18 Facts About Structural functionalism

Structural functionalism, or simply functionalism, is "a framework for building theory that sees society as a complex system whose parts work together to promote solidarity and stability".

Structural functionalism proposed that such societies tend to be segmented, with equivalent parts held together by shared values, common symbols or, systems of exchanges.

Structural functionalism took on Malinowski's argument that the basic building block of society is the nuclear family, and that the clan is an outgrowth, not vice versa.

Structural functionalism was in many ways the first true sociological functionalist.

Structural functionalism argued that all societies need to solve problems of control and coordination, production of goods, services and ideas, and, finally, to find ways of distributing these resources.

Structural functionalism held that "the social system is made up of the actions of individuals".

Structural functionalism's starting point, accordingly, is the interaction between two individuals faced with a variety of choices about how they might act, choices that are influenced and constrained by a number of physical and social factors.

Structural functionalism does believe that these changes occur in a relatively smooth way.

Structural functionalism fundamentally agreed with Parsons' theory but acknowledged that Parsons' theory could be questioned, believing that it was over generalized.

Structural functionalism identified three main limitations: functional unity, universal functionalism and indispensability.

Structural functionalism developed the concept of deviance and made the distinction between manifest and latent functions.

Structural functionalism reached the peak of its influence in the 1940s and 1950s, and by the 1960s was in rapid decline.

The refutation of the second criticism of Structural functionalism, that it is static and has no concept of change, has already been articulated above, concluding that while Parsons' theory allows for change, it is an orderly process of change [Parsons, 1961:38], a moving equilibrium.

Stronger criticisms include the epistemological argument that Structural functionalism is tautologous, that is it attempts to account for the development of social institutions solely through recourse to the effects that are attributed to them and thereby explains the two circularly.

Yet Holmwood states that the most sophisticated forms of Structural functionalism are based on "a highly developed concept of action, " and as was explained above, Parsons took as his starting point the individual and their actions.

Structural functionalism's theory did not however articulate how these actors exercise their agency in opposition to the socialization and inculcation of accepted norms.

Structural functionalism did not account for those parts of the system that might have tendencies to mal-integration.

The name 'Structural functionalism' implies a difference of method or interpretation that does not exist.