Functionalism, also known as Structural Functionalism, is a term that is used to refer to the theorizing of Emile Durkheim because of its focusing on how social structures determine and are effective in maintaining social order and cohesion (Dillon, 2020). Many theorists have helped create what is known today as Functionalism. There are early and modern theories that have come together to get what is known as Functionalism today. Most of the theories have to do with society and how social order will work under what conditions. For example, Emilie Durkheim wanted to explain how social institutions were a shared way for individuals in society to meet their own biological needs (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). This would set the base for the modern theorists to create and test their theories.
Early theorists are to thank for what is known as Functionalism today. Durkheim is seen as the theorist who brought about the term Functionalism, but without Auguste Comte there would be no such thing as Sociology in general. Comte is seen as the Father of Sociology. Comte embraced the Enlightenment’s way of science and adapted it to study human society instead of a more biological approach and also believed that sociology could unite all sciences and improve society. (Dillon, 2020). Comte believed that sociology would be the science of humanity and envisioned that there would be a positivist sociology (Dillon, 2020). The positivist idea is that sociology as a science is able to employ the same scientific method of investigation and explanation used in the natural sciences, but focusing on society (Dillon, 2020). Comte wrote the work, Positivist Philosophy, which set out his views. In this view, sociology would represent a social advancement in all other disciplines, like how the Enlighteners thought about humanity. Sociology developed quickly as a discipline because it could improve on already existing scientific methods and with Comte, the focus was on observable data across all aspects of society (Dillon, 2020). Comte also believed that society developed in three stages. The first was the theological stage which is where people took a religious view of society. The second was the metaphysical stage which is where people understood society as natural rather than supernatural. The third stage was the scientific or positivist stage, which Comte believed to be the pinnacle of social development. In this stage, society would be governed by reliable knowledge (Dillon, 2020). Without Comte, there would be no Functionalism for people to study.
Harriet Martineau is seen as the first female sociologist (Dillon, 2020 ; Lengermann & Niebrugge-Brantley, 2007). With Martineau included in the initial definition of sociological work, her work would only overlap slightly with Comte (Lengermann & Niebrugge-Brantley, 2007). Martineau’s work shows that in the beginning there was concern with actions and actors, a sense to begin sociology, a definition of sociology, the idea that gender matters, and what the moral responsibility of a sociologist would be (Lengermann & Niebrugge-Brantley, 2007). Martineau was able to take theories of other sociologists and add a Feminst point of view to them. This created a different way of looking at society, which also helped open the eyes of other theorists later on. Martineau translated Comte’s vision of sociology into English so it would be able to reach more people (Dillon, 2020). Along with this she also wrote a detailed booklet explaining the way that morals and manners, her definition of sociology, should be observed (Dillon, 2020). Martineau studied social class, religion, suicide, health, family, crime, and more in her works. Martineau was committed to sociology as observation based, but was also able to recognize that the subject matter of sociology is different from that of what is studied by natural scientists (Dillon, 2020). Martienau was able to help open the door for sociologists to understand that humans are different to study than the natural sciences and that sociologists would need to have a different view when studying.
Emile Durkheim is known as the sociologist to bring about Functionalism (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Durkheim’s main idea was centered on identifying the mechanisms of social integration that are needed for the preservation of the social system. Durkheim believed this could be classified as the cultural, structural, interpersonal, and cognitive functions of integrated social structures (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). The explanation of social facts, which are external and collective forces regulating and constraining the ways of society, requires identifying both their causes and their functions in relation to their relevant social structures (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Durkheim applied this approach to a wide range of social facts to identify existing correspondences between these facts (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). For Durkheim, the main focus of sociological analysis should be on the mechanisms of solidarity and cohesion that help to explain social systems (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Durkheim wanted to understand the value of cultural and social traits by explaining them in regards to their contribution to the operation of the overall system of society and life (Dillon, 2020). The focus for Structural Functionalism changed to be more about the ways that social institutions in society meet the social needs of individuals within that society. Durkheim was interested in four main aspects of society, why societies formed and what holds them together, religion, suicide, and crime. These together are what brought about Durkheim’s theory on the division of labor which resulted in his views on organic and mechanical societies (Dillon, 2020). Durkheim helped to set the base for what is now known as Functionalism as theorists after him used his works as the base for their theories on Functionalism.
Modern theorists were able to use the theories of the early theorists to mold Functionalism into what it is known as today. Talcott Parsons is seen as the theorist who introduced Functionalism to the United States (Dillon, 2020). Parsons theory was not just a theory to be one. He wanted his theories to be some that were generalized and applied in a specific context (Dillon, 2020). Parsons recognized the importance of individual agency and will in the pursuit of goal-oriented behavior (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). He maintained that the choices available to individual agents are circumscribed and shaped by social values and norms (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Parsons normative Functionalism and his emphasis on system stability informed much urban planning and design since the 1950s (Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). The Structure of Social Action came to define European social theory for subsequent generations of North American sociologists (Crothers, 2010). Parsons’ theory was derived from those of Karl Max and Emile Durkheim, together he was provided with an early intimation of the functionalist synthesis of sociological theory. Parsons would present it as the basis of professional sociology (Crothers, 2010). Parsons worked closely with other sociologists to be able to create and test his theories.
One of these theorists Parsons worked closely with was Robert Merton (Dillon, 2020). Merton wrote about an extensive range of topics and is most known for his middle-range theory he created off of Parsons’ generalized theory (Dillon, 2020). Merton argued that it was necessary to make a distinction between latent and manifest functions (Crothers, 2010). Manifest functions are objective consequences contributing to the adjustment of the system which are intended to be recognized participants in the system (Dillon, 2020). Latent functions are those objective consequences that are not recognized (Dillon, 2020). Merton argued that most of the mistakes with existing Functionalism were the result of the conflation of these categories (Crothers, 2010). Merton also argued that there exist certain components that do not fulfill any functions, while other elements that he called dysfunctions may have a negative effect on the system ( Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Merton also had a theory on deviance and how it is a function of strain between cultural goals and institutional means (Dillon, 2020; Merton, 2017). There are different types of individual adaptation to cultural and institutional strain, this just depends on the individual’s social situation (Dillon, 2020 ; Merton, 2017). Merton and Parsons set the path for other sociologists in the 1950s and 1960s and helped to create what Functionalism is seen as today (Dillon, 2020 ; Kitchin & Thrift, 2009).
Like any theory, there are criticisms of Functionalism. Since the 1970s, Functionalism has been criticized because of its different analogies in the conceptualization of social systems and social order. This was because Functionalism was seen as being unable to account for social change (Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). For similar reasons Functionalism was criticized as being a conservative approach because of its emphasis on system integration, stability, and social consensus. This would cause the internal contradictions of social systems (Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). Functionalists would be unable to account for the causes driving the process of structural and functional differentiation and they would have combined the concepts of cause and function. These and more criticisms of Functionalism became more and more during the 1970s. This was at the same time that the social sciences were experiencing a rapid growth and changes (Kitchin & Thrift, 2009). One thing about Functionalists is that they were mainly interested in the relations of institutions and their consequences for a social system (Homans, 1964). It is argued that Functionalists take things like social norms for granted and that the relationships they discover can be explained by deductive systems that employ psychological approaches, then the general explanatory rules of sociology are not sociological (Homans, 1964). Psychologically the behavior of man would be studied and not that of society. These are just a few of the many criticisms of Functionalism. Functionalism is still around and used in several areas of scientific analysis and explanation.
Many different theorists set the base for what Functionalism is today. Different theories were built off of those of others, like Durkheim setting the way for modern theorists. Not one person had the set theory for Functionalism as it is based on society, social structures, and social order. As things in society change the theory will change as more theorists study it. With modern theorists like Talcott Parsons and Robert Merton, Functionalism is what people know it as today. There are a lot of differences in the modern theories as society has changed a lot since Durkheim was around. There are many criticisms of Functionalism, but in the end it is still used widely by sociologists and is used in several areas of scientific analysis and explanation.
References
Crothers, C. (2010). Historical developments and theoretical approaches in sociology (Vol. 2).
Eolss Publishers.
Dillon, M. (2020). Introduction to sociological theory: Theorists, concepts, and their applicability
to the twenty-first century (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
Homans, G.C. (1964), ‘Bringing men back in’ American Sociological Review 29: 809-18.
Kitchin, R., & Thrift, N. J. (2009). Functionalism (Including Structural Functionalism). In
International Encyclopedia of Human Geography (pp. 277–282). Essay, Elsevier.
Lengermann, P. M., & Niebrugge-Brantley, J. (2007). The women founders: Sociology and
social theory, 1830-1930: A text/reader. Waveland Press.
Merton, R. K. (2017). Social structure and anomie. In Gangs (pp. 3-13). Routledge.