Introduction
The purpose of the essay is to analyze the functionalism theory from an anthropological perspective. The primary focus is on the proponents of the theory , reasons behind its development, historical context, variation, and other theorists who have applied its principles. Herbert Spenser and Emile Durkheim are credited with the origin of the functionalist theory. However, Durkheim referred to it as structural-functionalism. In the 1930s, British anthropologists (Bronislaw Malinowski and Arthur Reginald Radcliffe-Brown) were interested in applying functionalism perspectives in understanding cultures. Robert Merton and Talcott Persons are other theorists that perpetuated and applied functionalism theory in explaining social behavior, needs, and the importance of social institutions.
Reasons Behind Development
The rationale behind the development of the functionalism theory is to understand the societal needs and how cultures function to enhance their (needs) achievement. The primary assumption is that each community within the larger society has certain biological and physical needs (Ember, Ember & Peregrine, 2010). The primary needs of the society include safety and social order. Whenever there are safety issues, such as during warfare, social conflicts, and disasters, religion has a function of fostering calmness, peace, hope, and a sense of harmony. Magic was also considered to be necessary for the attainment of the safety needs. Political organizations were also vital functions for enhancing social order and peace .
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The second reason behind the development of the functionalism theory was to understand the most critical functions in maintaining a culture (Berger, 2012). From a functionalist perspective, all the social institutions are imperative in fostering the survival of a culture . When a social institution becomes dysfunctional, it might affect the stability of culture and cause certain suffering.
Historical Context
The history of the functionalism theory and its relationship to culture can be traced back to the 1860s, through the works of Herbert Spenser and Emile Durkheim (Berger, 2012). The two theorists indicated that communities had specific needs that could only be addressed by functional social structures and institutions. In the 1930s, Bronislaw Malinowski and Arthur Reginald Radcliffe-Brown advanced the functionalism theory further, with a more focus on culture. Malinowski paid close attention to the biological and physical needs in a given culture (Ember, Ember & Peregrine, 2010). Such needs included nutrition, safety, reproduction, movement, relaxation, among others. The achievement of the basic needs required functional social institutions. Malinowski also discussed the derived cultural needs that include the education, economy, and social control (Bourgatta & Montgomery, 2000). Cultural norms, beliefs, traditions, and values were considered significant in fostering the social order and control. Radcliffe-Brown focused on the behaviors, norms , and beliefs that helped to maintain the relationships within a social system. For instance, he demonstrated how in-laws in particular communities treated each other to promote respect and harmonious relations . Both theorists (Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski) agreed that society needed functional institutions to address its needs and also maintain social relationships.
A variant of the Theory
Functionalism theory has been developed over time, bringing some insights, though central precepts remain the same. Historically, Herbert Spenser used the term ‘Functionalism’ while Emile Durkheim termed it as ‘structural-functionalism.’ However, there is a similarity between the two perspectives, in the sense that they both demonstrate the cultural needs and the importance of the social institutions. The major difference is on what needs and social functions each theorist considers to be most important. Malinowski was one of the anthropologists who advanced Herbert Spenser’s functionalism theory. Like Spenser, his focus was on the basic needs and functions of the society. For instance, if there is a need for growth, training and apprenticeship was an essential social function. It aimed to enhance the acquisition of skills and knowledge to address various social needs. The political organizations were also vital in promoting growth and development in the society. Therefore, Malinowski was interested in discussing the essential functions of a community and the social institutions that facilitated the achievement of the needs.
Radcliffe-Brown had a different perspective on the theory. That explained why Emile Durkheim’s structural functionalism approach inspired him . While the community needs are vital to understanding the functions and institutions, Radcliffe-Brown thought it was also essential to demonstrate how the relationships are maintained . Addressing the primary societal needs is one thing but promoting harmonious existence within the social structure is another. Radcliffe-Brown suggested that the society is characterized by relationships (Ember, Ember & Peregrine, 2010). For instance, the relationships within the nuclear family promote harmony and survival. Each member of the nuclear family must know and perform his/her responsibilities to promote growth and satisfaction. Similarly, the maintenance of the relationship between the in-laws requires the observation of certain beliefs and norms. The variation from the focus on the biological needs to the social relations helps in the understanding of the complexities of a given culture.
Radcliffe-Brown also saw the society as being characterized by interdependence. In other words, the survival of the culture depended on the relationships and contributions of each . In this regard, the social harmony and cooperation were necessary for promoting the growth and development of the culture . Additionally, it was expected that the societal goals should supersede the individual interests. To Radcliffe-Brown, religious institutions gave individuals a sense of belonging and dependence on society . From observation, therefore, both Radcliffe-Brown and Malinowski are concerned about what makes a community or society to be functional. The main difference is that Malinowski is concerned about the underlying biological and physical needs, while Radcliffe-Brown is focusing on how the norms and beliefs promote social functions.
Theorists Associated with Adoption, Application, and Perpetuation
Functionalism/structural functionalism perspectives have been applied by theorists such as Talcott Parsons and Robert Merton in explaining the behavior of the society (Giovanni, 2017). However, it appears that Radcliffe-Brown’s approach is commonly applied in describing the functions of the society . Both Merton and Persons were interested in how the culture adapted to changes and overcame various challenges (Giovanni, 2017). Both explained that there were primary goals of the community and the social institutions within which such needs are met . For instance, education is considered essential in preparing young people for economic empowerment. Roberts also explained specific maladaptive strategies, such as crimes to achieve the socially desired goals. He indicated that there is always a conflict between the legitimate and what is considered an illegitimate means of achieving the societal goals. Social institutions, including the politics and security, are involved in maintaining social order and ensuring that people act within the stipulated laws. Therefore, the functionalism theory continues to evolve and to be applied in explaining social behavior and why different functions and social institutions are imperative.
References
Berger, P. (2012) Theory and ethnography in the modern anthropology of India. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theory 2:2, 325-357.
Bourgatta, E.F. & Montgomery, R. (2000). Encyclopedia of sociology . (Vol – 2) New York: McMillion
Ember, R., Ember, M. & Peregrine, N. (2010). Anthropology . 13 th Edition. Pearson. (Chapter 2: History of Anthropological Theory)
Giovanni, C. (2017) Two or three things I know about Ethnographic Theory. HAU: Journal of Ethnographic Theor y 7:1, 1-8.
