Name: Tekani Trim Topic: Discuss the strengths and weaknesses of Functionalism.

The Functionalism ideology views society as a system that is a set of interconnected parts which together form a whole. Society is seen as a basic unit of analysis and its various parts are understood primarily in terms of their relationship to the whole as each aspect of society is interdependent. Functionalism grew from the ideas of a few theorists such as Herbert Spencer and Emile Durkheim. However, the roots of Functionalism can be found in the ideas of August Comte, the founder of Sociology. Functionalists believe that society is held together by social consensus, or cohesion, in which members of the society agree upon, and work together to achieve, what is best for society as a whole, this means that the needs of the society outweigh those of the individual. Along with interdependence and collaborative functions, functionalists also believed that the societal system would always tend towards a state of equilibrium. This equilibrium in society however can only be achieved once each part is functioning efficiently and correctly. Any change as such within any individual force would see a gradual shift of the entire whole toward a new state of equilibrium in order for the maintenance of social order. There is indeed little strength associated with Functionalism as explored by the relevant theorists. One of the strengths of Functionalism is that it asserts that there are purposes for social conditions or facts. For example, under a functionalist point of view the newspaper deliverer and the sewer worker all contribute to the function of the entire unit--without serving these purposes, the social structure would not function properly. This is important as it does not downplay the role of any worker in society, this truly reflects reality as even the lower level garbage man plays a pivotal role in society. As such contribution to society is dependent on respective skill set. On the other hand, it is said that too much emphasis is actually placed on the identification of the functions within an institution as opposed to the total benefit it actually brings to society. This therefore implies that the associated functions are justified as being in the best situation possible in social arrangement. This begs question of whether everything in society does indeed have a beneficial function to support the entire whole as purported. Some institutions may indeed have

oppressive and exploitative functions. An example of this can be seen in the numerous organisations that use forced labour to produce or manufacture items. These items may provide the society with certain needs, however, the human capital in these businesses are severely disadvantaged. Another question is whether every facet of society does indeed have a function. An additional downside of Functionalism is that it focused too much on the largest possible systems, which the entire societies. Their view is also very conservative and idealistic in nature. The question can also be raised whether modern societies even operate as a closed pattern of interaction or system at all. Instead it is suggested that analyses would have been more accurate had they occurred on a smaller scale. Functionalists also have great difficulty in explaining rapid social change or upheaval possibly brought about by revolutions. Their perspective places strong emphasis on a value consensus brought about through the socialisation process. Conflict and diversity is ignored for the most part as inherent aspects of reality. Mainly Durkheim recognised the possible dysfunctional aspects of some forms of social life. However, he observed that crime; which in reality usually follows the social stratification associated with functionalism, was functional to society. Conversely, too high a level of crime would not be functional and could cause a sense of confusion about the norms that applied to peoples' lives. Functionalists also suggest that with any change in any micro group in society would result in the complete shift of the entire unit, seen here as society, into a new sense of equilibrium. However, as seen in many realistic instances, equilibrium is never fully restored. This can be seen in the Middle East where rapid manifestations of social change have caused prolonged disruptions within entire societies. The rippling effects can also be seen not only within those borders but worldwide, also questioning the closed system of interaction, based on value constructs. This macro theory also underplays power differences among and between groups within institutions. This would influence the actual distribution of work or functions as well as whether there would indeed be equal weight pulling within the society. As such individual with a lower sense of power and prestige may indeed carrying extra functions that again, may be seen as

oppressive in nature. This therefore calls into question everyone functioning to improve societys whole. Generally it can be seen that the Functionalism ideology has many questionable aspects, seen as weaknesses. It can also be said that the criticisms appear to outweigh the positives identified by many critics. This as such definitely makes its total modern application difficult to emulate in many societies.