Theory and Methods

A Level Sociology
A Resource-Based
Learning Approach
Theory and Methods
Unit M1: Functionalism

Unit M1: Functionalism

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

Introduction
The main purpose of these Notes is to provide a basic overview of different
sociological perspectives. Each set of notes is organised around three basic
themes:
1. A brief overview of the perspective.
2. An outline of the basic principles on which each perspective is based.
3. A brief evaluation of the perspective.
These Notes are, therefore, intended to serve as a general introduction to different
perspectives, although they may also be used as revision notes.
Structural Functionalism: Overview
The Functionalist perspective is a variant of Structuralist sociology and, as such,
we can initially characterise it as a form of Macro sociological theorising.
In basic terms, the main theoretical question addressed by sociologists working
within the Functionalist perspective is that of:
How do social systems ("societies") hold together?
Like many other sociologists working within other perspectives, Functionalists have
initially concentrated upon two ideas that are closely related to the above:
1. How is order maintained in any society?
2. What are the main sources of stability in any society?
As you might imagine - given that the theoretical emphasis seems to be placed on
rather grand questions about the nature of "society" - Functionalist sociologists are
not particularly concerned with the examination of individual ideas, meanings and
interpretations.
What they do tend to emphasise, however, is the idea that the basis of social
order is to be found in shared values / consensus (hence this perspective
sometimes being referred-to as "Consensus Structuralism").
When looking at varieties of Functionalist sociology, it is clear that all begin with an
elaboration of two major concepts:
1. Social System:
"Society" is seen as an organised structure (or framework) of inter-related parts
(called "Institutions").
2. Social Structure:
This refers to the specific framework around which any society is based (in effect,
social structure refers to the specific ways in which various institutions are
related to one another on a functional basis).

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 2

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

To develop these ideas, I've noted that the concept of "social institution" is central
to this perspective and an institution can be loosely defined as:
A broad pattern of shared, stable, social relationships.
In this sense, an institution involves large-scale, organised, behaviour patterns that
persist over time. Examples in our society include:
Family,
Work,
Education,
Religion.
When Functionalists study "society", therefore, they look initially at institutional
arrangements and relationships, since these are seen as the basic buildingblocks of any society. The way in which institutions relate to one another
determines the structure and basic character of any society.
Institutional arrangements are also significant in relation to the concept of culture,
which can be defined as a:
Broad pattern of values and beliefs that both characterise a particular way
of life and which are transmitted from generation to generation,
This is because people are born into an existing system of institutional
arrangements.
In order to learn how to behave in society, therefore, arrangements have to be made
for people to fit-into existing patterns of behaviour (patterns that are established and held relatively stable and constant over time - by institutionalised patterns of
behaviour. This process is socialisation:
Values and beliefs are transmitted to individuals (and internalised - that is, they
become an essential part of an individual's social make-up), through a variety of
socialising agencies (the family, peer group, mass media and so forth).
These agencies may be institutions in their own right (the family for example) or
part of an institutional set-up (the police, for example, are part of a legal
institution).
Through the socialising process the basic values of any society are internalised by
individuals and, for this to occur, Functionalists (such as Talcott Parsons,
G.P.Murdock and William Goode) argue that any society is founded, maintained
and reproduced through a broad value consensus (in this respect, broad levels of
agreement over fundamental values, for example).

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 3

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

From the above it is perhaps easy to see why Functionalist writers are not
particularly interested in the behaviour of individual social actors and the meanings
and interpretations they place on various forms of behaviour:
1. Firstly, society is seen as a set of inter-related and mutually-dependent
social structures that exist prior to any individual - the individual learns how to
behave within society and, in this respect, behaves in ways that are effectively
"pre-defined" by these social structures.
2. Secondly, because people are, by definition, socialised into a set of existing
cultural values (and they live their lives according such values), it follows that all
human activity / choice effectively takes place in the context of this institutionallydetermined cultural order.
In effect, we can note the following:
The socialisation process - through which cultural values are transmitted to the
individual - places limits upon people's horizons, perception of potential courses
of action and so forth.
People deviate from social norms, for example, not because they are irrational,
"naturally bad" or whatever. Deviation occurs because people are placed under
various kinds of social pressure that effectively limit their potential choices of
action.

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 4

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

Basic Principles...
1. It is useful to employ an organismic analogy to an understanding of the
Functionalist perspective.
Societies are analogous to living organisms (for example, a human being). Each
part of the human body is linked, in some way, to all other parts. Individual
organs combine to create something that is "greater than the sum total of their
individual parts".
In social terms, "organs" equate to social institutions (patterns of shared, stable,
behaviour) and the focus of analysis is upon the relationship between various
institutions in society. this represents a macro approach to the theorising and
study of the social world.
2. All parts of a society have:
a. A purpose (or function).
b. Certain needs.
For example, the purpose of the work institution is to create wealth and in
order to do this it needs people with a certain level of educational
knowledge.
In this respect, each institution in society faces certain problems that have to be
solved if it is to both exist and function properly. Talcott Parsons identifies these as:
a. Goal Attainment
This involves the need to set goals for human behaviour and also to determine
the means through which they can be achieved (the means of keeping an
institution moving towards its allotted goals).
b. Adaptation
This involves procuring the means to achieve valued goals. this may, for
example, involve the ability to create / provide the physical necessities of
institutional life.
c. Integration
People have to be made to feel a part of any institution. They need to be made to
feel that they belong and one way of achieving this is to give them something
that they can hold in common (values, beliefs, etc.). The ability of an institution to
integrate people successfully is vital for its continuation, internal harmony and so
forth.
d. Latency (or Pattern Maintenance)
This involves the development of social control mechanisms that serve to
manage tensions, motivate people, resolve interpersonal conflicts and the like
within an institution.
Parsons calls the above "functional imperatives". That is, "structural commands"
that have to be met if an institution - or indeed a society - is to continue to exist.

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 5

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

3. The above leads to the concept of functional interdependence between

institutions in society. The purpose of each institution can only be properly
understood by examining the relationship it has to all other institutions in society.
4. Society is seen as a form of living organism that exists independently of
individuals. Society exists "out there" in the structure of people's social relationships
rather than "in here" (inside the mind of individual social actors).
5. People experience society in terms of structural pressures and constraints on
their behaviour (for example, the pressure to go to school or to work, the pressure to
form a family and have children and so forth). In this respect, society is like a
"hidden hand" that pushes and coerces people in their daily lives - making us do
things that we may not particularly want to do but which we have to do if we are to
survive or to continue with our responsibilities to other people.
This concept was originally used by Adam Smith ("The Wealth of Nations") to
explain the way in which economic markets work. The relationships into which we
enter place rules, routines and responsibilities on us and our recognition of these
things acts like a hidden hand controlling our behaviour.
6. "Individual choice" is not a useful concept for Functionalists because people are
seen to react to social stimulation (pressure). that is, they respond to various
structural pressures and we learn our responses through the socialisation process.
7. Social order is based upon and maintained by a value consensus - a basic
agreement about values. These basic values derive from the "functional
imperatives" noted above (generated by the way in which institutions have purpose
and needs).
8. Durkheim ("The Rules of Sociological Method", 1895) emphasises two concepts:
a. Social Solidarity - the feeling that we belong to a common society (that we
have certain basic values in common with people). Solidarity is based upon such
things as common culture, socialisation, basic values and norms, etc.
b. Collective Conscience - the "external expression" of the collective will of
people living in a society. This represents the social forces that help bind people
together (to integrate them into the collective behaviour that is society). It can be
likened to the "will" of society.
9. In methodological terms, Functionalism has historical links to positivism,
although Durkheim refers to realist methodological concepts (unobservable
phenomena such as "levels of social integration" in relation to suicide).
If people's behaviour is a response to social stimulation, this is like the natural
world (where objects react in a non-conscious way to external forces - a light bulb
cannot decide not to shine, for example). Therefore, it is possible to study human
beings in much the same way since their "consciousness" is not a significant
variable in the overall scientific equation. Thus it is possible to study the social
world:
a. Objectively (that is, with out reference to the sociologist's personal values) and
b. Scientifically (that is, in terms of social facts rather than opinions).
Functionalist sociology, therefore, tends to advocate the concept of value-freedom
in relation to the study of social life.

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 6

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

Some General Points of Criticism...

1. The error of reification (that is, treating something that is not alive / not human as
if it were alive / human).
For example, Emile Durkheim talks about societies having "personalities" ("The
Rules of Sociological Method", 1895).
Can we talk about social institutions having "needs" and "purposes" in the way that
human beings can be considered to have such things?
2. Does everything in society have a function? The usual justification for this belief is
expressed in the idea that:
"We know something is functional to society because it exists; it exists because it
is functional".
The technical term for this justification is a tautology (a statement that contains its
own proof). In non-technical terms we can think of it as a circular argument.
This is a good example of the way a writer's perspective influences the way in
which they see the social world. If Functionalists believe that everything that
exists in society does so because it has some kind of functional purpose, then
their work will be directed towards trying to explain what that purpose might be.
3. Robert Merton, writing in the mid-20th century, attempted to modify this rather
extreme view by arguing that it was possible for something to be dysfunctional (that
is, potentially harmful to society.
Durkheim also recognised the possible dysfunctional aspects of some forms of
social life (although he did not use the term "dysfunction"). When he wrote about
crime being functional to society he also noted that "too high a level of crime"
might not be functional because it could create a situation of anomie (confusion
about the norms that applied to peoples' lives).
4. Functionalists have a problem explaining social change (or, more correctly, rapid
social change - revolutions, for example). This is because of the emphasis their
perspective puts on:
a. Value consensus created through the socialisation process.
b. Functional dependence and necessity (why, for example, should anything
change if it is already functional to society?).
5. Evolutionary (slow) change tends to be explained in terms of structural
differentiation (Parsons).
As institutions evolve / are created they produce different needs. For example:
As industrialisation occurs the institution of work needs a better-educated
workforce to cope with new skills. Hence, to compensate for this anomic situation
an education system evolves. The purpose of this new institution is to meet the
new social need and, in so doing, society adjusts itself to limit the potentially
disruptive effects of anomie.
6. Is there an over-emphasis upon the "beneficial" aspects of various institutional
arrangement in society? That is, do Functionalists tend to see only the benefits that

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 7

Theory and Methods

Functionalism

various institutional relationships bring to "society"? Can, for example, institutions be

oppressive and exploitative?
Marxists would argue that Capitalist institutions (such as the way in which work is
socially organised) may be beneficial to a small section of society (a ruling class)
rather than to society as a whole.
Radical feminists have also argued that the family group is an oppressive and
exploitative group, this time in favour of men.
In addition, the emphasis that tends to be placed upon identifying the functions an
institution performs (and the supposed benefits it brings to society as a whole) leads
to an implicit support for the political and economic status quo - in crude terms, a
tendency to try to justify "things as they are" as the best of all possible social
arrangements.

Chris.Livesey: www.sociology.org.uk

Page 8