth century scholars in Europe were concerned with the
origins of human society. Among them, the best known are the Scottish
moral philosophers, David Hume (1711-1776) and Adam Smith (17231790). They considered that the origin of human society is to be found
in human nature. Rejecting the idea of a social contract, developed by
Hobbes, they spoke about natural religion, natural law, natural morality
and so on. They wanted to find out general principles of human nature.
This they did in terms of stages of development. They believed that by
arranging all known social groups on a scale of developed it was
possible to reconstruct human history. Similarly, Adam Ferguson wrote
in 1767 a book An Essay on the History of Civil Society, in which he
discussed such themes as the manner of subsistence, the principles of
population growth, social division and so forth. Because these scholars
were concerned with general principles about societies, we refer to their
ideas, even though we do not as such read their books.
In France, Montesquieu (1689-1755), who was a lawyer and political
philosopher, wrote in1748 a book The Spirit of the Laws on social
political philosophy. The aim of this book was to find out the
interrelations between all aspects of society. He thought that everything
in society is related, in a functional sense, to everything else. So to
understand for example constitutional, criminal and civil law one had
to study them in relation to each other and also in relation to the economy,
beliefs, and customs etc. of a people. Condorcet (1743-1794) was a
French Philosopher and political scientist. He too was in pursuit of the
origin of human societies.

22.2.0 Evolutionists
The evolutionists argued that because some societies were more advanced
than others, all societies had to pass through certain stages of development.
Theories of Charles Darwin about the evolution of human species
strengthened the idea that the progress of human history could also be
studied in terms of an evolutionary process.
For example, Bachofen in Europe, Maine and McLennan in Britain and
Morgan in America postulated various stages of social evolution.
During the period between 1861 and 1871 came out publications, which
are today regarded as theoretical classics. Among them, the best known
are:
z

Maines Ancient Law (1861) and Village - Communities in the East

and West (1871)

Max Weber

Bachofens Das Mutterrecht (The Mother - right) (1861)

Maclennans Primitive Marriage (1865)

Tyiors Researches into the Early History of Mankind (1865) and

Primitive Culture (1871)

Morgans Systems of Consanguinity and Affinity of the Human Family

(1871).

All these books do not primarily deal with primitive societies. Maines
books are about Roman institutions and the Indo-European communities.
Bachofen wrote about traditions and myths of Greek and Roman period.
But McLennan, Tylor and Morgan were mainly interested in primitive
cultures as a subject of study. They collected information about primitive
peoples from widely scattered sources and systematised this information.
All these scholars were keen to do away with speculative theories, which
had no basis in reality. Their predecessors (the eighteenth century moral
philosophers) relied on introspection about their own societies and had no
access to observation of societies other than their own. The nineteenth
century scholars were keen to study interrelations of parts of society by
the method of correlative variations. They argued that for complex social
phenomena one could not isolate simple variables. For establishing the
laws of origin and development of social institutions they wrote bulky books.
For example, they traced development of monogamy from promiscuity, of
industry from nomadism, of monotheism from animism and so on. Take
the case of Sir Henry Maine (1822-1888), a Scottish lawyer, who wrote
that the original and world-wide form of social life was the patriarchal
family, with the absolute authority of the patriarch. Interestingly, Bachofen,
a Swiss jurist had other, rather opposite, ideas about the family. He wrote
that promiscuity was the original form of family. Then came a matrilineal
and matriarchal form, which was followed by a patrilineal and patriarchal
form.
One more jurist and a Scot, J.F. McLennan (1827-1881) also worked out
the laws of social development. He thought that promiscuity must have
been the original and universal form of social life. Then must have come
the stage of matrilineal and totemic groups, followed by polyandry and
finally by a patrilineal system (see Key-words for these terms).
Finally, L.H. Morgan (1834-1881), an American lawyer, identified fifteen
stages of development of marriage and family. Only Sir Edward Tylor
(1832-1917) did not write about stages of human development, but focused
on religious beliefs. He showed that primitive peoples mistaken inference
about dreams, visions, disease, sleeping, life and death etc. gave rise to all
religious beliefs and cults.
Even now you may come across some people who believe that human
societies pass through evolutionary stages. But the idea looks far less
convincing to us who have access to contemporary research and writing
on human societies. This was not so for the nineteenth century scholars
who were primarily interested in finding out the origins of human
institutions. It was only later when more information about contemporary
10

human societies became available that the theories of the nineteenth century
evolutionists were tested against the newly available evidence. It was then
argued that their theories were only conjectural, without a basis in empirical
reality. For the evolutionists the idea of basing their theories on
systematically collected evidence about the people they wrote about was
unthinkable. They could not even imagine that primitive societies had
anything to offer for their enlightenment. You might like to hear the story
about a famous, late nineteenth century scholar, Sir James Frazer. He wrote
many books including The Golden Bough (see Box 22.2), about primitive
peoples. When asked if he ever met one of such people, he exclaimed,
God Forbid. This attitude reflects that arm-chair anthropologists like Frazer
considered their own society as the most advanced. In this way their findings
assumed an evolutionary character, reflecting the nineteenth century
scholars obsession with the idea of progress of human society. They
maintained that their society and culture were epitome of progress.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Box 22.2: The Golden Bough by J.G.Frazer

It is said (see Kuper 1975:23) that after being told that owing to ill
health he could not continue his career in science, Malinowski diverted
himself with the English classic The Golden Bough Sir James George
Frazer (1854-1940). The Golden Bough was first published in 1890
and re-printed in twelve volumes between 1907 and 1915. In 1922 it
appeared in an abridged edition. This classic is a study of ancient cult
and folklore and refers to a wide range of anthropological research.
In this book, Frazer reconstructed the evolution of human thought
through the successive stages of Magic, Science and Religion.
According to Frazer (1922: 55), at first magic dominated social life
and the magician believed in laws of nature. These were not real, but
imaginary laws. Gradually the more intelligent people came to realise
the fallacy and faced the trauma of disillusionment. In that state they
imagined of spiritual powers which could control nature, This was, for
Frazer, the stage of religion. In course of time, even this stage proved
to be an illusion, and led to the final stage of science.
We may not agree with the theory of Frazers sociological laws but we
need to give him enough credit for trying to account for similarities in
societies across time and space. This required a great deal of ability,
learning and scholarship. This is what had impressed Maliaowski and
inspired him to devote much of this scholarship to dealing with Frazerian
problem of magic science and religion. About this you will read in
Unit 23.
By the end of the nineteenth century scholars were reacting against the
evolutionist approach to explaining human societies by reconstructing the
past. Scholars, like Steinmetz (1894), Nieboer (1900), Westermarck (1906)
and Hobhouse (1906) can be counted among the last of those thinkers
who carried on the tradition of recasting and representing the ideas of the
single-direction or unilinear development of human societies, from primitive
to modern scientific stage.
11

Max Weber

Though the evolutionist approach came to be challenged, few disputed

that inquiry into the origins of human institutions was the aim of sociological
research. This is the reason why we find that even Malinowski who
criticised the evolutionists, almost with a passion, remained at heart an
evolutionist. The evolutionists were being discredited more for the
conjectural and evaluatory nature of their findings. In this they were found
to be little different from their eighteenth century precursors. You can say
that the difference between them was that the eighteenth century moral
philosophers constructed their theories without a care for providing any
evidence and the nineteenth century scholars felt that they had to support
their theories with some factual information. The evolutionists therefore
amassed a wealth of published material, haphazardly recorded by explorers,
travellers, missionaries, government functionaries and migrants. This
material was used to build lofty theories regarding the remote past of human
societies. The early twentieth century scholars questioned the validity of
such evidence.
The attack on evolutionary theories came from two kinds of sociologists.
One kind was known as the diffusionists and the other was labelled the
functionalists. Both regarded the study of primitive cultures necessary for
explaining the progress of human cultures. Both questioned the validity of
unsystematically collected facts about primitive societies. Both gave
importance to scientific collection of data about primitive people. But each
evolved its own techniques of data collection and more importantly
developed different theoretical frameworks to assign meaning to the data
thus collected for explaining human cultures. Here, we will first discuss
the diffusionists, their method of data-collection and their theories about
human cultures. We will then examine the functionalists, their techniques
of data collection and their theories for analysing human societies and
culture. As the study of primitive cultures was common to both the
diffusionists and the functionalists, the following discussion will relate to
their writings on primitive groups. It is now time to complete Activity 1.
Activity 1
Do you believe that human societies pass through successive stages of
development? Would you say that the whole phase of evolutionist
thinking, as discussed here, does not include the Indian writings on
society? If so, how would you explain this tact?

22.2.1 Diffusionists

12

The diffusionists were struck by the plain evidence of the spread of elements
of culture from one human group to another. They asked the question: If a
cultural trait in group A is similar to a trait in group B, is there a diffusion
and hence a link of some sort between the two groups? While answering
this question, the diffusionists became involved in showing affinities, which
accounted for similarities of beliefs, customs, technology, art and so on.
The theory of the spread of elements of culture from one ethnic group to
another came to be known as diffusionism. Extreme diffusionists tried to
trace the complex process of dispersal of entire human culture. They wanted
to find out the origins of cultural traits. For example, Father Wilhelm

Schmidt (1868-1954) considered it very important to identify survivals of

the earliest stages of humankind in the study of the conditions prevalent
among the primitive peoples. In England, G.E. Smith and W.J. Perry also
took an extreme position of identifying a single source of the spread of
human civilisation (see Lowie 1937). In their search for the source of human
civilisation they reached the conclusion that civilisation in ancient Egypt
was the source from where all civilisations in the world had spread. This
Egypt-based diffusionism of Elliot Smith and Perry was a much talked
about theory in the 1920s, but it did not find much favour in academic
circles. Bronislaw Malinowski was an ardent critic of this theory.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Most diffusionists reconstructed the history of human societies on the basis

of items of cultures being transmitted from one culture to another. They
evolved a geographical approach to study the growth of human society.
They focused on groups from culture - specific areas, comparisons across
cultures and described evolutionary processes of human civilisation. They
examined the patterns of links among cultural traits across time and space.
They were also known as ethnologists. Ethnologists deal with the division
of humankind into races, their origin, distribution, relations and cultural
traits. The ethnological tradition of studying cultural traits stimulated the
growth of cultural anthropology in the United States of America, with Franz
Boas as its leader. The ethnological studies are generally contrasted with
ethnographic studies. We may say that the difference between the two is
that ethnological studies deal with the comparison of cultural elements in a
range of societies while ethnographic studies describe the way of life of a
particular society. You can easily say that the very nature of ethnological
studies (dealing with the comparison of cultural elements across cultures)
would make ethnologists to depend on ethnographic studies for their basic
data.

22.2.2 Birth of Social Anthropology

Enthusiasm of ethnographers, in the early twentieth century, for making
detailed studies of particular societies resulted in the publication of several
ethnographic monographs (see Box 22.3). These studies created the space
for a new discipline - Social Anthropology - in Britain. Social anthropology
and sociology are closely related subjects. The findings of social
anthropology, largely derived from the studies of non-Western societies,
are of general relevance to the study of all types of societies. This is the
reason why the growth of social anthropology in the 1920s and 1930s
contributed to significant advances in sociological thought. Social
anthropologys emphasis, under the leadership of Bronislaw Malinowski,
on studying societies on the basis of first hand observation became a turning
point in the development of sociological theory. It was so because social
anthropologists insisted that ethnographic account must be based on the
study of a chosen society through personal visits, lasting a year or more.
In addition, they claimed that societies ought to be studied for their own
sake and they criticised those who studied primitive cultures only to
reconstruct the history of humankind.

13

Max Weber

Box 22.3 Ethnographic Monographs

Ethnographers of the early twentieth century tried to explain the social
phenomena in terms of the societies studied. Publications arising out of
these efforts came to be known as ethnographic monographs. As an
early example of this approach we can cite H. Junods The Life of a
South African Tribe, published in 1912-13. Malinowskis Argonauts of
the Western Pacific, published in 1922, is considered to be the supreme
example of the scientific study of a primitive society. This book analyses
the kula system of exchange of gifts among the Trobrianders. To know
more about this book, you are advised to listen to the audio-programme
on Argonauts of the Western Pacific.
Professional research in Africa was initiated by the visit of Seligman
and his wife to the Anglo-Egyptian Sudan in 1909-10. Later, intensive
field-studies of tribal societies in Africa were made by, for example, I.
A. Schapera among the Bechuana, by Meyer Fortes among the Tallensi
of the Gold Coast, by S.F, Nadel among the Nupe of Nigeria, by Hilda
Kuper among the Swazi and by Evans-Pritchard among the Nuer of
Southern Sudan. All these studies were among the small-scale political
groups. All the ethnographic studies mentioned here entailed the field
study of a primitive society for about a year and a half. This period
was generally broken into two visits with a break or few months in
between the visits. After this intensive fieldwork it took a scholar about
five years to publish the results of his or her research. Most works took
as long as ten years to come out.
Dominant among the ethnographers during the early twentieth century were
those who followed the Malinowskian tradition of collecting first-hand
information about primitive societies. Malinowski, as their leader, opposed
both the evolutionists and the diffusionists and went ahead with the task
of establishing social anthropology as an alternative way of studying human
societies.
Let us now discuss how the new found interest in collecting data based on
first-hand observation paved the way for the development of new ways of
studying human societies. Later the method of data collection came to be
known as participant observation by living among the people to be studied.
Early practitioners of this method chose to study primitive societies by
focussing on all aspects of a particular tribe. At this point it is better to
complete Check Your Progress 1 for gaining confidence of knowing what
you have so far read in this unit.
Check Your Progress 1
i)

State, in four lines, the difference between the approaches of the

eighteenth century moral philosophers and the nineteenth century
evolutionists.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

14

...................................................................................................................

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

...................................................................................................................
ii)

Distinguish between ethnology and ethnography. Use three lines for

your answer.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

22.3 CONCERN WITH DATA COLLECTION

Many scholars engaged in the study of human cultures during the early
twentieth century felt that both the evolutionists and the diffusionists were
involved in reconstructions of the human past on the basis of less convincing
evidence. You will be surprised to know that till the end of the nineteenth
century, with the solitary exception of L.H. Morgan (1818-1881), no
anthropologist or sociologist carried out a field-study and collected firsthand data about the people he or she had selected to study. Evans-Pritchard
(1954: 72) has attributed this to the fact that the nineteenth century scholars,
interested in the study of human cultures, were all from non-science
background. Further he shows that the scholars who began studying human
societies in the early twentieth century were mostly natural scientists (see
Box 22.4).
They had been trained to test their theories on the basis of their own
observations. So they were committed to collect first-hand information about
prevailing socio-cultural conditions in different parts of the world.
Box 23.4: Twentieth Century Natural Scientists Interest in the
Study of Society
Evans-Pritchard (1954: 72) has mentioned that among the earlier
scholars, writing on social institutions, Maine, McLennan and Bachofen
were lawyers. Herbert Spencer was a philosopher, Edward Tylor was
a foreign languages clerk and Frazer was a classical scholar. In contrast,
the early twentieth century scholars, who became interested in the study
of society were mostly from the natural sciences. For example, Boas
was a physicist and geographer. A.C. Haddon was a marine zoologist.
Rivers a physiologist, Seligman a pathologist. Elliot Smith was an
anatomist and Malinowski was a physicist. A.R. Radcliffe-Brown was
trained in experimental psychology. These scholars were used to testing
their statements against observations and experiments. So they
obviously stressed upon the need for making ones own observations
of the phenomena they wanted to study.
Secondly, it occurred to scholars that systematically collected information
about human cultures can be used for more purposes than just for illustrating
ones ideas about earlier stages of society. As pointed out by Beattie (1964:
91) even practical considerations gave an impetus to the attempts to

15

Max Weber

understand socio-cultural behaviour in primitive societies. Colonial

administrators and missionaries found it useful to collect ethnographic
material on the people they were to administer/convert. In fact, some of
the early records of primitive peoples were prepared by them (colonial
administrators and missionaries). Appreciation of the value of such material
gave stimulus to systematic and professional collection of first-hand
information about human communities. Gradually, information collection
replaced the interest of scholars in reconstructing the history of human
institutions, and led to inquiries into living communities.
Expeditions to collect information began first in America. Here, Morgan
(1851) had collected information among the Iroquois Indians. He lived
with and was later adopted by the Iroquois tribe. In 1883-84, Franz Boas
made a field-study among the Eskimos and later studied the American
Indians of the North-West coast (British Columbia, Canada). He gave
special importance to learning the language of the people to be studied.
In England, anthropological field visits for collecting first-hand information
were introduced by A.C. Haddon of Cambridge University. He led in 187879 the famous expedition to the Torres Straits region of the Pacific. The
purpose behind this expedition was to train scholars in conducting
professional fieldwork. In his team of fieldworkers, Haddon included
specialists in various academic areas. After spending four weeks in the
Western islands and four months in the Eastern islands, the team collected
information in pidgin-English (see Keywords) or with the help of
interpreters. Special interests of the scholars were reflected in the publication
of the expeditions reports. For example, W.H.R. Rivers wrote the chapters
on personal names, genealogies, kinship and marriage. C.G. Seligman was
responsible for the chapters on customs related to birth and childhood and
womens puberty. A.C. Haddon wrote on trade, warfare, magic, religion
and the ordering of public life. The team made an effort to cover all aspects
of the native way of life. It gave a clear account of the conditions of
fieldwork and the qualifications of those natives who provided information.
For individual scholars, this expedition set on a firm basis the value of
fieldwork experience. Two members, W.H.R. Rivers and C.G. Seligman
carried out more fieldwork on their own. C.G. Seligman worked in
Melanesia in 1904 and among the Vedda of Sri Lanka in 1907-8. Again in
1909-12 and 1921-22, he conducted fieldwork in Sudan and provided a
descriptive account of a cultural and linguistic area. W.H.R. Rivers carried
out fieldwork among the Toda of Nilgiri, India, in 1901. The Todas, by
Rivers (1906), gave a precise account of fieldwork conditions and its main
text described beliefs and customs among the Toda, followed by a separate
section on interpretation of the field material.
The expedition to Torres Straits in 1898-99 became a landmark in the
history of anthropological studies of society. Now onwards, anthropology
became a full-time professional interest of scholars and secondly, gaining
of fieldwork experience became an integral part of the training of
anthropologists. Another important landmark in collecting ethnographic
material was the expedition of A.R. Radcliffe-Brown to the Andaman
Islands, India, in 1906-8. About this fieldwork and its results published in
1922, we will discuss in Units 24 and 25.

16

Here we will take the much discussed tradition of fieldwork initiated by

Bromslaw Malinowski, who made three field visits to New Guinea C G
Seligman, who was Malinowskis teacher, had suggested that Malinowski
should go to New Guinea for his first field-experience. In his first visit to
New Guinea, Malinowski lived among the Mailu of Toulon Island, a West
Papuo-Melanesian group. This visit was made during September 1914 to
March 1915. In June 1915 Malinowski went to the Trobriand islands (see
Map) and stayed there until May 1916. Again he went to these islands in
October 1917 and lived there for one year

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Map 22.1: i) The Geographical Location of Trobriand Islands and ii)

Detailed Map of Trobriand Islands
Malinowski first conversed with the Trobrianders in pidgin-English but
soon in a matter of three months, he could make his inquiries in the native
dialect. Of the two years of fieldwork among the Trobnand islanders, he
spent only six weeks in the company of Europeans. He had pitched his
tent right among the huts of the natives. This gave him an ideal position to
observe the way of life of the Trobrianders. His story of the tribulations
of fieldwork is quoted as one of the most human documents in
ethnographical writing (Kaberry 1957: 77). For a glimpse into his field
diaries see Kuper (1975: 27-32)
Furthermore, Malinowski was not just a passive observer and collector of
facts about a society. He collected them by employing certain techniques.
He was the first professionally trained anthropologist to conduct fieldwork
in a primitive community. He evolved a range of techniques of fieldwork
(see sub-section 22.4.1).
Application of these techniques was, according to Malinowski, dependent
on ones training in theory relating to the study of human cultures. The
rich ethnography that Malinowski had at his command prompted him to
evolve a theoretical approach for presenting the results of his research. His
ethnographic monographs (see the list of references at the end of this block)
are not mere examples of pure ethnography nor just a record of the patterns
of behaviour and belief of the Trobrianders. They show principles of
organisation of the society and their interconnections. You can now easily
make out that the concern for collecting data about society and its institutions
was geared to finding alternative ways of studying and analysing human
cultures. In the next section, we will discuss Malinowskis concept of
culture. From his idea about culture emanated his theory of functionalism
which gave him and his students a methodology to analyse human cultures.

22.4

CULTURE AS A FUNCTIONING AND

INTEGRATED WHOLE

Malinowski had a set of ideas, which he used to guide his approach to

cultural behaviour. Malinowski (1944: 36) used culture in an encyclopaedic
way to include in it implements and consumer goods,....constitutional
charters for the various social groupings,....human ideas and crafts, beliefs
and customs. Be it a simple or primitive culture or a complex and developed
17

Max Weber

one, for Malinowski (1944: 35) it was a vast apparatus, partly material,
partly human and partly spiritual by which man is able to cope with
concrete specific problems that face him. These statements show that
Malinowskis concept of culture included (i) material culture, (ii) concrete
categories of human activity and (iii) constitutional charters for social groups,
and beliefs.
i)

The first category, i.e., material-culture includes implements and

consumer goods. These were artefacts or physical objects. They were
the products of human actions and were instrumental in satisfying
human needs.

ii)

The second component, i.e., concrete categories of human activity, is

covered by the term custom, which included elements of social
organisation.

iii) The third component, i.e., constitutional charters for social groups and
beliefs, included cultural objects and also some aspects of social
organisation.
The above description shows that Malinowski treated culture as almost
everything that concerned human life and action and that it was not a part
of human organism as a physiological system. For Malinowski, culture
was that form of behaviour which individuals learnt and held in common
and passed on to other individuals. It included also the material culture
linked with such learned patterns of behaviour.
Here, we find that Maiinowski drew a line of distinction between material
objects on the one hand and customs, beliefs and social groupings on the
other. Material objects functioned as implements and consumer goods.
Customs, beliefs and social groupings were properties of those individuals
who were involved in socio-cultural behaviour. Malinowski in a way used
culture as equivalent to society or social system. Let us examine
Malinowskis definition of culture in relation to Tylors definition of the
same term.

22.4.0 Malinowskis and Tylors Definitions of Culture

Malinowskis definition of the term culture was given in 1931 in the
Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences (1931:621-46). He wrote, ...culture
comprises inherited artifacts, goods, technical processes, ideas, habits and
values. For Malinowski, social organisation is clearly a part of culture. In
this respect, you will find that his definition of culture is quite similar to
Tylors (1881) definition. We have often referred to Tylors definition of
culture in our elective courses. Once again we repeat it. Tylor said that
culture is that complex whole which includes knowledge, belief, art, law,
morals, customs and all other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a
member of society. A comparison between the two definitions shows that
Tylor stressed the complexity aspect while Malinowski emphasised the
wholeness aspect of culture.
Malinowski used the term culture as a functioning whole and developed
the idea of studying the use or function of the beliefs, practices, customs
and institutions which together made the whole of a culture. He viewed
18

different aspects of culture as a scheme for empirical research, which could

be verified by observation. In this sense, we can say that Malinowski
became an architect of what is known as the fieldwork method in
anthropology/sociology. In developing his perspective on field research he
brought about the functionalist revolution and wrote, The magnificent title
of the Functionalist School of Anthropology has been bestowed by myself,
in a way on myself. This was no boasting. Malinowski published the results
of his painstaking fieldwork in 1922 in his famous monograph, Argonauts
of the Western Pacific. Here, he used the concept of culture as a balanced
system of many parts. He explained that the function of a custom or
institution was to be understood in the way it helped to maintain the culture
as a whole. Malinowski (1931: 621-46) instructed that a culture had to be
studied in its own right... as a self-contained reality.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

We should look at these emphases by Malinowski in the light of prevalent

approaches of his time. At that time, evolutionists and diffusionists related
the cultures in time to an evolutionary scale or related them in space upon
some diffusionist map (Pocock 1961: 52). Objecting to these approaches,
Malinowski stressed the need for finding the interrelatedness of different
aspects of culture. In this way, he argued for viewing culture as an
integrated whole. This whole had to be studied in terms of the function
of each custom.

22.4.1 Techniques for Studying Culture

For this purpose Malinowski developed techniques or field methods for
studying the functioning whole of culture. Because of his insistence on
field-methods his brand of functionalism almost revolutionalised the
discipline of anthropology. He brought about a radical revaluation of terms
used in his days for describing and analysing culture. Let us briefly examine
the three broad kinds of material which, according to Malinowski, required
special techniques of data-collection.
i)

He advanced the method of statistic documentation by concrete

evidence for outlining the institutions and customs of a culture. He
wanted the fieldworker to understand elements of an activity and links
between its separate aspects from opinions, descriptions elicited from
people, from observation of actual cases.

ii)

Social action of everyday life was to be observed and minutely

recorded in a special ethnographic diary. Malinowski wrote,
In working out the rules and regularities of native custom, and in
obtaining a precise formula for them from the collection of data and
native statements, we find that this very precision is foreign to real
life, which never adhere rigidly to any rules. It must be supplemented
by the observations of the manner in which a given custom is carried
out, of the behaviour of the natives in obeying the rules so exactly
formulated by the ethnographer, of the very exceptions which in
sociological phenomena almost always occur.

iii) He asked the field worker to collect ethnographic statements,

characteristic narratives, typical utterances, items of folklore and
magical formulae to document native mentality,

19

Max Weber

Malinowski wanted to understand the complexity of divergences between

what people say about what they do (no. i of the above), what they actually
do (no. ii of the above) and what they think (no. iii). A gifted field worker,
like Malinowski himself, was to achieve personal identification with the
people he or she wanted to study. Malinowski referred to the concept of
function as use. He said that cultures were integrated wholes because they
were functioning unit. For him all aspects of culture carried a meaning for
members of a social group. In a way, they were a means for satisfying
peoples needs. This was, so to say, the rationale for their being together.
Explanation of culture in terms of needs took Malinowski into the area of
psychology. We will discuss this in section 22.5.
Activity 2
Kuper (1975: 37-8) has commented that though Malinowski insisted
upon interrelations between the various aspects of culture, he was
unable to produce a coherent depiction of Trobriand culture. According
to Kuper this was so because Malinowski lacked the notion of a
system. This means that he simply described each part and tried to
show its relation to another part of culture, yet he could not perceive
the essence of their culture. For example, you may describe each part
of the body. You may say that arms are connected to shoulders and
shoulders are connected to the neck and so on. But this description
cannot give you a theory of anatomy. Well, this is one example of the
failure of Malinowskian ethnography. After critically reading section
22.4, can you think of any other failure of Malinowskian description
of primitive culture?

22.5

THEORY OF NEEDS

Malinowskis search for concepts to analyse primitive culture led to a

particular approach to explanation of social facts. This approach is known
as his theory of needs. It was presented in A Scientific Theory of Culture
by Malinowski. According to him the needs were two-fold, namely, the
needs of the individual and the needs of the society. Malinowski (1944:
90) defined the term need, as follows.
By need, then, I understand the system of conditions in the human
organism, in the cultural setting, and in relation of both to the natural
environment, which are sufficient and necessary for the survival of group
and organism. A need, therefore, is the limiting set of facts. Habits and
their motivations, the learned responses and the foundations of organisation,
must be so arranged as to allow the basic needs to be satisfied.
The first part of this definition speaks of the system of conditions in the
human organism. It refers to biological impulses which need to be satisfied.

22.5.0 Biological Impulses

20

Malinowski (1944: 77) provided a table of permanent vital sequences

incorporated in all cultures. These sequences refer to the satisfaction of
impulses of an individual. These are

A) Impulse, leading to B) Act, leading

C) Satisfaction

1)

drive to breathe

intake of Oxygen

Elimination of carbondioxide
in tissues

2)

hunger

ingestion of food

satiation

3)

thirst

absorption of liquid quenching

4)

sex appetite

conjugation

detumescence (subsidence
of swelling)

5) fatigue

rest

restoration of muscular and

nervous energy

6)

restlessness
(sleepiness)

activity

satisfaction of fatigue

7)

somnolence

sleep

awakening with restored

energy

8)

bladder pressure

micturition
(urination)

removal of tension

9)

colon pressure

defecation

abdominal relaxation

10) fright

escape form danger relaxation

11) pain

avoidance by
effective act

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

return to normal state

This table refers merely to the satisfaction of the impulses of an individual.

In this and the following list, Malinowski used unfamiliar words. Their
meanings have been provided in parentheses.

22.5.1 Types of Needs

Malinowski (1944: 91) added the concept of individual and group survival
to that of individual impulse. He constructed a model of types of needs. It
comprised three types, namely, basic, derived and integrative needs.
i)

Basic Needs

The basic needs focussed on the conditions essential to both individual

and group survival. The table of basic needs is as follows:
Basic Needs

Cultural Responses

Metabolism

Commissariat (food supplies)

Reproduction

Kinship

Bodily comforts

Shelter

Safety

Protection

Movement

Activities

Growth

Training

Health

Hygiene

21

Max Weber

Culture, in terms of the table of basic needs, has the value of biological
survival. This may be described as primary determinism.
ii)

Derived Needs

The human beings life as a social creature brings about a secondary

determinism. You can also say that for the satisfaction of basic needs culture
creates its own needs. These are, according to Malinowski (1944: 125),
derived needs or imperatives, which relate to
Need
a)

requirements of maintenance
of cultural apparatus

Response
economics

b)

regulation of human behavioul

social control

c)

socialisation

education

d)

exercise of authority

political organisation

These derived needs or imperatives do not however include all imperatives

established among human beings. The young of many animals can also be
taught these rules. But none, except human beings, have the ability to
transmit them to their young. No doubt, apes are able to teach their young
how to behave and in this sense they have rules. But it is hard to imagine
the mother chimpanzee commenting on another mother-baby set as
observing no rules. This happens only when habit changes into custom
iii) Integrative Needs
Human social life is characterised by what Malinowski (1944: 125) calls
the integrative imperatives. Through integrative imperatives, habit is
converted into custom, care of children into the training of the next
generation and impulses into values. The phenomena such as tradition,
normative standards or values, religion, art, language and other forms of
symbolism belong, according to Malinowski, to the sphere of integrative
imperatives. In other words, we find that for Malinowski the essence of
human culture is contained in symbolism or in values.
This shows that Malinowskis theory of needs recognises the biological
bases of cultural activities and therefore it can be applied to explain and
compare cultural behaviour from different parts of the world. He considers
social structure as one of the cultural means to satisfy primary, derived and
integrative needs of human beings. This conceptual scheme gave
Malinowski an explanatory tool to prepare field records of a high order.
Malinowskis (1929) study of The Sexual Life of Savages in N W Melanesia
and his student Audrey Richards (1932) Hunger and work in a Savage
Tribe amply demonstrate that different cultures not only satisfy but also
regulate and limit biological impulses (see sub-section 22.5.0)

22

Ralph Piddmgton (1957: 49) considered the theory of needs as a potential

contribution to co-operation between psychologists and anthropologists.
To summarise we can say that Malinowskis theory of needs is a general
idea about the biological and cultural factors of human behaviour. His quest
for concepts, which were not purely speculative and which were also not

so concrete as to make generalisations difficult, remained an ongoing

activity. In the process, we find his idea of describing societies as wellbalanced cultural wholes was later overtaken by his emphasis on the study
of institutions. An institution for Malinowski was a component or part of
culture. He began to look for the relationship between different institutions
of a society. This enabled him to link the political with the religious or the
political with the economic or technological. He thought institutions to be
different from each other as much as they were organised around different
functions. What did he mean by the term function? Let us first Check
Your Progress 2 and then read section 22.6 for finding the answer to this
question.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Check Your Progress 2

i)

Write, in three lines, the difference between basic needs and derived
needs.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

ii)

Was Malinowski able to account for the phenomena such as religion

and art in his theory of needs? If yes, explain how he perceived the
essence of human culture in symbolism? Use three lines for your
answer.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

22.6

THE CONCEPT OF FUNCTION AS

DEVELOPED BY MALINOWSKI

You have already learnt that the cardinal point in the conceptual framework
of Malinowski was the idea of culture. It was taken by him as an instrument
for the satisfaction of human needs. Cultures function in terms of needs
helped Malinowski to systematically record and analyse the rich
ethnographic material he collected in the Trobriand islands.
Some scholars consider Malinowskis ethnography as a matter of theoretical
insight (Leach 1957: 119). And such theoretical insights have today
become an integral part of sociological research. According to Leach, the
anthropological greatness of Malinowski lies in his theoretical assumption
that all field data must fit and form a total picture, just like in a jigsaw
puzzle. It must not only fit but also make sense. This assumption made it
necessary for a Malinowskian to pay great attention to minute details of
socio-cultural situations. This attitude brought significant results in terms
of vivid and lively ethnographic accounts of primitive peoples and
explanations of their behaviour (for an example see Box 22.5).
Malinowskis insistence on collection of first-hand data itself became a

23

Max Weber

source of theoretical advance because it necessitated that the analysis of

the data must remain grounded in empirical reality.
Box 22.5: Malinowskis Essay on Baloma
This is an excerpt from Malinowskis essay on Baloma: The Spirit of
the dead in the Trobriand (1948:191-3). Malinowski spent about ten
months at Omarakana and the neighbouring village of Kiriwina
(Trobriand Islands). There he lived among the natives in a tent and
within five months of his stay in the village he was able to converse in
Kiriwinian language. This excerpt shows the role of magic in the tribal
life of the Kiriwinians. Note Malinowskis ease in bringing the
Trobrianders right before our eyes.
Magic is so widespread that, living among the natives, I used to come
across magical performances, very often quite unexpectedly, apart from
the cases where I arranged to be present at a ceremony. The hut of
Bagidou, the garden magician of Omarakana, was not fifty meters from
my tent, and I remember hearing his chant on one of the very first days
after my arrival, when I hardly knew of the existence of garden magic.
Later on I was allowed to assist at his chanting over magical herbs; in
tact, I could enjoy the privilege as often as I liked, and I used it several
times. In many garden ceremonies part of the ingredients are chanted
over in the village, in the magicians own house, and, again, before
being used in the garden. On the morning of such a day the magician
goes alone into the bush, sometimes far away, to fetch the necessary
herbs. In one charm as many as ten varieties of ingredients, practically
herbs have to be brought. Some are to be found on the sea beach only,
some must be fetched from the raiboag (the stony coral
woodland),others are brought from the odila, the low scrub. The
magician has to set out before daybreak and obtain all his material before
the sun is up. The herbs remain in the house, and somewhere about
noon he proceeds to chant over them a mat is spread on the bedstead,
and on this mat another is laid. The herbs are placed on one half of the
second mat, the other half being folded over them. Into this opening
the magician chants his spell.
His share is very much appreciated by the community; indeed, ft would
be difficult to imagine any work done in the gardens without the cooperation of the towosi (garden magician).

24

Malinowski was sceptical of abstract theory (Leach 1957: 134). This

attitude drove him to insist on minutely recording the empirical facts about
society. But he was not to be drowned in the sea of empirical details. He
too, like other sociologists, had to make sense of these details. For this
purpose he needed to develop a theoretical framework. Biased against
abstract theory, he was determined to overcome deficiencies of the
nineteenth century speculative theory. As a result he was engaged in a
constant search for concepts of middle-range, concepts which were not
too abstract as to become speculative and concepts which were not too
concrete as to leave no scope for generalisations. And in the process,
Malinowski confined himself to establishing culture as a tool, to serve

functional roles. Secondly, in showing the functional role of culture, he

emphasised the satisfaction of needs of the individual. His theory of
functionalism did not proceed beyond this.

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Functionalism could not be developed by Malinowski as a methodological

concept. In the words of Evans-Pritchard (1954: 54), for Malinowski
functional method was a literary device for integrating his observations
for descriptive purposes. It is not out of place to mention here that it was
Malinowskis contemporary Radcliffe-Brown who later developed the
functional or organismic theory of society. You will read about it in Unit
25. Let us now complete Check Your Progress 3.
Check Your Progress 3
i)

If Malinowski failed to develop functionalism as a methodological

concept, what was his special contribution to sociological research?
Use two lines for your answer.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

ii)

What helped Malinowski to explain his theory of culture as a functional

tool? Use two lines for your answer.
...................................................................................................................
...................................................................................................................

22.7

LET US SUM UP

Having discussed at length Malinowskis concept of culture, needs and

function, it is easy to make out that the concept of function was not fully
developed by him. As far as his concept of culture was concerned, he
wanted to evolve a grand design and in the process he made his job too
difficult and unwieldly. All the same he is recognised to be a valiant fighter
who opposed widely accepted theories of his times. Not only this, he made
his major contribution to sociological thought by combining into one the
roles of an ethnographer and a theoretician. He showed how ethnographic
facts were without meaning in the absence of theoretical interpretations.
Over fifteen years he evolved a theoretical framework which, being
grounded in empirical reality, was extensively used by his followers. In
this way he became a legend and a great name in anthropology.

22.8

KEYWORDS

Diffusionism

The theory of the spread of elements of culture from

one ethnic group to another

Empiricism

The practice of relying on observation and

experiment or a theory that all knowledge originates
in experience
25

Max Weber

Eskimo

A group of people of Northern Canada, Greenland,

Alaska and eastern Siberia

Ethnography

It refers to a descriptive account of the way of life

of a particular society

Ethnology

It is the comparative study of the elements of culture

in many societies

Evolution

This concept refers to change and progress. When

it is applied to organisms, it implies the changes in
genes of given populations by processes like
mutation and natural selection. Applied to the
development of human society, the concept refers
to successive stages of development through which
societies are supposed to pass.

Fieldwork

The anthropological practice of carrying out

research by going to the area of the people one
wants to study and collecting facts which are guided
by systematic theory of society

Iroquois Indian

An Amerindian confederacy of New York that

consisted of the Cayuga, Mohawk, Oneida,
Onondaga, and Seneca and later included Tuscarora
tribals

Matriliny

The system of tracing relationship to kin exclusively

through females

Matriarchy

Social organisation in which mother is head of

family

Moral Philosopher

Those who make the study of human conduct and

values

Patriliny

The system of tracing relationship to kin exclusively

through males

Patriarchy

System of society in which father or oldest living

male is head of family

Pidgin-English

An English-based speech used for communication

between people with different languages

Polyandry

The practice of marriage of one woman to two or

more men

Torres Straits

A strait 80 meter wide between island of New

Guinea and northern tip of Cape York peninsula,
Australia

22.9
26

FURTHER READING

Kuper, Adam, 1975, Anthropologists and Anthropology: The British School

1922-72. Penguin Books: London

22.10

SPECIMEN ANSWERS TO CHECK YOUR

PROGRESS

Concept of Culture and

Function-Malinowski

Check Your Progress 1

i)

The eighteenth century moral philosophers did not feel any need to
provide evidence regarding their theories of human institutions. The
nineteenth century evolutionists felt such a need and provided evidence
on the basis of haphazardly collected material.

ii)

Ethnography provides a descriptive account of the way of life of a

particular society while ethnology refers to the comparative study of
the various aspects of culture in many societies.

Check Your Progress 2

i)

The basic needs relate to the conditions, which are necessary for the
survival of both the individual and the group. Derived needs, on the
other hand, are those needs, which are created by culture to satisfy
the basic needs.

ii)

Malinowskis idea of integrative needs accounts for symbolism. He

said that when a habit becomes a custom, learnt behaviour is converted
into a value, it is recognised as an integrative need.

Check Your Progress 3

i)

The insistence on collection of first-hand data is Malinowskis special

contribution to sociological research.

ii)

Malinowski developed a theory of needs for explaining the concept

of culture as a functional tool.

27