2.3: Structural Functionalism

Functionalism is considered one of the earliest foundations of sociological theory. Developed by Èmile Durkheim, Functionalism asks the question: how do the different parts of society function in order to maintain stability? An answer to this question can be understood through the first pair of glasses—a perspective through which society is viewed as complex sets of social institutions that operate in relation to each other in establishing social realities. These social institutions vary depending on the focus of the perspective, but in general they may include family, marriage, religion, politics, the economy, etc. Functionalism then, provides a view of society wherein different parts work together in some sort of sustainable pattern that fosters various norms, beliefs, practices, and the like.

Early contributors to the Structural Functionalists perspective, like Herbert Spencer (1820-1903), likened these relationships between institutions to the way in which the various parts of the human body work alongside each other in sustaining the human organism throughout the lifecycle. In other words, in the same way the cardiovascular system operates alongside such other functions as the nervous system, muscular system, or respiratory system within our bodies, is analogous to the societal context wherein various social institutions like family, marriage, religion, politics, and the economy all operate in conjunction with one another. That is, the role of the family, its relationship to marriage, guidance of religion, the influence of politics, or how family is subject to different economic fluctuations, all function together to sustain the bonds we create in society.

In this perspective, the view of society can appear rather optimistic, as it largely focuses on the function, consensus, and cooperation that bind various institutions together. If we consider the topics of this textbook—race and ethnicity—for example, structural functionalists may view these social forces as important in forming various socio-cultural traditions, identities, or distinctions that foster diversity. In other words, by focusing on the general functions of these social forces, this perspective appears to embrace a fairly innocent, if not completely benign, view of race and ethnicity.

While this perspective may sound rather admirable, some critics of Functionalism would argue that it fails to consider other less-commendable realities associated with race and ethnicity, namely the inequality and inequity that so often accompanies these social forces. If, for example, we were to use this perspective to view the Trans-Atlantic Slave Trade, a number of institutions could be identified as functioning together for the sustainability of the society that slavery served. To explain, in terms of the political economy, there was a pursuit of enormous profit through the development of an economic system that would initially serve the colony and later the nations-state. Institutions of law and criminal justice operated in tandem with this political economy to establish the legal parameters through which the enslaved were subjugated. Although certainly odd couples, even religion and science operated alongside these other institutions creating doctrines and debates that would drive the discourse on the inferiority of the enslaved and the superiority of their masters; the ineptitude of their conversion to Christianity or even the lack of potential cognitive capabilities in the ‘civilizing process’; as well as the justification of their enslavement—not to mention the absolution of guilt brought about by remaining complicit in the inhumane treatment of fellow humans. These, of course are just a few examples of social institutions that operated alongside of each other during slavery and would be seen primarily for their function within the Functionalist perspective as opposed to their mere problematic implications.