Functionalism as a Structural/Systems Theory – it focuses on the needs of the social system as a whole; it is a consensus theory – it sees society as based on shared values; it is also a modernist theory – it believes that research can find the truth and lead to progress. Functionalism is closely related to the New Right and Modernisation Theory.
Functionalism for A Level Socioogy
Introduction/ Society as a System
Historical Context: the 1890s to the 1950s
Parsons uses the term ‘organic analogy’ to describe society.
Parsons sees three similarities between society and a biological organism: both are self-regulating, both have needs, both have sub-systems which perform specific functions.
Emile Durkheim’s Functionalism (1858 – 1917) – The first ever ‘Sociologist’
Concerned with understanding rapid social change brought about with industrialisation
Traditional society based on ‘mechanical solidarity’ and strong collective conscience
Industrial society = more complex causes change and anomie, challenge of modernity = how to achieve ‘organic solidarity’
Society exists as a separate entity above its members, as a system of ‘social facts’. It affects people irrespective of their individual thoughts and feelings.
Studied suicide to illustrate the above.
Talcott Parson’s Functionalism
Society is based on value consensus and social order
Society needs individuals to be integrated – this is achieved through socialisation and social control
The social system has four basic needs: instrumental (adaptation and goal attainment) and expressive (integration and latency)
Social change is gradual and evolutionary/ progressive – societies gradually evolve by moving from simple to more complex and larger structures.
Robert Merton’s Functionalism
Merton’s Three Internal Critiques of Functionalism: Not everything is necessary; not everything is interconnected; some institutions are dysfunctional
Merton’s ideas of Latent and Manifest Functions: Intended and unintended (so functions may be more complex than Parson’s suggests)
Overall Evaluations of Functionalism
Durkheim’s study on suicide – trends still true today
Governments view society as a system
Development theorists view society as a system.
X – Logical Criticisms – Functionalism is teleological – it explains an institutions existence in terms of its effect, and the effect may not be necessary
X – Conflict Perspectives – Functionalism ignores power inequality and exploitatio
X – Action Perspectives – Functionalism is deterministic
X – Postmodernist Critiques – society is not as stable, orderly, or predictable as Functionalists suggest.
Functionalism applied to other topic areas within sociology
The Functionalist perspective on the family
The four universal functions of the family
Functional fit theory
Primary socialisation
Stabilisation of adult personalities
Traditional gender role
The Functionalist perspective on education
Secondary socialisation
Social Solidarity
Skills for working
Meritocracy
Role Allocation
Modernisation Theory (Functionalism applied to development)
Aid injections and five stages of growth
Cultural Barriers
Capitalist/ Industrial model of development
Functionalist and Social Control theories of crime
Bonds of attachment theory
Positive Functions of Crime
Inevitability of crime
Functionalist research methods – Positivism
Social Facts
Objectivity
Official Statistics
Correlations
Generaliseablity
Science
If you like this sort of revision-thang, then why not contribute to my early retirement fund and buy these revision notes for Theory and Methods – they’re structured as in the picture below, and cost less than a pint of yer finest ale!
Consensus Theory – Social Institutions generally work, social control is good, crime is dysfunctional (bad)
Closely related to Subcultural Theories
1890 -1940s
Durkheim’s Functionalist Theory
Crime is natural and inevitable, society needs crime.
There are three positive functions of crime – social integration/ social regulation/ social change
Hirschi’s Social Control/ Bonds of Attachment Theory
Crime is most common amongst individuals who are detached from society
Four types of attachment – Commitment, Involvement, Attachment, Belief
Correlation between truancy, single parent households, unemployment and crime
Merton’s Strain Theory
There is a strain between society’s cultural value system (valuing money) and the social structure which fails to provide opportunities for everyone to achieve these goals legitimately.
In times of strain, there are five adaptations
Three of these are deviant – innovation, retreatism and rebellion.
Institutional Anomie Theory (IAT)
Merton’s Strain Theory on steroids.
The cultural value system of achieving monetary success has now the core value taught in every institution – The media, and education especially.
Overall Evaluations of Functionalist and Strain Theories of Crime
Positive
Negative
Generally – recognise the relationship between social structure and crime
Durkheim – Crime does exist in every society
Durkheim – Recognises that a crime-free society is an unrealistic goal
Hirschi – Official Statistics support
Merton – Explains different types of deviance
IAT – Recognises recent social changes
X –Can’t explain hidden crimes such as Domestic Violence
X – Durkhiem – Fails to ask ‘Functional for whom’ – ignores victims (Left Realism)
X – Can’t explain elite crimes, elites are attached (Marxism)
X – Ignores Power and Labelling, doesn’t recognise that crime stats are socially constructed and elite crimes happen but generally aren’t recorded. (Interactionism)
Crime is a result of a ‘strain’ between legitimate goals and lack of opportunities to achieve those goals.
Strain Theory argues that crime occurs when there aren’t enough legitimate opportunities for people to achieve the normal success goals of a society. In such a situation there is a ‘strain’ between the goals and the means to achieve those goals, and some people turn to crime in order to achieve success.
Strain Theory was first developed by Robert Merton in the 1940s to explain the rising crime rates in the USA. Strain theory has become popular with Contemporary sociologists.
Robert Merton
Strain Theory: The Basics
Merton argued that the cultural system of the USA was built on the ‘American Dream’. This was a set of meritocratic principles which assured the American public that equality of opportunity was available to all, regardless of class, gender or ethnicity.
The ‘American Dream’ encouraged individuals to pursue a goal of success which was largely measured in terms of the acquisition of wealth and material possessions. People were expected to pursue this goal through legitimate means such as education and work. The dominant cultural message was if you are ambitious, talented and work hard, then income and wealth should be your rewards.
However Merton pointed out that these goals were not attainable by all. The structural organisation of the USA meant that the means to get on were not fairly distributed. It was difficult, if not impossible for some to compete an achieve financial success.
Merton developed the concept of ‘anomie’ to describe this imbalance between cultural goals and institutionalised means. He argued that such an imbalanced society produces anomie – there is a strain or tension between the goals and means which produce unsatisfied aspirations.
Crime: A consequence of Anomie
Anomie was a socially fostered state of discontent and deregulation that generated crime and deviance. American society promised so much to everyone but denied many people equal access to achievement.
People might have been motivated to succeed, but they confronted class, race and other social barriers which contradicted the myth of openness. For example, it was not easy for a poor, inner-city teenager to gain qualifications or get a job.
In American society at the time failure was interpreted as a sign of personal rather than structural weakness. Failure tended to lead to individual guilt rather than collective or political anger.
The pressure to succeed could be so powerful that impelled disadvantaged people to bypass legitimate careers and adopt illegitimate careers.
As Merton puts it:
‘The culture makes incompatible demands… In this setting, a cardinal American virtue – “ambition” – promotes a cardinal American vice – “deviant behaviour”
Merton (1957) Social Theory and Social Structure.
Five Adaptations to Strain
Merton argued that when individuals are faced with a gap between their goals and their current status, strain occurs. When faced with strain, people have five ways to adapt:
Conformity: pursing cultural goals through socially approved means.
Innovation: using socially unapproved or unconventional means to obtain culturally approved goals. Example: dealing drugs or stealing to achieve financial security.
Ritualism: using the same socially approved means to achieve less elusive goals (more modest and humble).
Retreatism: to reject both the cultural goals and the means to obtain it, then find a way to escape it.
Rebellion: to reject the cultural goals and means, then work to replace them.
Strain Theory, Social Class and Crime
Merton’s strain theory can be applied to explain why there is higher rate of crime among the working classes.
Merton developed his theory from a well-established observation from official statistics – that a higher proportion of acquisitive crime is committed by those from unskilled manual backgrounds (or ‘lower social classes’).
Merton noted that American society promoted material success as a ‘legitimate goal’, and encouraged self-discipline and hard work as the ‘legitimate means’ of pursuing that goal, with the idea that any individual, irrespective of their background could, with sufficient effort, achieve material success.
HOWEVER, Merton argued that for those from lower social classes, this ‘dream’ had become an ideology, masking the fact that the legitimate opportunities are not available to all, and worse, those who failed to achieve success via legitimate means were condemned for their apparent lack of effort.
This situation puts great pressure on people to achieve material success by illegitimate means (acquisitive crime) to avoid being branded a failure.
In short, Merton argued that America was a highly unequal and divided society which promoted goals that only some of its population could realistically hope to achieve. Many young, working class men especially had internalised the desire to achieve material success (they wanted cars and nice clothes for example), but the only way they could meet these goals was through crime.
Thus, it is not so much the individual’s flaws that lead them to crime, but rather ‘anomie’ in society – the combination of the pressure to be materially successful and the lack of legitimate opportunities to achieve that success.
Criticisms of Strain Theory
Not all working class individuals turn to crime, and so we need something else to explain why some of them do and some of them do not. Subcultural theorists argued that the role of working class subcultures plugs this gap in the explanation – deviant subcultures provide rewards for individuals who commit crime.
Merton’s reliance on official statistics means he over-estimates the extent of working class crime and underestimates the extent of middle class, or white collar crime.
Strain theory only really explains economic crime, it doesn’t really explain violent crime.
Marxists argue Merton is not critical enough of capitalism. They point out that lack of equality of opportunity is at the heart of the Capitalist system. (Elites make the system work for them, which disadvantages the lower classes).
The Continuing Relevance of Strain Theory
Merton’s strain theory is an important contribution to the study of crime and deviance – in the 1940s it helped to explain why crime continued to exist in countries, such as America, which were experiencing increasing economic growth and wealth.
Baumer and Gustafson (2007) analysed official data sets in the USA and found that instrumental crime rates were higher in areas where there was a ‘high commitment to money success’ alongside a ‘weak commitment to legitimate means’..
It is possible to apply Merton’s theory of anomie to explain White Collar Crime – white collar criminals (those who commit fraud at work, for example) might be those who are committed to achieving material success, but have had their opportunities for promotion blocked by lack of opportunities – possible through class, gender or ethnic bias, or possible just by the simple fact that the higher up the career ladder you go, the more competition for promotion there is.
The (2009) applies Merton’s strain theory to explain rising crime rates during a period of economic growth in Malaysia, suggesting we can apply this theory to developing countries and that a ‘general theory of crime’ may thus be possible.
Philip Bourgeois (1996) In search of respect shows us that some of the most despised criminals have actually internalised Merton’s success goals.
Carl Nightingale: On the Edge – Carl Nightingale developed Merton’s Strain Theory, applying it to inner city youths in the 1990s.
Applying Strain Theory to Mass Shootings in America…
Merton’s Strain Theory can be applied to explain the rise in mass shootings in recent years in the United States. However, we need to take into account more than just Strain Theory. We also need to recognise that mass shooters tend to be white, working class men. Thus the ‘crisis of masculinity’ has a lot to do with the increasing trend of mass shootings too!
Kalish et al (2010) argue that a culture of hegemonic masculinity in the US creates a sense of aggrieved entitlement conducive to violence.
Today in America young men face barriers to achieving traditional markers of male success. Getting a decent paying job, buying a house and finding a partner are all harder than ever. There are a significant number of young men who fail to achieve any of these normal masculine success goals. Many men feel they are entitled to these things, which is part of patriarchy. Not achieving these goals means lots of men feeling anxious and their masculine sense of identity threatened.
When this happens, some of these men blame others for taking their opportunities away from them. Some of them (wrongly) blame ethnic minorities for taking their jobs, houses, and women. Some of these enact these feelings through mass-murdering ethnic minorities.
This kind of white-male racist reaction has a long history in America as outlined in this article in The Conversation.
The article above also notes that many of these mass shootings end with the shooter committing suicide. Suicide fits in with the masculine narrative: a pre-planned, successful suicide is the final way a young man can assert their masculine identity. (This may sound bonkers, but read the article, it’s in there!).
