Social System
Basic background
1. Talcott Parsons was born in Colorado, USA.
2. Parsons earned his Ph.D. in economics and sociology from the University of Heidelberg in Germany.
3. Parsons developed a general theoretical system for analysing society.
4. This theoretical system became known as structural functionalism.
5. Talcott Parsons had a significant impact on Anglo-American sociology, particularly through his introduction of 'the classics'.
6. Parsons' graduate studies in the UK and Europe in the 1920s introduced him to the works of Marx, Weber, and Durkheim.
7. In the 1930s, Parsons aimed to create a major theoretical synthesis.
1. He particularly drew upon the works of Weber and Durkheim.
8. His efforts culminated in the publication of "The Structure of Social Action" in 1937.
1. The book presented the ideas of four thinkers.
1. Alfred Marshall, an economist.
2. Vilfredo Pareto, an economist/sociologist.
3. Max Weber, a sociologist.
4. Émile Durkheim, a sociologist.
2. The book offered the first significant systematic presentation of Weber and Durkheim's ideas to the English-speaking world.
STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALISM
THE CONCEPT OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE IN RADCLIFFE-BROWN’S WORK
Radcliffe-Brown argues that for any field to be considered a science, it must have a coherent set of concepts denoted by technical terms that are consistently used and understood by all practitioners. He points out that while fields like physics have well-defined terms such as ‘atom’ and ‘molecule’, social anthropology suffers from inconsistent terminology and vague definitions, reflecting its immaturity as a science.
Max Weber emphasizes the importance of linking concepts and theories to empirical reality to avoid unscientific thinking. Radcliffe-Brown expands on this by stating that social anthropology must focus on the process of social life within specific regions and time periods. This process includes human actions and interactions, which are particularly evident in joint activities like agricultural work in rural India and the operations of various social organizations.
To provide a meaningful description of social life, social anthropologists need to identify the general features of social activities. For example, examining agricultural activities involves understanding who performs these tasks, how they cooperate, and how they interact during different farming stages. These general features form the data of the science and can be gathered through methods like participant observation and historical records.
Over time, the general features of social activities may change at different rates. In agriculture, for example, the availability of labourers, the use of technology, and the roles of women have evolved. While some aspects remain constant, others have transformed significantly. Descriptions that account for such changes are called diachronic, while those focusing on a specific time are termed synchronic.
Radcliffe-Brown asserts that the development of rigorous, clear concepts will help social anthropology mature as a distinctive science. These concepts enable generalizations about social life based on synchronic and diachronic explanations. The concept of social structure is crucial in this context, as it helps in systematically understanding the web of social relationships and how societies maintain their cohesion.
Social Structure
Radcliffe-Brown defines the concept of structure as the arrangement of parts or components related to one another within a larger unity, akin to the arrangement of tissues and organs in the human body, or at a more fundamental level, cells and fluids. In social structures, the basic elements are human beings engaged in social life. The arrangement of individuals in relation to one another forms the social structure. For example, the caste system in India represents a structural feature, and within a family, the relationships between parents, children, and grandparents illustrate another structural arrangement. Thus, for Radcliffe-Brown, social structure is an empirical reality, not an abstraction.
To identify the structural features of social life, Radcliffe-Brown suggests examining various social groups and their internal arrangements, such as classes, categories, and castes. A crucial aspect of social structure is the arrangement of individuals into dyadic, or person-to-person, relationships, such as master-servant or mother’s brother-sister’s son. Social structure becomes fully evident through interactions within and between groups.
Social Structure and Institutions
Radcliffe-Brown emphasizes that social relationships, which are the building blocks of social structure, rely on the expectation that individuals will conform to certain norms or rules. An institution is defined as an established, socially recognized system of norms and behaviour patterns related to a specific aspect of social life. For instance, family-related institutions in a society dictate acceptable behaviour patterns for family members. In many societies, children are expected to respect their parents, and parents are expected to care for their children and elderly family members.
Institutions play a crucial role in defining how individuals are expected to behave and how they can expect others to behave. Although individuals may occasionally violate these rules, various sanctions exist to address such deviations. Radcliffe-Brown asserts that social structure should be described in terms of the institutions that regulate relationships between individuals or groups. The structural features of social life in a given region consist of the continuing arrangements of individuals in institutional relationships. These arrangements are evident in the actions and interactions that collectively constitute social life.
Structural Continuity
Radcliffe-Brown's concept of social structure goes beyond the mere arrangement of individuals, suggesting that social structures persist even as individuals come and go. For example, social groups like classes and castes constantly lose and gain members through death and birth, but the structure remains intact. Similarly, institutions such as the Lok Sabha or tribal leadership continue despite changes in their membership. This persistence highlights the distinction between social structure and structural form.
THE STRUCTURAL SYSTEM IN WESTERN AUSTRALIA
The Territorial Basis
Radcliffe-Brown identifies the division of the country into numerous distinct territories as the essential basis of Western Australian tribal society. Each male belonged to a specific territory from birth to death, and this territorial identity was inherited by his sons. The men connected to a particular territory formed a "clan," a fundamental element of social structure. Women belonged to their father's clans until marriage, after which they joined their husband's clan, following the rule of clan exogamy. The men of a clan, along with their wives and children, formed a 'horde,' an economically self-sufficient and politically autonomous unit typically comprising no more than 50 persons. The horde was subdivided into nuclear families, each dominated by the male and dissolved upon his death, making the clan a permanent group despite the horde being in flux.
The Tribe
A tribe consisted of several clans sharing similar customs and language, forming a linguistic community. Unlike other regions, these tribes were not politically united and did not engage in collective action. The kinship structure provided an important link between different hordes and tribes, comprising complex dyadic, person-to-person relationships. A man was closely connected to his mother's clan, his grandmother's clan, his wife's clan, and the clans his sisters married into, highlighting the extensive range of social relationships involved.
The Moieties
Western Australian tribal society was divided into two broad divisions, or 'moieties,' with each clan belonging to one of them. Additionally, society was divided into two alternating generation divisions. If a father belonged to generation 'x,' his children would be part of 'y,' and their children would be 'x,' and so on. This system resulted in four "sections": Ix, Iy, IIx, and IIy. Tribal laws mandated that a man must marry a woman from the opposite moiety and the same generation division. For instance, in the Kareira tribe, a man from the Banaka section could only marry a Burong woman.
The Totemic Group
Totems formed another basis of social structure. Each clan had its own sacred totem-centres, myths, rites, and ceremonies, which fostered solidarity and persistence. Totemic ceremonies, such as those for initiating boys, often required cooperation among multiple clans, fostering religious structure and some degree of political unity as clans cooperated based on mutual trust and friendship.
Conclusion
Radcliffe-Brown's structural description encompasses not just social groups (family, clan, horde) but also the entire range of socially fixed dyadic relationships, as demonstrated in his kinship system analysis of the Australian aborigines. Despite criticisms of being overly general, Radcliffe-Brown's focus on the formal aspects of social life serves as a valuable complement to Malinowski's more personal descriptive approach. Together, their work offers a comprehensive understanding of social structure, with Radcliffe-Brown providing the "classic" counterbalance to Malinowski's "romantic" perspective.
THE CONCEPT OF FUNCTION
The Connection Between Structure and Function in Radcliffe-Brown's Theory
Biological Analogy
The concept of function is crucial in biology, where the various parts of a living organism have specific roles that maintain its health and survival. Emile Durkheim extended this idea to the study of social institutions, viewing functions in terms of the needs of the social organism.
Durkheim's Influence
Durkheim's approach involved understanding social functions as fulfilling the needs of society. He suggested that just as biological organisms have needs, social institutions also have functions that meet the needs of the social organism.
Radcliffe-Brown's Perspective
Radcliffe-Brown refined this idea by substituting the concept of 'needs' with 'necessary conditions of existence.' He argued that human societies, like biological organisms, must meet certain basic conditions to survive. These necessary conditions are essential activities that societies must perform to maintain their existence.
Necessary Conditions of Existence
Radcliffe-Brown posited that just as animals must breathe, eat, excrete, and reproduce, societies must carry out certain activities to exist. These activities are the necessary conditions of existence for human societies. According to Radcliffe-Brown, these conditions can be discovered through scientific enquiry.
Structure and Function
Interaction of Structure and Function in Living Organisms and Societies
Biological Perspective
In living organisms, the structure is maintained by various life processes, which involve the activities and interactions of cells and organs. This functioning of the constituent parts is crucial for the organism's survival. If critical organs like the lungs, stomach, or heart stop functioning, the body's structure collapses, resulting in death. Radcliffe-Brown (1971: 179) encapsulates this by stating, "the life of an organism is conceived as the functioning of its structure. It is through and by the continuity of the functioning that the continuity of the structure is preserved."
Social Perspective
Similarly, the continuity of social structure is maintained by social life, which consists of the activities and interactions of individuals and the groups they form. Social life represents the functioning of the social structure. The function of any recurrent social activity lies in its role in maintaining the continuity of the social structure. For instance, marriage is a recurrent social activity that legitimizes sexual relationships, leads to the birth of children, and integrates new members into society. By providing a socially acceptable outlet for sexual relations and a legitimate means of adding new members, marriage performs a crucial function in maintaining social structure.
Radcliffe-Brown (1971: 180) asserts, “the concept of function thus involves the notion of a structure consisting of a set of relations amongst unit entities, the continuity of the structure being maintained by a life process made up of the activities of the constituent units.”
Interconnection of Structure and Function
In animal organisms, structure can sometimes be observed independently of function, such as studying the human skeleton's arrangement of bones without considering their function. However, in human societies, structure and function cannot be separated. Most social relations that constitute the structure, like father-son, buyer-seller, or ruler-subject, cannot be observed apart from the social activities in which these relations function.
Radcliffe-Brown (1971: 181) notes, “Some of the features of social structure, such as the geographical distribution of individuals and groups can be directly observed, but most of the social relations which, in their totality, constitute the structure, such as relations of father and son, buyer and seller, ruler and subject, cannot be observed except in the social activities in which the relations are functioning.”
Functional Unity of the Social System
The concept of the 'functional unity' of the social system suggests that different parts of society are interconnected and work together to maintain the overall stability and continuity of the social structure. Each part or institution within society performs specific functions that contribute to the functioning of the whole system, ensuring its survival and continuity.
In summary, Radcliffe-Brown’s structural-functional approach illustrates that the functioning of societal elements is essential for maintaining the overall social structure, just as the functioning of biological components is vital for maintaining the structure of living organisms.
Functional Unity and dysfunction
Functional Unity
Radcliffe-Brown's concept of 'functional unity' refers to the harmonious and consistent interaction of all parts of a social system. This condition ensures that the social system works together effectively without producing persistent, unresolvable conflicts. For instance, in Pre-British Indian society, various elements like village organization, caste, and joint family worked together to maintain the social structure. These elements complemented each other and contributed to the overall stability of the society.
Positive Functions and the Possibility of Dysfunction
While the discussion so far has focused on the positive functions of social institutions and their role in maintaining social structure, it is also essential to consider the possibility of dysfunction. Dysfunction occurs when certain parts of the social system fail to perform their functions adequately, leading to disruptions in social harmony.
Eunomia and Dysnomia
The concepts of 'eunomia' and 'dysnomia' can be likened to the notions of health and disease in organic structures. Eunomia represents good order or social health, where all parts of the social system function harmoniously. In contrast, dysnomia indicates disorder or social ill-health, where there is functional disunity or inconsistency.
Radcliffe-Brown notes that the Greeks of the fifth century B.C. distinguished between these states, and Durkheim in the nineteenth century used the concept of 'anomie' to describe social pathology. Radcliffe-Brown adopts 'eunomia' and 'dysnomia' to describe social health and disorder, respectively. Unlike organic structures, societies do not fall ill and die in the same way, and objective criteria for determining social health are not as well-defined. However, these concepts remain useful for understanding the functional unity and disunity within societies.
In Radcliffe-Brown's view, a society in a state of dysnomia rarely dies but struggles towards a new state of eunomia. This process might involve changes in the structural type of the society. These concepts are particularly relevant for social anthropologists studying tribes whose social structures have been disrupted by external influences, such as Western domination.
SOME EXAMPLES OF RADCLIFFE-BROWN’S STRUCTURAL FUNCTIONALISM
Beyond Functionalism
Radcliffe-Brown's approach goes beyond functionalism to structural functionalism, focusing on how customs and social institutions not only fulfil certain needs but also interconnect through various social relationships. His method is best understood through practical examples that combine the concepts of social structure and function to provide explanations.
Ceremonial Weeping in the Andaman Islands
Radcliffe-Brown uses the example of ceremonial weeping among the Andaman Islanders to illustrate his structural-functional approach. Andamanese ceremonies, such as reunions after long separations, funerals, marriages, and peace-making events, are marked by formal weeping. Radcliffe-Brown argues that the purpose of such ceremonials is to express and transmit sentiments that help regulate individual behaviour according to societal needs. By analysing the contexts in which formal weeping occurs, he concludes that it signifies the resumption of disturbed or interrupted social relations, such as marking the end of a long separation or the final departure of the deceased. Thus, ceremonial weeping plays a functional role in maintaining social life by signalling the restoration or conclusion of social ties.
Totemism
In studying totemism, Radcliffe-Brown explores why certain natural objects are selected as totems. In some Australian tribes, exogamous moieties are named after animals or birds, such as the eagle hawk and crow, which are represented in myths as opponents yet share fundamental similarities. Radcliffe-Brown sees totemism as not only maintaining group solidarity (function) but also expressing social opposition between groups (structure). This dual role lays the foundation for future structuralist interpretations, such as those by Levi-Strauss, who use the notion of opposition to understand social usages.
Joking and Avoidance Relationships
Radcliffe-Brown also examines joking relationships, which are relaxed, friendly interactions marked by jokes and insults, and avoidance relationships, which involve extreme respect. These relationships help balance tensions in delicate social ties. For example, a son-in-law avoids his mother-in-law out of respect, preventing conflicts that could arise from their close association.
Radcliffe-Brown's structural-functionalism thus provides a comprehensive framework for understanding how various social elements and relationships work together to maintain social order and stability. His focus on correlated institutionalized relationships highlights the interconnectedness of social systems, offering valuable insights into the complexities of social life.
TALCOTT PARSONS
Parsons has developed his theory from the level of action to the social system. The basic unit of organisation of a social system given by Parsons are roles and role expectations
TALCOTT PARSONS AND THE EARLY APPROACHES TO THE CONCEPT OF SOCIAL SYSTEM
Definition of Social Systems
A social system, as defined by Mitchell (1979: 203), consists of multiple actors interacting directly or indirectly within a bounded situation. These systems are sociologically defined by individuals' orientation towards a common focus or interrelated foci. Examples of social systems include families, political parties, kinship groups, and entire societies.
Concept of the Social System
1. Parsons developed the concept of the social system as a general sociological theory.
2. This theory can be applied to both simple primitive societies and complex modern industrial societies.
3. Parsons developed his theory from the level of action to the social system.
4. His conceptual scheme is provided to analyse the structure and processes of the social system.
Parsons' Contribution to Social Systems Theory
Talcott Parsons, in his seminal work "The Structure of Social Action" (1937), reviewed the contributions of various social scientists, with particular emphasis on Pareto, Durkheim, and Max Weber. He aimed to highlight the underlying unity in their contributions, believing that this would advance his quest for a general theory of social systems. Parsons identified a theory of action, which he found more clearly formulated in Weber's work, and categorized earlier contributions into three broad schools of thought: utilitarian, positivist, and idealist.
Schools of Thought
1. Utilitarianism:
Utilitarianism is a school of thought, which believes in the fact that pleasure is better than pain. It is a philosophical outlook and is generally associated with the name of Jeremy Bentham. According to this outlook utility is the greatest happiness of the greatest number. The proper goal of all human beings should be maximisation of utility. Bentham believed that good motives are good as far as they lead to harmony of interests of an individual with those of others.
Thus utilitarianism is a moral theory which has certain social implications. Since pleasure is the guiding force of this philosophy, the moral rules also are believed to be those which encourage behaviour, which can increase pleasure and reduce pain.
Critique : Fails to account for the collective cohesion of social life, viewing social actions primarily at the individual level.
2. Positivism:
The term ‘positivism’ was first used by Auguste Comte (1798-1897).
This term also has been used for the distinct doctrines of school of philosophers known as ‘logical positivists’. They believed in the central idea that the meaning of a statement lay in the method of its verification. Any statement, which could not be verified, therefore, becomes meaningless
Critique: Positivism overlooks the subjective perspectives of individuals, treating human action without regard to the agent's standpoint.
3. Idealism:
Idealism is the school of thought, which believes that the mind plays a key role in the constitution of the world as it is experienced. In the history we can discern different forms and applications of idealism. Its most radical form has been rejected because it is equivalent to solipsism. Solipsism is the view that all reality is nothing but the activity of one’s own mind and that in reality nothing exists but one’s own self. However, idealists usually recognise the existence of the external or natural world fully. They do not claim that it can be reduced to the mere process of thinking. They believe that the mind is active and capable of producing and sustaining modes of being that would not have existed otherwise, such as law, religion, art and mathematics. The eighteenth century Irish philosopher George Berkeley is identified closely with this philosophy. He believed that all aspects of everything of which we are conscious are actually reducible to the ideas present in the mind. For example, the idea of a chair or a cow already exists in our minds, therefore, we recognise the chair or the cow when we find it. Thus, the observer does not conjure the external objects (chair or cow) into existence. In fact, Berkeley held that the true ideas of the external objects are caused in the human mind directly by God
The eighteenth century German philosopher Immanuel Kant further refined idealism through his critical inquiry into the limits of possible knowledge. Kant believed that there is no way of knowing things in themselves, they can be known to us only in the way that they appear to us in experience. He held that the fundamental principles of all science are essentially grounded in the constitution of the mind rather than being derived from the external world.
Finally, the name most closely associated with this philosophical outlook is of the nineteenth century German philosopher G.W.F. Hegal. Hegal believed that the highest achievements of the human spirit (culture, science, religion, and the state) are conceived and sustained by the dialectical activity; such as thesis, antithesis and synthesis of free reflective intellect. It is not the result of naturally determined processes in the mind. In fact, Hegel’s philosophy, especially his dialectical thought influenced Karl Marx in developing his ideas of dialectical historical materialism.
Critique: Idealism emphasizes the active role of the mind in constituting the world, sometimes to the point of solipsism, but usually acknowledges the existence of an external world.
The Point of View of Talcott Parsons
Parsons' Critique of One-Sided Approaches and Introduction of the Action Approach
Utilitarian Approach
The utilitarian approach views social systems as products of rational impulses where individuals integrate their needs and urges into orderly systems based on compatibility of interests and contractual mutuality.
Critique: Parsons argues that the utilitarian approach neglects the role of values in social systems, focusing too narrowly on rational calculations and contractual agreements.
Idealist Approach
The idealist approach emphasizes values and ideas, often viewing social systems as the realization of the social spirit and collective ideals. An example is:
Democracy: Seen as the fulfilment of the spirit of a nation.
Critique: Parsons points out that the idealist approach places too much emphasis on values and ideas while neglecting social practices and empirical realities. Weber, although not an outright idealist, exemplifies this with his focus on values like the Protestant ethic aiding early capitalism, but neglecting the role of needs and utilities.
Positivist Approach
Positivists believe that human action arises from complete knowledge of the situation, leading to a rigid and inflexible view where there is only one correct way to act, leaving no room for values, errors, or variations.
Critique: Parsons criticizes the positivist approach for its finality and inflexibility, overlooking the role of values and the possibility of error and variation in social action.
Parsons' Action Approach
Parsons argues that both utilitarian and idealist approaches assume certain characteristics of human impulses aprioristically (i.e., assumed without empirical evidence):
-Utilitarianism: Assumes rational regulation of needs.
Idealism: Assumes commitment to ultimate values and ideals.
Positivism: Assumes actions based on complete and inflexible knowledge.
PARSONS’ ACTION APPROACH
Introduction of the Action Approach
Parsons offers the action approach as an alternative, integrating the valuable insights from each school of thought while addressing their limitations:
Incorporates Individual and Collective: Recognizes the rational choices of individuals within the context of collective social systems.
Balances Values and Empirical Realities: Acknowledges the role of values while considering the empirical pressures and practical realities that influence these values.
Allows for Variation and Error: Understands that human actions are not always based on complete knowledge and are subject to variations and errors.
By adopting the action approach, Parsons seeks to provide a more comprehensive and balanced understanding of social systems, avoiding the one-sidedness of the utilitarian, idealist, and positivist approaches. This framework emphasizes the interplay between individual actions, collective values, and empirical realities, offering a more nuanced perspective on social dynamics.
Concept of Action
According to Parsons, action derives from human behaviour as living organisms interacting with external reality and their own minds. Behaviour becomes action when four conditions are present:
1. Oriented to Attainment of Ends or Goals
2. Occurs in Situations: The action takes place within specific contexts or situations.
3. Regulated by Norms and Values of Society: The action adheres to societal norms and values.
4. Involves Investment of Energy, Motivation, or Effort
Example of Action
Consider a lady driving to a temple to offer prayers:
Ends or Goals: Offering prayers at the temple.
Situation: Driving on the road in a car.
Regulated by Norms and Values: Offering prayers is a socially recognized and valued activity.
Investment of Energy: Driving the car, applying driving skills, and negotiating traffic.
When behaviour is analysed within this context, it is defined as action.
CONSTELLATIONS OF ACTION
According to Parsons, action does not occur in isolation but occurs in constellations. These constellations of action constitute a system.
1. Personality System
Definition: The personality system focuses on the individual and how their unique traits influence their social interactions and functioning within a broader social system.
Impact of Traits: Traits such as introversion/extroversion, openness to experience, conscientiousness, and others significantly shape how individuals engage with others and navigate social situations.
Example: Consider an introverted individual who prefers solitary activities. This personality trait may lead them to feel more comfortable in small group settings or to communicate more effectively through written rather than verbal means.
2. Cultural System
Definition: The cultural system encompasses the beliefs, values, norms, and symbolic communication methods within a society or group. It guides behavior and shapes social interactions.
Role of Beliefs and Values: Beliefs and values vary across cultures and subcultures, influencing social behavior and relationships in significant ways.
Example: In Japanese culture, mealtime rituals emphasize politeness and respect, influencing how food is served, the use of chopsticks, and the significance of certain dishes. These norms shape individuals' behavior during mealtime interactions.
3. Social System
Definition: The social system pertains to the structures and patterns of social interaction between individuals or groups within a society. It includes social institutions (like family, education, economy, politics) and the roles, statuses, and norms that govern social relationships.
Structures and Interactions: Social systems provide frameworks within which individuals operate and interact. They include hierarchies of authority, formal roles and responsibilities, and informal networks of communication.
Example: In a workplace setting, social structures dictate how employees interact. This includes hierarchical relationships between managers and subordinates, formal roles defining responsibilities, and informal norms shaping communication and decision-making processes.
These three modes of organization—personality, cultural, and social systems—constitute the constellations of action within Parsons' systems theory. They illustrate how individual traits, cultural values, and social structures collectively influence and shape social interactions and behavior within larger societal contexts.
Integration of Action Systems
Parsons argued that any society must provide for the integration of these three elements to function effectively.
Basic Requirements for Integration:
1. Culture: Must prescribe what people should do in ways that are practically effective relative to what people want to do.
2. Social System: The pattern of activities and relationships in which people engage must allow the cultural prescriptions to be effectively followed.
3. Personality Structures: Individuals must have personality structures that enable them to associate with others, participate in collective ventures, and comply with cultural demands.
Interaction and Integration:
1. Practical Viability of Culture:
Cultures must be organized so that their prescriptions are viable in practical affairs.
If a culture demands impractical things from its members, those members will abandon the culture or die out.
2. Consistency in Cultural Prescriptions:
Different cultural prescriptions for individual actions must fit together with those that other individuals follow.
Otherwise, people would act at cross purposes, preventing joint participation and causing instability in the social system.
Example: If drivers had different cultural instructions on which directions to drive on roads, it would lead to chaos.
3. Organized Social Activities:
Social activities must be organized in ways that involve personality types who participate in them.
If people are frustrated or alienated by participation demands, they will resist involvement in society.
Example: Individuals with a pathological fear of competition would resist involvement in competitive sports.
Minimal Conditions for Social Order
1. Tolerance of Deviations:
Society can tolerate a few people following different prescriptions or having incongruous personalities.
However, such deviations must be limited to relatively few cases to maintain overall social order.
2. Integration Requirements:
Without sufficient integration between culture, the social system, and individual personalities, social relationships cannot be organized and sustained.
"Sufficient integration" is not a precise notion and varies in different contexts.
Parsons' View on Integration
1. Complexity and Problematic Nature:
Integration of culture, social system, and personality is highly problematic and not automatic or complete.
The order of society involves complex patterns of institutions, relationships, culture, and varied personalities.
2. Empirical Evidence of Integration:
In any functioning society not collapsing into conflict, a level of integration must exist as evidenced by the achievement of tasks, adherence to cultural prescriptions, and participation in activities.
The perceptible stability of society indicates that most members are not alienated and are engaged in societal activities.
3. Conflicts and Deprivations:
There may be conflicts between cultural aspects and social system organization.
Both cultural and social system organizations may impose deprivations on participants' personalities.
4. Unhappiness and Reluctance:
Many people may not be entirely unhappy with their work, opposed to authority, or contemptuous of the law, but they may still experience dissatisfaction, reluctance to comply, and a lack of commitment to law-abiding behavior.
These issues reflect the problematic nature of integrating culture, social system, and personality.
Internalization in Social Systems
Definition:
Internalization refers to how individuals integrate the requirements and norms of their societal roles into their personal beliefs and actions, thus making them a fundamental part of their identity and behavior.
Examples:
Road Rules: When individuals witness others breaking traffic rules, they might feel personally offended because they have internalized these rules as norms of social behavior. This internalization leads to a sense of personal adherence to societal rules.
Relationship to Social Systems:
In a social system, which is largely institutionalized culture, individuals internalize not only their specific roles but also the broader cultural norms that define these roles.
Example: In a workplace, employees not only perform their job duties but also internalize the expectations and norms associated with their roles (e.g., responsibility, accountability).
Integration with Personality:
Internalization involves the incorporation of societal expectations and norms into an individual's self-concept and values.
Example: A police officer not only enforces laws as part of their job but also internalizes a sense of duty and responsibility associated with maintaining law and order.
Significance:
Internalization ensures that individuals not only comply with societal rules but also uphold them as personal convictions.
Example: Citizens following laws not just because of fear of punishment but because they believe in the importance of social order and legal compliance.
Characteristics of a Social System
A social system, according to Parsons, has the following characteristics:
1. Interaction Between Two or More Actors: The interaction process is the primary focus.
2. Interaction in a Situation: Implies the presence of other actors (alters) who are objects of emotion and value judgment, through which goals and means of action are achieved.
3. Collective Goal Orientation and Consensus: Common values and a consensus on expectations in normative and cognitive senses exist within the social system.
BASIC UNIT OF ORGANISATION OF A SOCIAL SYSTEM
1. Role as the Basic Unit of Social Systems
A role is the fundamental unit of the social system, representing a set of expected behaviors, rights, and duties associated with a particular position in society.
It serves as a point of intersection between the individual actor's actions (system of action) and the broader social system.
2. Role-Expectation
Role-expectation refers to the reciprocal expectations between the actor (individual) and alter (others in the social context) regarding behaviors, responsibilities, and rights associated with a role.
It involves mutual understanding and adherence to social norms and expectations within a role.
These expectations are influenced by motivational and value orientations.
Motivational Orientation
Motivational orientations refer to the ways in which individuals direct their actions based on internal motivations and external circumstances. These orientations help individuals prioritize and make decisions regarding their goals and behaviors. Talcott Parsons categorized these orientations to understand how individuals navigate their roles within social systems.
Involves the Actor's Consideration of Needs, External Circumstances, and Plans
1. Needs: Motivation often starts with identifying needs, which can range from basic physiological requirements (like food and shelter) to higher-level psychological and social needs (such as belongingness or achievement).
2. External Circumstances: Actors consider the external environment, including resources available,economic conditions, and other situational factors that influence decision-making.
3. Plans: Individuals formulate plans or strategies to achieve their goals, considering both immediate actions and long-term objectives within their roles.
Types of Motivational Orientations
1. Cognitive Orientation:
Cognitive orientation involves a rational assessment of the environment or objects based on their relevance to personal needs. The actor engages in information processing, gathering data about the quality, availability, and cost-effectiveness of options. This orientation prioritizes understanding and knowledge to make informed decisions.
Example
When a housewife evaluates vegetables based on cognitive orientation, she considers factors like nutritional value, freshness, and price. Her decision-making process involves gathering information about each vegetable's quality and comparing it with her household needs and budget constraints.
2. Cathectic Orientation:
Cathectic orientation involves emotional attachments or preferences toward objects or choices. Emotions play a significant role in guiding actions, influencing preferences, and determining satisfaction levels. This orientation emphasizes the affective aspect of decision-making.
Example
In the context of vegetable selection, a housewife might prefer certain vegetables not only based on their nutritional value or cost but also because of personal taste preferences or emotional associations. Her decision to choose one vegetable over another is influenced by how she feels about each option.
3. Evaluative Orientation
Evaluative orientation involves organizing efforts to achieve goals efficiently. It focuses on optimizing outcomes and achieving desired results through systematic planning decision-making. This orientation emphasizes goal-directed behavior and the effective allocation of resources.
Example
When a housewife applies evaluative orientation to vegetable selection, she strategically chooses vegetables that not only meet nutritional needs and personal preferences (cathectic orientation) but also optimize overall satisfaction and meal planning. She considers factors like variety, cooking methods, and family preferences to ensure maximum utility and efficiency in meal preparation.
Value Orientation
Value orientation refers to the standards of values, aesthetics, morality, and thought that guide an individual's actions and judgments within a cultural context. These orientations are deeply rooted in societal norms and cultural patterns, shaping how individuals perceive and interact with their environment.
Types of Value Orientations
1. Cognitive Orientation
Cognitive orientation emphasizes the intellectual assessment and validity of judgments made by individuals. It involves rational reasoning and critical thinking to determine the correctness or truthfulness of beliefs and decisions.
2. Appreciative Orientation
Appreciative orientation involves emotional responses and aesthetic judgments towards objects or experiences. It focuses on personal feelings of liking or disliking, as well as the appropriateness of those emotional responses within cultural contexts.
3. Moral Orientation
Moral orientation centres on ethical values and principles that guide individuals' behaviors and decisions. It involves a commitment to moral standards, integrity, and the distinction between right and wrong based on societal norms and personal beliefs.
In the cultural context, individual behavior is heavily influenced by cultural patterns and societal norms. For example, the role and status of a son within a family can vary significantly between patriarchal and matriarchal societies:
Example: The role and status of a son in patriarchal vs. matriarchal families differ based on societal norms. In a patriarchal family, the son might have a more dominant role, inheriting leadership responsibilities and decision-making authority. Contrastingly, in a matriarchal family, the son's role might be more supportive or egalitarian, depending on cultural expectations.
Difference Between Motivational and Value Orientations
Motivational Orientation: Focuses on the psychological aspects of individual behavior, including needs, external circumstances, and plans. It pertains to the internal motivations that drive actions, such as seeking food based on hunger or choosing vegetables based on preferences and affordability.
Value Orientation: Focuses on cultural systems and societal norms that guide behaviors and judgments. It involves adherence to moral standards, aesthetic preferences, and intellectual judgments within a given cultural context. Value orientations shape how individuals evaluate choices and interact with others based on cultural expectations.
Integration of Motivational and Value Orientations
According to Parsons, both motivational and value orientations are interlinked and interdependent aspects that define behavioural and cultural roles within social systems:
Behavioural Roles: Role expectations within a social system serve as patterns of evaluation, defining how individuals interact with others.
Types of Roles According to Parsons:
1. Orientation Role: Where the actor (ego) interacts with alter (the other person) as their object.
2. Object Role: Where the actor becomes the object of alter's orientation.
These role distinctions highlight the reciprocal nature of interactions within social systems, where individuals navigate their roles based on both internal motivations (motivational orientation) and cultural norms (value orientation).
Institutionalization of Roles
In a social system, roles become established as part of the culture. This means that the expectations, values, and motivations for specific roles are integrated into society's norms. Society sets common standards for how roles should be performed. When people adopt and follow these standards in their roles, those roles are considered institutionalized.
To ensure roles are performed according to these societal standards, society uses sanctions. Sanctions can be rewards for following the rules or punishments for breaking them. This system helps maintain order and conformity within the social structure.
Collectivity as a Social System
Collectivity Definition
Boundary-Based: Collectivity is identified by the boundaries of a social system, which determine who is included or excluded.
Membership Boundaries: These boundaries can be based on kinship, qualifications, skills, faith, etc.
Distinct Identity: The boundary limits define a social system's distinct identity. For example, a kinship system's members and roles are defined by cultural patterns.
Collectivity vs. Social Aggregates
Not Just a Category: Unlike categories defined by common attributes like age, sex, or education, collectivity is not just a group of people sharing these traits.
Not Just Interdependence: Collectivity is also not just a group of individuals interdependent in a physical situation, like people in a market.
Characteristics of Collectivity
Solidarity: Characterized by the solidarity among its members, such as in a kinship group or an association.
Shared Values: This solidarity comes from shared values, like cooperation among kin or shared religious beliefs and practices.
Sub-Collectivities
Internal Subdivisions: Collectivities can have internal subdivisions (sub-collectivities) where memberships might overlap.
Forms of Social System: Both collectivities and sub-collectivities are forms of social systems.
Pattern Variable and Role Performance
1. Role as the Central Element
In Talcott Parsons' social theory, the role is considered the fundamental unit of analysis within the social system. It represents the expected behavior and responsibilities attached to a particular position or status within society. Here’s a detailed exploration:
Role Definition and Significance
Definition: A role refers to the set of behaviors, rights, obligations, and expectations associated with a particular social position or status. It defines how individuals are expected to behave in social interactions and within specific contexts.
Central Element: Parsons identifies roles as central because they organize individual actions and interactions within the broader social structure. Roles provide a framework for understanding social relationships, hierarchies, and the distribution of responsibilities and privileges in society.
Role Performance and Strain
Role Performance: The performance of roles involves individuals fulfilling the expectations and obligations associated with their positions. This includes both outward actions and the internalization of norms and values that guide behavior.
Factors Influencing Strain:
1. Institutionalization: This refers to the degree to which role expectations are standardized and integrated into the social fabric of society. Highly institutionalized roles have clear norms, rules, and expectations that are widely accepted and enforced. For example, the role of a doctor in society is highly institutionalized with clear expectations regarding patient care, ethics, and professional conduct.
2. Internalization: This concept reflects how deeply individuals adopt and internalize societal values associated with their roles. Internalization occurs through socialization processes, where individuals learn and incorporate cultural norms, beliefs, and values into their personal identities. The more deeply internalized these values are, the more likely individuals are to conform to role expectations willingly.
Role Strain
Definition: Role strain refers to the stress or tension experienced by individuals when they perceive conflicting or incompatible demands within their roles or between different roles they occupy.
Causes of Role Strain: When roles are not well-defined, when there are conflicting expectations, or when the demands of one role interfere with the demands of another, individuals may experience role strain. For instance, a person might experience role strain when the expectations of being a devoted parent conflict with the demands of a demanding career.
Example: Role of a Working Parent
Institutionalization: The role of a working parent is highly institutionalized in many societies, with expectations regarding providing for the family, nurturing children, and managing household responsibilities.
Internalization: Parents often internalize societal values related to parenting, such as nurturing, discipline, and fostering the development of their children according to societal norms and expectations.
Role Strain: A working parent may experience role strain when the demands of their job conflict with their responsibilities as a parent. Balancing work commitments, childcare responsibilities, and personal well-being can create tension and stress, highlighting the challenges of managing multiple roles in society.
2. Dilemmas in Role Performance
Motivational and Value Orientations:
Actors face dilemmas in their roles related to both motivational orientations (needs) and value orientations.
These dilemmas arise from tensions or conflicts within an individual's choices or preferences regarding their actions.
3. Nature of Dilemmas
Characterization: Dilemmas are often dichotomous, requiring actors to choose between conflicting options before they can act effectively.
Example: For instance, an actor may need to choose between adhering to universalistic values (applicable to all) or particularistic values (specific to certain individuals or situations).
4. Resolution of Dilemmas
Actors must resolve these dilemmas to perform their roles effectively within a given social context.
The choice made by the actor influences how they act in response to a particular situation, aligning with either universalistic or particularistic values.
Pattern Variables
There are five main pattern variables, each representing a polar extreme:
Affectivity vs. Affective Neutrality
Affectivity: Emotional involvement in a situation.
Example: Mother-child relationship, where emotional engagement is high.
Affective Neutrality: Emotional detachment.
Example: Doctor-patient relationship, requiring emotional neutrality for effective care.
Dilemma: Actors face a choice between immediate gratification (affectivity) and renouncing immediate gratification in favor of moral considerations (affective neutrality).
Example: Choosing between personal pleasure and adhering to moral principles that may require sacrificing immediate desires
Self-Orientation vs. Collectivity Orientation
Self-Orientation: Prioritizing personal gratification.
Collectivity Orientation: Deferring personal gratification for the group's benefit.
Dilemma: Involves moral evaluation where actors must decide between pursuing personal gratification and considering the welfare of a larger group (collectivity).
Example: Socialism as an ideology emphasizes collectivity orientation where societal institutions prioritize the common good over individual interests, though institutionalizing such values can be challenging.
Universalism vs. Particularism
Universalism: Adhering to general rules and standards.
Example: Following legal norms without personal biases.
Particularism: Considering personal relationships or specific situations.
Example: Favoring a friend or family member over general rules.
Dilemma: Actors must choose between applying universal standards (e.g., legal norms applicable to all) or particularistic considerations (e.g., favoring friends or family despite legal standards).
Example: Legal systems that apply laws uniformly to all citizens versus situations where personal relationships influence decisions, illustrating the tension between universalistic and particularistic norms.
Ascription vs. Achievement
Ascription: Roles and statuses based on inherent qualities like birth, age, or gender.
Example: Caste system in India, where status is determined by birth.
Achievement: Roles and statuses based on personal accomplishments and skills.
Dilemma: Focuses on whether roles are defined based on inherited qualities (ascription) or personal achievements and performance (achievement).
Example: The caste system in India where roles are traditionally assigned based on birth (ascription) contrasts with roles in modern societies where achievement and skills determine status.
Specificity vs. Diffuseness
Dilemma: Concerns the scope and nature of social interactions within roles.
Specificity: Roles with precise and limited interactions (e.g., doctor-patient, buyer-seller).
Diffuseness: Roles involving broad and encompassing interactions (e.g., friendships, familial relationships).
Example: Interactions like doctor-patient relationships are specific and defined, whereas familial relationships are broader and involve multiple aspects of interaction.
Examples in Social Systems
Family: Role expectations are often affective, collectivity-oriented, particularistic, ascriptive, and diffuse.
Professional Associations: Role expectations lean towards affective neutrality, self-orientation, universalism, achievement, and specificity.
Analysis of Pattern Variables and Role Performance
1. Role Expectations and Social Systems
Nature of Pattern Variables: Pattern variables not only define how roles interact within a social system but also indicate the predominant orientations that members of a society tend to adopt in their roles.
Example Family: Within a family, roles are typically affective (emotional), collectivity-oriented (emphasizing family welfare), particularistic (influenced by personal relationships), ascriptive (based on familial status), and diffuse (encompassing various aspects of family life).
2. Contrasting Examples
Professional Associations: In contrast to familial roles, roles within professional associations (e.g., medical, legal, student) tend to emphasize affective neutrality (objective decision-making), self-orientation (individual achievement), universalism (applying standards uniformly), achievement (personal merit), and specificity (focused interactions).
Real-life Complexity: While these examples provide extremes, real-life role performances involve more complex and precarious choices across pattern variables, leading to significant strain and dilemmas.
3. Dilemmas in Role Performance
Emotional versus Neutral Evaluation: Many roles involve dilemmas regarding the degree of emotional involvement versus emotional neutrality in decision-making.
Example Mother-Child vs. Doctor-Patient: In the mother-child relationship, affectivity is dominant but balanced with the need for discipline and affective neutrality at times. In contrast, the doctor-patient relationship requires primarily affective neutrality for objective medical care, especially in surgical settings.
Persistent Dilemmas: Parsons emphasizes that in all role performances, the dilemma of choosing between different orientations (like affective versus affective-neutral) and the extent of commitment to these choices remains a constant challenge.
4. Parsons' Conceptual Contribution
Bridging Social Action and Social System: Parsons' pattern variables serve to bridge the gap between individual social actions and the larger social system.
System Characterization: A social system can be characterized by the particular combination of solutions individuals adopt to resolve dilemmas presented by pattern variables in their roles.
Parsons' pattern variables explain the choices and dilemmas individuals face within their roles in social systems. They illustrate the complexity and strain involved in maintaining societal norms and individual actions.
System theory
1. Concept of System
Definition: According to Parsons, a system refers to a complex of interacting components (individuals, groups, organizations) that form a unified whole. Each component plays a role in maintaining the system's stability and functionality. Importantly, systems are not isolated entities but interact with their environment.
Open System: Social systems are categorized as open systems. This means they interact with their environment by exchanging energy, matter, and information. For instance, an educational institution interacts with students, faculty, government policies, and societal norms, all of which impact its operations and goals.
2. Key Aspects of System Maintenance
Regulation of Transactions: Systems regulate transactions with their environment to acquire necessary resources (like funding, materials, or talent), manage inputs (such as information or technological changes), and maintain stability. This regulation involves processes such as negotiation, decision-making, and strategic planning to align external demands with internal capabilities.
Internal Relations: Effective system functioning relies on managing internal relationships, roles, norms, and communication channels. This ensures coordination, cooperation, and cohesion among members. For example, a corporation maintains internal relations through hierarchical structures, job roles, and team dynamics, fostering productivity and organizational culture.
3. Development of Parsons' Analysis
Influence of Robert F. Bales: Parsons collaborated with Robert F. Bales, who studied small-group dynamics and identified phases essential for task-oriented groups:
Gathering resources: Collecting necessary inputs for task completion.
Organizing tasks: Structuring roles and responsibilities.
Managing internal relations: Resolving conflicts and maintaining group morale.
Engaging in non-task activities: Bonding socially after task completion.
Parsons integrated these phases into his broader framework of system exchanges, which examine how systems manage tasks, resolve conflicts, and maintain stability through structured interactions.
4. Structural Functionalism and AGIL System
Functional Imperatives (AGIL): Parsons developed the AGIL paradigm to identify essential functions that all systems must fulfil:
Adaptation: Systems must adjust to changes in their environment to survive and thrive. This involves modifying strategies, processes, and structures in response to external challenges.
Goal Attainment: Systems set objectives and strive to achieve them effectively. This imperative focuses on defining and pursuing organizational goals through planning, resource allocation, and performance evaluation.
Integration: Systems maintain internal cohesion and solidarity. This imperative ensures that various components (such as departments or individuals) work together harmoniously to achieve collective objectives.
Latency: This refers to managing patterns of motivation and socialization within the system. It involves maintaining morale, fostering commitment, and ensuring individuals align with organizational values and norms.
5. Self-Maintenance of Social Systems
Boundary Maintenance: Social systems establish boundaries to distinguish themselves from their environment and regulate the flow of resources and information. This involves defining roles, responsibilities, and relationships both within the system and with external stakeholders. Boundary maintenance ensures clarity, control, and stability in interactions and operations.
Functions: Functions encompass the processes and activities that contribute to the system's self-maintenance and adaptation. This includes organizational routines (like decision-making processes or communication protocols), strategies for handling internal conflicts, mechanisms for learning and adaptation, and activities that promote cultural cohesion and identity within the system.
FUNCTIONAL PREREQUISITES
Parsons thinks all systems such as the family, the economy or the polity have a boundary which they maintain in order to subsist. This self-maintenance of systems is possible because human actors as social beings are socialised in society and their motivational and value orientations accordingly are patterned. In order to maintain itself, social systems have to perform some indispensable adjustment between its internal organisation and outer environment. These adjustments are like the adjustment that the human body has to make with the outside environment through breathing, blood circulation and through the maintenance of a steady temperature within itself. Parsons argues, it also have a self-adjustive and self-maintaining quality. These adjustment processes which maintain the social system internally and through its boundary conditions are called functions. Functions are processes of system’s self-maintenance. There are certain functions without which a social system cannot subsist. These are called ‘functional prerequisites’ by Talcott Parsons. There are four such functional prerequisites.
i) adaptation
ii) goal attainment
iii) integration
iv) latency
The scope of functioning of these functional prerequisites is further defined in terms of whether they deal with processes external or internal to the system. They are also defined in terms of the nature of interaction as such, whether it is consummatory or whether it is instrumental.
Consummatory and instrumental interactions are two different types of interactions that can occur within a system:
1. Consummatory Interaction: In consummatory interaction, the emphasis is placed on achieving a desired end or outcome directly. The primary focus is on the result or the endpoint of the interaction. For example, if a person eats a meal primarily for the enjoyment of the food itself, rather than for any instrumental purpose like nutrition or sustenance, it can be considered a consummatory interaction. These interactions are often driven by intrinsic motivation and the inherent satisfaction derived from the activity itself.
2. Instrumental Interaction: In instrumental interaction, the emphasis is on the acquisition and utilization of means to achieve desired ends. Here, the focus is on the process of achieving the outcome rather than the outcome itself. For instance, a person may engage in studying to acquire knowledge and skills necessary for a future career, viewing the studying process as a means to an end. Instrumental interactions are often driven by extrinsic motivation, where the activity is pursued for the sake of some external reward or goal.
As you have already learnt. Parsons thinks all systems such as the family, the economy or the polity have a boundary which they maintain in order to subsist. This self-maintenance of systems is possible because human actors as social beings are socialised in society and their motivational and value orientations accordingly are patterned. In order to maintain itself, social systems have to perform some indispensable adjustment between its internal organisation and outer environment. These adjustments are like the adjustment that the human body has to make with the outside environment through breathing, blood circulation and through the maintenance of a steady temperature within itself.
Parsons argues, also have a self-adjustive and self-maintaining quality. These adjustment processes which maintain the social system internally and through its boundary conditions are called functions. Functions are processes of system’s self-maintenance. There are certain functions without which a social system cannot subsist.
These are called ‘functional prerequisites’ by Talcott Parsons. There are four such functional prerequisites.
i) adaptation
ii) goal attainment
iii) integration
iv) latency
The scope of functioning of these functional prerequisites is further defined in terms of whether they deal with processes external or internal to the system. They are also defined in terms of the nature of interaction as such, whether it is consummatory or whether it is instrumental. Consummatory is where the emphasis is on achieving some desired end and instrumental is where the emphasis is on the acquisition and incorporation of means to achieve ends.
Let us now examine each of these functional prerequisites.
Adaptation
Adaptation as a functional prerequisite implies generation and acquisition of resources from outside the system, its external environment and to effect its distribution in the system. External environment in this case means land, water, etc. As an example we can mention the economic system, which involves resource utilisation, production and distribution in the society. Adaptation is oriented to factors external to the system and it has an instrumental character.
Goal-Attainment
Goal-Attainment is that functional prerequisite which involves, firstly, the determination of goals, secondly, the motivating of members of the system to attain these goals, and thirdly, the mobilising of the members and of their energies for the achievement of these goals. Its processes are consummatory in character although it does involve external interaction. The organisation of the power and authority structure in a social system is an example of an institution where goal attainment is the primary thrust. The political processes are its examples. It needs to be remembered that goal attainment is related to the ideological and organisational set up of the social system.
Integration
Integration is that functional prerequisite which helps to maintain coherence, solidarity and coordination in the system. In the social system this function is mainly performed by culture and values. Therefore, the cultural system and its associated institutions and practices constitute elements of integration. Max Weber Integration ensures continuity, coordination and solidarity within the system; it also helps in safeguarding the system from breakdown or disruption. This functional prerequisite is internal to the system and has a consummatory character.
Latency
Finally, latency is that functional prerequisite of the social system which stores, organises and maintains the motivational energy of elements in the social system. Its main functions are pattern maintenance and tension management within the system. This function is performed by the socialisation process of the members of the social system. The process of socialisation helps in internalisation of the symbols, values, tastes and habits specific to the social system in the personality of the actors who are members of the system. It needs also to be added that in Parsons’ view the function of tension management must take place internally in all institutions. This is how it can be differentiated from the function of “integration” which refers primarily to the integration between different systems in society. The functional prerequisite of latency also bears an instrumental character.
Analysis
Subsystems and Functions: Parsons' framework allows for understanding systems at various levels of complexity, from larger societal systems to subsystems like families. Each subsystem performs functions essential for its own maintenance and contributes to broader system stability.
Interdependence of Functions: The AGIL model emphasizes balanced exchanges between adaptive, goal-attaining, integrative, and latency functions. For instance, resources produced by the adaptive system (economy) must support goal-attainment efforts by governmental institutions, ensuring reciprocal benefits and minimizing resentment or alienation.
Complexity in System Analysis: Parsons acknowledges the complexity of real-world systems where different parts specialize in specific functions but contribute collectively to overall system stability and functioning.
Social order and stability
Elaboration of Parsons' AGIL Model
1. Patterns of Interface and Exchange
Parsons' scheme emphasizes the intricate patterns of interaction and exchange between the adaptive (A), goal-attainment (G), integrative (I), and latency (L) phases within social systems.
These exchange patterns are nested within each other, operating at multiple levels from interpersonal interactions to larger societal structures.
For example, the integrative and latency phases also require facilities and resources to maintain their functions, illustrating interdependencies within the system.
2. Hierarchy of Sub-Systems
Parsons' model applies universally from individual interactions (like two-person situations) to entire societies and everything in between.
Sub-systems within larger systems perform specialized functions that contribute to the overall stability and functionality of the system.
Investigation of these sub-systems reveals their interrelations with the larger system and their internal exchange dynamics.
Action Systems and Functional Imperatives
1. Behavioural Organism
Function: Performs the adaptive function within Parsons' framework.
Example: Individuals and their behavior adapt to environmental stimuli and requirements, illustrating how adaptation operates at the most basic level of human interaction.
2. Personality System
Function: Focuses on goal attainment, involving the motivation and mobilization of resources to achieve personal and societal objectives.
Example: Personal aspirations and ambitions align with societal goals through mechanisms of motivation and goal-setting.
3. Social System
Function: Integrates individuals into cohesive social units, ensuring solidarity, coordination, and coherence within society.
Example: Institutions and cultural norms play crucial roles in integrating diverse individuals into functioning societal structures.
4. Cultural System
Function: Maintains patterns of behavior and societal norms, managing tension and ensuring stability through socialization and cultural transmission.
Example: Cultural practices, beliefs, and values shape individual behavior and societal norms, maintaining continuity and stability over time.
Parsons' Focus and Assumptions
Focus on Social Order: Parsons was primarily concerned with understanding and explaining social order.
Key Assumptions:
Systems are interdependent, requiring balance and coordination.
Systems tend towards equilibrium, maintaining stability over time.
Allocation and integration of resources are critical for maintaining equilibrium.
Systems are self-maintaining, utilizing internal mechanisms to ensure functionality and stability.
Limitations: Parsons' focus on social order led him to prioritize stability over change in his analysis, potentially overlooking dynamic processes within societies.
TYPES OF STRUCTURES OF SOCIAL SYSTEMS
Parsons has dealt primarily with four types of structures of social systems in his sociological analysis. These are the economic system, the family system, the political system and the personality system. Ideas about dilemmas of role expectations and role performance enunciated in the form of pattern variables (which you just studied) and formulation of functional prerequisites, taken together would further our knowledge of societies significantly. We find that it helps us to identify different types of structures of social systems, their social characteristics and their place in society. We can identify social systems not just theoretically, as we saw in the earlier sections on pattern variables and functional prerequisites, but empirically as well.
In his book The Social System (1951), Parsons mentions many types of empirical (i.e., that which can be observed in the field [societies] and can be verified) social systems with different clustering’s of social structures. Parsons made a distinction between the concept of social system and social structure. Social system is manifested through the totality of the principles through which roles and related elements of social interaction are organised. Social structure, on the other hand, reflects the specific manner in which these roles in an interaction situation are configurated or composed together. For instance, family is a social system but its social structure can be seen in the empirical clustering of kinship roles. Similarly, the economic system can be treated as another example of a social system, but its social structure is characterised by roles related to production, marketing, management, etc. Pattern variables illustrate in a precise manner the principal types of clusterings of social structures. Parsons mentions four such types
i) the universalistic-achievement pattern
ii) the universalistic-ascription pattern
iii) the particularistic-achievement pattern
iv) the particularistic-ascription pattern
The Universalistic-Achievement Pattern
The Universalistic-Achievement Pattern, as described by Talcott Parsons, represents a type of social system structure characterized by dominant value orientations that emphasize achievement through legal-rational methods.
Characteristics of the Universalistic-Achievement Pattern:
1. Value Orientations:
Achievement: Emphasizes achievement through meritocratic means, such as education, skills, and performance.
Legal-Rationality: Values legality, rules, and rational decision-making processes in governance and organizational management.
Equality: Promotes equality of opportunity and treatment for all members of society.
Democracy: Values democratic principles and participatory governance.
Freedom of Enterprise: Supports entrepreneurial activities and economic freedom.
Openness in Social Interactions: Encourages transparency and openness in social relations and interactions.
2. Social Structure:
Meritocracy: Rewards based on individual merit and performance rather than inherited status or affiliations.
Egalitarianism: Minimizes divisions based on caste, ethnicity, or other particularistic values.
Institutionalization: Formal institutions (legal, educational, economic) play a crucial role in regulating societal interactions and promoting stability.
Example: American Society
Parsons' Perspective: According to Parsons, American society exemplifies the Universalistic-Achievement Pattern to a significant extent.
Characteristics in American Society:
Meritocracy: Individuals can achieve success based on their talents, skills, and hard work rather than social background.
Legal-Rational Governance: The U.S. operates under a legal system that emphasizes due process, equality before the law, and rational decision-making in governance.
Equality and Democracy: Democratic principles are central, promoting equality of opportunity and political participation.
Freedom of Enterprise: The U.S. economy is characterized by a free-market system that fosters entrepreneurship and economic freedom.
Openness: American society values transparency and openness in social interactions and public discourse.
The Universalistic-Ascription Pattern
The Universalistic-Ascription Pattern, according to Talcott Parsons, represents a social system configuration characterized by specific role distributions and value orientations.
Characteristics of the Universalistic-Ascription Pattern:
1. Value Orientations:
Legal Rationality: Emphasizes the use of legal and rational methods in performing roles and organizing institutions.
Ascription: Role allocation and distribution of authority are based on ascriptive principles rather than meritocratic or egalitarian criteria.
Modern Technology: Utilizes principles of science and technology in industry, communication, and organizational management.
2. Social Structure:
Role Allocation: Roles and positions are assigned based on ascriptive criteria such as membership in ideological associations, political parties, ethnic or racial categories, or other affiliations.
Hierarchy and Discrimination: Hierarchies exist where certain groups or individuals are privileged or disadvantaged based on ascriptive characteristics rather than merit or achievement.
Organizational Rationality: Despite ascriptive role allocation, organizations and institutions may operate under rational and efficient management principles, especially in terms of technology and production.
Example: Nazi Germany
Parsons' Perspective: Parsons identifies Nazi Germany as an example of a society embodying the Universalistic-Ascription Pattern during its regime.
Characteristics in Nazi Germany:
Legal Rationality: The Nazi regime employed legal and bureaucratic methods to organize industries, government institutions, and societal functions.
Ascriptive Principles: The distribution of authority and privileges was heavily influenced by racial ideology, particularly favoring the so-called Aryan or Nordic races while discriminating against Jews and other minority groups.
Technology and Industry: Nazi Germany utilized modern principles of science and technology in its industries and military, aiming for efficiency and technological advancement.
Discrimination: Policies and laws systematically marginalized and persecuted Jews, Romani people, disabled individuals, and others deemed as threats to the Nazi racial hierarchy.
The Particularistic-Achievement Pattern
The Particularistic-Achievement Pattern, as described by Talcott Parsons, represents a social structure characterized by specific role configurations and value orientations. Here's an analysis of its key characteristics with a focus on classical Chinese society:
Characteristics of the Particularistic-Achievement Pattern:
1. Value Orientations:
Particularistic Principles: Role allocation, authority, and social hierarchy are organized based on particularistic criteria rather than universalistic principles.
Familism: Emphasizes continuity with ancestors, strong kinship ties, and reverence for ancestors through practices like ancestor worship.
Male Lineage Dominance: Preference for male descent and lineage, leading to female subordination in societal roles.
2. Social Structure:
Role Configuration: Occupations, authority, and management roles are determined by particularistic principles, such as birthright, kinship ties, and adherence to cultural norms rather than meritocratic or egalitarian criteria.
Achievement and Propriety: Despite particularism, there is a recognition of achievement and adherence to a "code of propriety," akin to legal rationality found in universalistic systems.
Confucianism Influence: Confucian ethics, which emphasize hierarchical relationships, respect for authority, and adherence to social norms, serve as the official ethic guiding societal roles and conduct.
Example: Classical Chinese Society
Parsons' Perspective: Parsons identifies classical Chinese society, influenced by Confucianism, as exemplifying the Particularistic-Achievement Pattern.
Characteristics in Classical China:
Familism and Ancestor Worship: Society values continuity with ancestors and strong familial bonds, reinforcing hierarchical family structures.
Male Lineage Dominance: Preference for male descendants and male lineage inheritance, contributing to female subordination in societal roles.
Particularistic Role Allocation: Occupational roles, authority, and access to resources are based on birthright, kinship ties, and adherence to cultural norms rather than universalistic principles.
Confucian Ethical Framework: Confucianism guides social conduct with principles of propriety, respect for authority, and the importance of fulfilling roles within the social hierarchy.
Merit in Civil Service: Despite particularism, civil service recruitment involved competitive examinations, allowing individuals who adhered to Confucian ethics to enter government service, demonstrating a blend of achievement and ascription principles.
The Particularistic-Ascription Pattern
The Particularistic-Ascription Pattern, according to Talcott Parsons, characterizes social structures where roles are organized around values linked to kinship, birth, and other ascriptive features rather than individual achievement.
Characteristics of the Particularistic-Ascription Pattern:
1. Value Orientations:
Ascriptive Features: Role allocation and social hierarchy are based on ascriptive criteria such as kinship, birthright, and traditional affiliations rather than merit or individual effort.
Expressive or Artistic Orientations: Emphasis on expressive activities and cultural traditions rather than economic or instrumental pursuits.
Work as a Necessary Evil: Work is viewed as a necessary obligation rather than a source of personal fulfillment or achievement.
Traditionalism: Society prioritizes stability and tradition, discouraging disruptions to established norms and practices.
2. Social Structure:
Role Organization: Roles and status are determined by inherited characteristics or affiliations, reinforcing social hierarchies based on birth and lineage.
Stability and Traditional Values: Strong vested interests exist in maintaining traditional values and social structures, minimizing incentives for social change or mobility.
Cultural Emphasis: Society places significant value on expressive activities, artistic pursuits, and cultural traditions as central to social identity and cohesion.
Example: Spanish Americans in the USA
Parsons' Perspective: Parsons identifies Spanish Americans in the USA as an example of a group embodying the Particularistic-Ascription Pattern.
Characteristics in Spanish American Communities:
Ascriptive Criteria: Social roles and status are often determined by ethnic or cultural heritage, family lineage, and traditional affiliations rather than individual achievement.
Emphasis on Tradition: Spanish American communities in the USA may prioritize cultural traditions, family ties, and community solidarity over economic or career advancement.
Stability and Traditional Values: There is a strong preference for maintaining cultural heritage and traditional practices, fostering stability and social cohesion within the community.
Debate: Traditional Indian Caste Society
Comparison: Traditional Indian caste society exhibits elements that align with the Particularistic-Ascription Pattern:
Ascriptive Role Allocation: Caste determines social roles, occupations, and social status based on birthright and lineage.
Emphasis on Tradition: Caste-based societies emphasize stability, continuity of traditions, and hierarchical social structures.
Limited Mobility: Traditional caste systems historically restricted social mobility, with roles and privileges inherited rather than achieved.
FUNCTIONALISM AND SOCIAL Change—Parson
Moving Equilibrium
Talcott Parsons' concept of moving equilibrium is a central idea in his structural-functional approach to sociology. It describes how social systems maintain stability and order while adapting to changes. Moving equilibrium emphasizes the dynamic nature of social systems, which continuously adjust to internal and external pressures to sustain overall stability.
Key Aspects of Moving Equilibrium
1. Dynamic Stability:
Social systems are not static; they are constantly undergoing changes while striving to maintain a balance.
Stability is achieved not by remaining unchanged but by adjusting to new conditions and challenges.
2. Adaptation to Change:
Social systems face both internal changes (e.g., demographic shifts, technological advancements) and external changes (e.g., economic fluctuations, environmental challenges).
To maintain equilibrium, systems must adapt to these changes through various mechanisms and processes.
3. Feedback Mechanisms:
Feedback loops are essential for monitoring the system's state and making necessary adjustments.
Positive feedback reinforces certain behaviours or changes, while negative feedback corrects deviations and restores balance.
4. Role Differentiation and Integration:
As social systems evolve, roles within the system become more specialized and differentiated.
Integration mechanisms (e.g., norms, laws, institutions) ensure that these diverse roles work together harmoniously to maintain system coherence.
5. Functional Prerequisites:
For a social system to function effectively and maintain equilibrium, it must fulfil certain functional prerequisites:
Adaptation: Adjusting to the environment and resource allocation.
Goal Attainment: Setting and achieving collective goals.
Integration: Ensuring cohesion and coordination among different parts of the system.
Latency (Pattern Maintenance): Maintaining and transmitting cultural values and norms.
Mechanisms of Moving Equilibrium
1. Institutionalization:
New roles, norms, and values are institutionalized to stabilize changes.
Institutionalization helps integrate new elements into the existing social structure, reducing potential conflicts and strains.
2. Socialization:
Socialization processes transmit cultural values and norms to individuals, ensuring continuity and stability.
It helps individuals adapt to their roles within the system and align their behaviour with societal expectations.
3. Conflict Resolution:
Conflict and strain are inevitable in social systems, but mechanisms exist to manage and resolve these conflicts.
Effective conflict resolution helps restore equilibrium and prevent disruptions to the system's stability.
4. Cultural Innovation and Diffusion:
Cultural innovation introduces new ideas, technologies, and practices that can enhance the system's adaptability.
Diffusion of these innovations ensures that beneficial changes spread throughout the system, contributing to overall stability.
Example: Economic System
In an economic system:
Dynamic Stability: The economy continuously adapts to changes in technology, consumer preferences, and global markets.
Adaptation: Businesses adjust their strategies in response to market trends, competition, and regulatory changes.
Feedback Mechanisms: Market signals like prices and consumer behaviour provide feedback for businesses to adjust their production and services.
Role Differentiation: Specialization of labour and diversification of industries enhance efficiency.
Integration: Economic policies, regulations, and financial institutions ensure that different economic actors work together harmoniously.
Example: Family System
In a family system:
Dynamic Stability: Families adapt to changes such as births, deaths, marriages, and relocations.
Adaptation: Family roles and responsibilities adjust to life cycle changes and external pressures.
Feedback Mechanisms: Communication and emotional feedback help family members adjust their behaviours.
Role Differentiation: Different family members take on specialized roles (e.g., breadwinner, caregiver).
Integration: Family traditions, values, and social norms ensure cohesion and support within the family unit.
Parsons' concept of moving equilibrium underscores the importance of continuous adaptation and adjustment in maintaining social stability. Social systems are dynamic entities that must constantly respond to changes while striving to maintain balance and order. Through mechanisms like institutionalization, socialization, conflict resolution, and cultural innovation, social systems achieve a moving equilibrium that allows them to function effectively and sustainably over time.
CYBERNETICS HIERARCHY OF CONTROL
Talcott Parsons, integrated concepts from cybernetics and systems theory into his sociological framework. His cybernetic hierarchy of control addresses how social systems maintain stability and adapt to changes. This hierarchy is essential for understanding the structure and function of complex social systems and the interplay between different levels of control. Parsons' cybernetic hierarchy of control can be understood through several levels of control, each with specific roles and mechanisms. These levels ensure the system's stability, adaptability, and goal achievement.
1. Behavioural Organism (Lowest Level)
Focus: Physiological and biological needs.
Mechanisms: Basic biological functions and immediate responses to the environment.
Examples: Reflex actions, metabolic processes, and basic survival mechanisms.
Function: Ensures the survival of individuals within the system by addressing basic needs and responding to immediate environmental stimuli.
2. Personality System
Focus: Individual motivations and goal-setting.
Mechanisms: Psychological processes, personal goals, and motivations.
Examples: Personal ambitions, emotional responses, and individual decision-making.
Function: Guides individual behaviour by setting personal goals and motivations, influencing how individuals interact within the social system.
3. Social System
Focus: Interaction between individuals and groups within the society.
Mechanisms: Norms, roles, institutions, and social structures.
Examples: Family, education, political institutions, and legal systems.
Function: Maintains social order and cohesion through established norms, roles, and institutions. Regulates individual behaviour to align with societal expectations and ensures stable interactions.
4. Cultural System (Highest Level)
Focus: Overarching values, beliefs, and symbols that guide the social system.
Mechanisms: Cultural values, traditions, religious beliefs, and symbolic systems.
Examples: National identity, religious doctrines, moral codes, and shared ideologies.
Function: Provides the ultimate framework for the entire social system by instilling shared values and beliefs. Shapes the norms and goals of the social system and influences the lower levels of the hierarchy.
Key Concepts in Parsons' Cybernetic Hierarchy
1. Feedback Loops:
Each level of the hierarchy uses feedback to regulate behaviour and processes. Feedback loops at higher levels (e.g., cultural system) influence lower levels (e.g., social system and personality system), ensuring that changes are aligned with overarching goals and values.
2. Homeostasis:
The system's ability to maintain internal stability despite external changes. Each level contributes to homeostasis by regulating specific aspects of the system, ensuring overall stability and functionality.
3. Adaptation:
The process by which the social system evolves in response to internal and external changes. Higher levels of the hierarchy facilitate adaptation by adjusting norms, values, and goals to align with new conditions.
4. Integration:
Ensuring that various components of the system work together harmoniously. The social system integrates individual behaviours and motivations, while the cultural system integrates shared values and beliefs.
5. Goal Attainment:
Setting and achieving collective goals. The social system focuses on immediate societal goals, while the cultural system sets long-term, overarching goals.
6. Latency (Pattern Maintenance):
Maintaining and transmitting the cultural values and norms that define the system. The cultural system ensures continuity by preserving and reinforcing core values and beliefs.
Interdependence and Control
In Parsons' view, each level of the hierarchy is interdependent, meaning changes or disturbances in one level can affect the others. For instance:
Cultural System Changes: Shifts in cultural values can lead to changes in social norms and individual behaviours.
Social System Changes: Institutional changes (e.g., new laws or policies) can impact individual motivations and behaviours.
Personality System Changes: Changes in individual motivations and behaviours can influence social interactions and, ultimately, cultural values.
This interdependence ensures that the system can adapt and evolve while maintaining stability and coherence. The cybernetic hierarchy of control provides a comprehensive framework for understanding how complex social systems operate, adapt, and sustain themselves over time.
Talcott Parsons’ framework for understanding social systems incorporates the concepts of energy flow and information control, drawing on ideas from cybernetics and systems theory. These concepts help explain how social systems maintain equilibrium and adapt to change.
Energy Flow in Social Systems
Energy in Parsons' context refers to the resources required to maintain and operate a social system. This can include physical resources, human effort, and capital. Energy flow is about how these resources are mobilized, allocated, and utilized within the system.
1. Mobilization of Energy:
Sources: Energy in a social system is derived from various sources, including human labor, financial capital, and natural resources.
Processes: These resources are mobilized through economic activities, political processes, and social cooperation.
2. Allocation of Energy:
Distribution: Energy must be distributed effectively to ensure that different parts of the system function properly.
Economic Systems: Markets, governmental policies, and organizational management are key mechanisms for energy allocation.
3. Utilization of Energy:
Consumption: The system consumes energy to perform various functions, from sustaining individual members to maintaining institutions.
Efficiency: Ensuring efficient use of energy is crucial for the system’s sustainability.
4. Feedback and Adaptation:
Feedback Loops: The system monitors energy usage through feedback mechanisms, adjusting allocation and consumption to optimize performance.
Adaptation: When resources are depleted or new sources become available, the system adapts by changing its energy mobilization and allocation strategies.
Information Control in Social Systems
Information control involves the processes by which information is generated, transmitted, and used within a social system. Effective information control is essential for decision-making, coordination, and regulation.
1. Generation of Information:
Sources: Information is generated from various activities within the system, such as economic transactions, social interactions, and political decisions.
Data Collection: Institutions like governments, corporations, and research bodies collect data to inform their operations.
2. Transmission of Information:
Communication Networks: Information flows through formal and informal communication networks, including media, education systems, and social networks.
Technology: Advances in technology, such as the internet and telecommunications, facilitate rapid and widespread information dissemination.
3. Utilization of Information:
Decision-Making: Information is used to make decisions at all levels of the social system, from individual choices to governmental policies.
Coordination: Effective information flow ensures that various parts of the system are coordinated, enabling coherent and unified actions.
4. Regulation and Feedback:
Monitoring: The system monitors its activities and outcomes through information feedback loops, assessing performance and compliance with norms and goals.
Control Mechanisms: Information control mechanisms include regulations, audits, and feedback systems that help maintain system stability and adaptability.
Integration of Energy Flow and Information Control
In Parsons' model, energy flow and information control are interdependent and mutually reinforcing:
Energy for Information Systems: Maintaining communication networks, data processing, and decision-making structures requires energy. Efficient energy allocation ensures that these information systems function effectively.
Information for Energy Management: Information about resource availability, consumption patterns, and external conditions is essential for managing energy flow. Feedback loops provide the data needed to adjust energy mobilization and allocation.
Example: Economic System
In an economic system:
Energy Flow: Resources like labor, capital, and raw materials are mobilized, allocated, and utilized to produce goods and services.
Information Control: Economic data (e.g., market trends, financial reports) is collected and analysed to inform business strategies and government policies.
Feedback Mechanisms: Market signals, such as prices and consumer behaviour, provide feedback that helps regulate production and distribution.
Example: Healthcare System
In a healthcare system:
Energy Flow: Resources such as medical personnel, facilities, and funding are allocated to provide healthcare services.
Information Control: Patient records, research data, and public health information guide clinical decisions, policy-making, and resource allocation.
Feedback Mechanisms: Health outcomes and epidemiological data provide feedback for improving healthcare delivery and planning.
Talcott Parsons' concepts of energy flow and information control are crucial for understanding how social systems maintain stability and adapt to change. Effective energy mobilization and utilization, coupled with robust information generation, transmission, and utilization, enable social systems to function efficiently, respond to internal and external challenges, and achieve their goals. This integration of energy and information dynamics ensures the resilience and sustainability of social systems in the face of continuous change.
In Parsons’ view the stability of a social system is maintained not only through the rules and regulations that society imposed upon its members or through other measures of social control that state enforces upon its citizens but in a more enduring manner, by the internalisation of socially approved values, expected behaviour patterns and codes of social existence. This internalisation takes place in society through the process of socialisation of its members. Child learns from his/her environment in the family and neighbourhood both the expected and prohibited norms and values with respect to different social institutions and social roles. Later on as the person grows older, the school, the college and work-place make the person learn and imbibe other sets of social values and expected behaviour patterns. Recall from the past exercise Parsons’ concept of, the functional prerequisites of a social system. These functional prerequisites are adaptation, goal attainment, integration and latency, which are all necessary responses, in Parsons’ view for the existence and survival of any social system. The institutions and processes, which serve to maintain the existence of the system, are considered to be functional for the system by Talcott Parsons. Functionalism represents the viewpoint that all social systems invariably possess the tendency to evolve and integrate such processes and institutions as elements (parts) of the system, which help in its own self-maintenance. Social systems are basically oriented to evolving such units as components of their form, be it in the shape of processes (such as, in Parsons’ understanding, adaptation, goal-attainment, integration and latency) or as social institutions, such as government, economy, schools, courts, etc. all of which serve to maintain the system as if on purpose. The term teleology refers to this purposiveness of institutions. Teleology is thus an essential characteristic of functionalism. It is based on an analogy with the organic system, for instance the human body. In the human body, processes such as respiration, blood circulation, maintenance of a constant temperature, etc., are intended to maintain the health of the body. As such these processes are Ideological or purposive in nature. Simply stated, teleology is any explanation, which is in terms of the final cause or purpose. For example it would be teleological to argue that fruits and seeds exist so that animal and birds can eat them in order to live; or that the function of the long tail of monkeys is to help them jump easily from tree to tree. The vital functions of the human body have the purpose of maintaining the survival of the body, and if any foreign infection threatens the body, its internal system reacts to save it from such invasions and continues to do so until the threat has been neutralised. There is a self-regulatory role that such processes play in human body. It is called homeostasis. Functionalism implies that social systems bear resemblance to organic systems such as the human body. The processes and institutions in social systems and the human body possess self-regulatory mechanisms that keep them stable and save it from external threats. A stability of this sort is called homeostasis. But unlike the human body however, which has a universality for all species of human kind, the social systems are historical products. Parsons acknowledges the enormous variations in the forms and styles of social systems. This is ensured by the plasticity of human infant, which unlike other animal species does not grow up with a limited general traits of behaviour. The child learns different languages, conforms to different sets of cultural values and behaviour patterns of the group of society in which he/she is born. The child also has the unlimited capacity to learn new languages, cultural styles, etc; depending on what it is exposed to. Human beings are not born with pre-determinate instinctive traits like other animals are. The socialisation process of the human child and its personality system maintain the stability and integration of the social system through the internalisation of values and ways of social behaviour that the social system approves. In addition human beings not only learn from culture and society but also create new forms of culture and integrate them within pre-existing patterns.
TELEOLOGY
Besides several criticisms of functionalism, its teleological nature is its logical criticism. As you know, teleology is the explanation for the existence of a process or institution or any object or idea in terms of the purpose it fulfils. Thus, according to this explanation the effect is treated as the cause. This is the principal objection to the functionalist theory. For example, according to this theory, religion exists in societies in order to uphold the moral order of societies. Here the effect of religion has been used to explain the cause, i.e, the moral order Why is the teleological nature of functionalism its logical criticism? It is a logical criticism because how can an effect which comes later explain the cause which precedes the effect. It defies the laws of logic. It is like saying that A factor produces B, therefore, the occurrence of B must explain A. However, sociologists belonging to the functionalist school of thought, such as Durkheim were aware of these flaws in functionalism and made attempts to overcome them.
FUNCTIONALISM AND SOCIAL CHANGE
The above characteristics of functionalism might give us an impression that it only has to do with continuity and self-maintenance of the social system, and that it does not have a view of social change. In fact, there are many sociologists who have criticised functionalism only for this reason and argued that functionalism over-emphasises only those features of a social system which bring about stability of continuity. They also accuse functionalism for assuming a large measure of agreement or consensus in a society on its core values, beliefs and behaviour patterns or opinions about social issues. This Criticism is based on the-functionalist position that members of a social system are socialised from childhood onwards to a common set of beliefs and values, which are specific to that society.
CHANGES WITHIN SOCIAL SYSTEMS
Elements of functionalism are prominently evident in Parsons’ explanation of social changes within social systems. He draws an analogy between biological life cycles and social transformations, though he emphasizes that social systems are significantly influenced by cultural factors, which transcend biological processes. Despite this distinction, processes such as growth, differentiation, and self-maintenance, seen in biological changes, also operate within social systems. Social systems undergo internal changes due to cultural innovations, interactions with other cultures, and the diffusion of new values and lifestyles.
A key factor driving changes within social systems is population increase, density, and aggregation. Historically, major social systems like large communities, cities, and organized forms of polity emerged near river valleys and fertile lands, where increased food production led to population growth and significant social changes, including the division of labor, the rise of urban centers, and the development of complex social organizations like the caste system in India and guilds in Europe. According to Parsons, these changes often necessitated re-establishing equilibrium within the system due to strains between past and present relationships, values, and interests. He asserts that change involves overcoming resistance, which means resolving strains or conflicts within the social system.
Over time, each social system develops vested interests aligned with its functional prerequisites (adaptation, goal attainment, integration, and latency). However, the emergence of new ideas, technological advancements, and external pressures such as changes in climate, ecology, or pestilence force social systems to adapt, disrupting pre-existing vested interests and leading to new modes of thinking, new ideas, technology, work patterns, and divisions of labor. This adaptation process, which Parsons terms institutionalization, involves making new roles, organizations, and cultural configurations acceptable to people. The introduction of new elements generates strains and conflicts with established vested interests.
Parsons argues that no single factor is responsible for causing social strain; instead, it represents a point of social development where the old balance of interaction systems, institutions, and structures (roles, statuses, occupations, etc.) is destabilized, initiating a tendency towards a new equilibrium.
Factors Causing Strain Towards Change
Parsons identifies several factors contributing to strain within social systems, necessitating the establishment of a new equilibrium. Key factors include demographic changes through migration, racial intermixture, and shifts in mortality and fertility rates, all affecting social configurations. Physical environment changes, such as the depletion of resources like soil and water, also contribute to social strain. Population changes resulting from increased food production and resource availability further impact social systems. Technological advancements and the application of scientific knowledge drive societal progress and introduce new strains. Additionally, the development of new cultural configurations, such as new religious ideas or the integration of religious values with science and technology, triggers changes within social systems. Parsons emphasizes that these factors act interdependently rather than individually, contributing to social change collectively.
Cultural factors instigate changes within social systems through a continuous cycle of rationalization and traditionalization of values and beliefs. Rationalization, as defined by Parsons and Weber, involves the growth of rational, individualistic, and innovative attitudes towards work, personal commitments, and social institutions. This process includes the adoption of legal and formal methods for allocating responsibilities over traditional customs or the whims of authoritative figures. Over time, rational values become institutionalized and give rise to vested interests, leading to the preservation of these values despite changing circumstances. Consequently, rational values tend to become traditionalized, perpetuating a cyclical process of rationalization and traditionalization.
Parsons illustrates these processes through the family system, which undergoes inherent changes throughout the life cycles of its members, such as birth, maturation, adulthood, old age, and death. Each stage demands adjustments in family roles, occupations, authority, status, and values. The socialization mechanism engrains system values in children, who later adopt additional values from broader society. New roles and expectations in adult life may not always align with those of childhood, creating an inbuilt process of both stability and change within the family system.
These changes are best exemplified by studying the family cycle, focusing on the evolving role of the child through biological growth stages like childhood, adolescence, adulthood, and old age. Each stage brings new role expectations and requires the adoption of new educational and cultural values. This biological process of socialization is not without strain, as transitions between life phases involve resistance and anxiety. The socialization and education process manipulates role expectations through rewards and punishments, with parents guiding early childhood and societal structures enforcing conformity in later life.
Another aspect of the family cycle is its structural nature, influenced by changes in family size. Nuclear families may become joint with increased membership, driven by both internal and external factors. External factors include economic resources, wealth, property, or occupation modes, while internal factors relate to reproduction rates and sex ratios, which are interrelated. These structural changes illustrate how families adapt and evolve in response to both internal dynamics and external pressures.
Social Movement and Social Change
Parsons discussed social change within the social system at two levels:
1. First Level: Gradual, Adaptive Change:
Social change occurs through processes like role differentiation, socialization, and institutionalization.
These changes are slow, continual, and adaptive.
The process involves innovation or rationalization, the institutionalization of innovations, the development of vested interests around new adaptations, and the eventual traditionalization of these innovations.
2. Second Level: Revolutionary Movements:
Social change can also result from revolutionary movements, which bring about sudden and significant alterations in the social system's equilibrium.
Examples include the Communist and Nazi movements.
Four conditions must prevail for such movements to gain supremacy:
1. Widespread Alienative Motivations: A large section of the population must feel disenchanted with the existing system.
2. Organization of a Deviant Subculture: The presence of a counter-ideology that radically departs from the existing one, enabling people to evade or challenge the existing social system.
3. Development of an Ideology: A set of beliefs that can claim legitimacy for its values, symbols, and institutional structures.
4. Organization of a Power System: The establishment of a power structure, particularly referencing the state, to support and legitimize the new movement's ideology.
Consequences of Revolutionary Movements:
Revolutionary ideologies often contain utopian elements that, when implemented, require concessions to develop adaptive structures.
Radical ideologies face difficulty in evolving adaptive structures and tend toward orthodoxy.
For example, in the Communist movement, attempts to abolish institutions like the family and private property were impractical, illustrating the tension between belief and practicality.
Revolutionary movements involve structural ambivalence, such as between class and egalitarianism in Communism.
Followers may indulge in personal or collective self-gratification as the system shifts from "theirs" to "ours," mitigating the movement's radical nature.
Over time, revolutionary movements that begin with heterodoxy tend to move toward orthodoxy, socializing members into conformity similar to pre-revolutionary societies.
Ultimately, even revolutionary movements undergo adaptive change, aligning with the system's stability needs, transitioning from radical transformation to orthodoxy.
EVALUATION
Strengths of Parsons' Sociology
1. Comprehensive Theoretical Framework:
Robert K. Merton: A prominent student of Parsons, Merton expanded on functionalism by introducing concepts such as "manifest and latent functions." He appreciated Parsons' systematic approach but sought to make it more applicable to empirical research.
2. Focus on Social Order and Stability:
Kingsley Davis and Wilbert E. Moore: These sociologists built on Parsons' ideas to develop theories of social stratification, arguing that social inequality is necessary for the functioning of a society. They emphasized the importance of stability and integration in maintaining social order.
3. Functional Prerequisites:
Jeffrey Alexander: A contemporary sociologist who has revisited Parsons' work, Alexander acknowledges the importance of functional prerequisites in understanding societal cohesion. He has worked on updating Parsons' theories to address contemporary issues.
4. Role Differentiation and Integration:
Niklas Luhmann: Luhmann was influenced by Parsons' systems theory and developed his own theory of social systems. He appreciated Parsons' focus on differentiation and integration but offered a more refined understanding of complex social systems.
5. Influence on Subsequent Sociological Theory:
Anthony Giddens: Giddens recognized Parsons' significant influence on sociological theory, particularly in the development of structuralism and functionalism. While Giddens later critiqued Parsons, he acknowledged the foundational role Parsons played in modern sociology.
Criticisms of Parsons' Sociology
1. Overemphasis on Stability and Consensus:
C. Wright Mills: A sharp critic of Parsons, Mills argued that Parsons' theories overlooked the significance of power, conflict, and social change. Mills emphasized the need to address social inequalities and power dynamics in sociological analysis.
2. Abstract and Complex Theoretical Constructs:
Alvin Gouldner: Gouldner criticized Parsons for his abstract and overly complex theoretical constructs, arguing that they were detached from empirical realities. He called for a more grounded and practical approach to sociological theory.
3. Neglect of Agency and Individual Action:
Harold Garfinkel: The founder of ethnomethodology, Garfinkel critiqued Parsons for neglecting individual agency and the micro-level interactions that constitute social reality. Garfinkel focused on how individuals create and sustain social order through everyday actions.
4. Insufficient Attention to Social Change:
Ralf Dahrendorf: Dahrendorf challenged Parsons' emphasis on social stability and consensus, arguing that conflict and change are inherent to social life. He developed conflict theory as a counterbalance to Parsons' structural-functionalism.
5. Eurocentric and Conservative Bias:
Immanuel Wallerstein: Wallerstein critiqued Parsons for his Eurocentric perspective and conservative bias. He argued that Parsons' theories were rooted in a Western, capitalist framework that ignored global inequalities and historical dynamics.
Impact and Legacy
Despite these criticisms, Parsons' contributions to sociology remain influential. Key aspects of his legacy include:
1. Foundation for Systems Theory:
Jürgen Habermas: While critical of some aspects of Parsons' work, Habermas appreciated Parsons' systems theory's potential for understanding complex social dynamics. Habermas integrated Parsons' insights into his own theory of communicative action.
2. Development of Functionalist Approaches:
Herbert Spencer: Though preceding Parsons, Spencer's work laid the groundwork for functionalist thinking, which Parsons developed further. Parsons' functionalism built on Spencer's ideas about society as an organism.
3. Influence on Subsequent Theorists:
Pierre Bourdieu: While Bourdieu critiqued Parsons for neglecting power and conflict, he acknowledged the importance of understanding social structures. Bourdieu's concept of habitus can be seen as addressing some of Parsons' limitations.
4. Educational Contributions:
George Ritzer: Ritzer, known for his work on sociological theory, has highlighted Parsons' role in shaping the field of sociology. His textbooks often discuss Parsons' theories, providing a balanced view of their strengths and weaknesses.
Talcott Parsons' sociology offers a comprehensive and influential framework for understanding social systems and their functions. While his theories have faced substantial criticism for their perceived overemphasis on stability, complexity, and neglect of conflict and change, they continue to be a critical part of sociological discourse. Parsons' contributions have shaped the field of sociology, offering valuable insights into the functioning of social systems and inspiring ongoing debate and development in sociological theory. The perspectives of other sociologists, both supportive and critical, enrich our understanding of Parsons' legacy and its place in the broader sociological landscape.
AN ASSESSMENT OF PARSONS
1. Influence on American Sociology:
Parsons wielded significant influence over American sociology for more than two decades, shaping a generation of sociologists including Robert Merton, Kingsley Davis, Wilbert Moore, Marion J. Levy, Neil Smelser, and Harold Garfinkel. His theoretical framework provided a foundational basis for the integration of social sciences.
2. Break from Empiricism:
Parsons departed from the minutiae of empiricism prevalent in American sociology at the time. His ambitious goal was to synthesize elements from British utilitarian economics, French positivism, and German historicism into a comprehensive conceptual structure. However, while correcting over-empiricism, his theoretical model became overly complex and lacked empirical applicability.
3. Action Theory and Functionalism:
Parsons attempted to merge action theory with functionalism through concepts like pattern variables and systemic analyses. Yet, his emphasis on systemic analysis often overshadowed individual action theories, leading to criticism that his framework presented an overly socialized view of human behavior.
4. Preoccupation with Order and Equilibrium:
Critics argue that Parsons' theory is overly oriented towards social order and equilibrium, neglecting the role of social conflict and change. His functionalist perspective tends to prioritize stability and continuity, which limits its explanatory power in dynamic social contexts.
5. Functionalism and Teleology:
Parsons' concept of power and functionalism is critiqued for its teleological bias, overemphasizing the role of values and norms in maintaining societal order. This perspective arguably downplays the complexities and contradictions inherent in social systems.
6. Criticism and Response:
Parsons faced substantial criticism, particularly for portraying society as harmonious and devoid of conflict, neglecting power dynamics as sources of social conflict, and thus failing to adequately explain social change. However, Parsons did address these criticisms in his later works by acknowledging tensions and discontinuities within societies and allowing for the possibility of social change.
7. Integration and Complexity:
Parsons' later writings recognized that social integration involves intricate processes with inherent difficulties and failures. He acknowledged that real societies are not perfectly integrated, and tensions and conflicts are natural outcomes of social interactions.
8. Equilibrium and Change:
Contrary to the critique of static equilibrium, Parsons did not argue that highly integrated societies are static or immune to change. He viewed societal equilibrium as dynamic, akin to the balanced functioning of a living organism that evolves and adapts while maintaining its functional requisites for survival.