Notes: Robert Merton - Functionalism | Sociology Mains Optional for UPSC 2024 PDF Download

 Page 1


 
 
Robert Merton’s Structural Functionalism 
• Talcott Parsons’ student Robert Merton criticized some of the more extreme and 
indefensible aspects of structural functionalism. But equally important, his new 
conceptual insights helped give structural functionalism a continuing Usefulness. 
 
Difference between Merton and Parsons: 
? While Parsons advocated the creation of grand, overarching theories, Merton 
favored more limited, middle range theories.  
?  Merton was more favorable toward Marxian theories than Parsons was. In fact, 
Merton and some of his students (especially Alvin Gouldner) can be seen as having 
pushed structural functionalism more to the left politically. 
 
A Structural functional model: 
Merton criticized what he saw as the three basic postulates of functional analysis: 
 
? First, Functional unity of society: This postulate holds that all standardized social and 
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society as a whole as well as for 
individuals in society. This view implies that the various parts of a social system must 
show a high level of integration. However, Merton maintained that although it may be 
true of small, primitive societies, this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more 
complex societies. 
 
? Second, Universal functionalism: It says that all standardized social and cultural forms and 
structures have positive functions. Merton argued that this contradicts what we find in 
the real world. It is clear that not every structure, custom, idea, belief, and so forth, has 
positive functions. For example, rabid nationalism can be highly dysfunctional in a world 
of proliferating nuclear arms. 
 
? Third, Indispensability: It says that all standardized aspects of society not only have 
positive functions but also represent indispensable parts of the working whole. This 
postulate leads to the idea that all structures and functions are functionally necessary for 
society. No other structures and functions could work quite as well as those that are 
currently found within society. Merton’s criticism, following Parsons, was that we must at 
least be willing to admit that there are various structural and functional alternatives to be 
found within society. 
 
? Merton’s position was that all these functional postulates rely on non-empirical 
assertions based on abstract, theoretical systems. At a minimum, it is the responsibility of 
the sociologist to examine each empirically. Merton’s belief that empirical tests, not 
theoretical assertions, are crucial to functional analysis led him to develop his “paradigm” 
of functional analysis as a guide to the integration of theory and research. 
Page 2


 
 
Robert Merton’s Structural Functionalism 
• Talcott Parsons’ student Robert Merton criticized some of the more extreme and 
indefensible aspects of structural functionalism. But equally important, his new 
conceptual insights helped give structural functionalism a continuing Usefulness. 
 
Difference between Merton and Parsons: 
? While Parsons advocated the creation of grand, overarching theories, Merton 
favored more limited, middle range theories.  
?  Merton was more favorable toward Marxian theories than Parsons was. In fact, 
Merton and some of his students (especially Alvin Gouldner) can be seen as having 
pushed structural functionalism more to the left politically. 
 
A Structural functional model: 
Merton criticized what he saw as the three basic postulates of functional analysis: 
 
? First, Functional unity of society: This postulate holds that all standardized social and 
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society as a whole as well as for 
individuals in society. This view implies that the various parts of a social system must 
show a high level of integration. However, Merton maintained that although it may be 
true of small, primitive societies, this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more 
complex societies. 
 
? Second, Universal functionalism: It says that all standardized social and cultural forms and 
structures have positive functions. Merton argued that this contradicts what we find in 
the real world. It is clear that not every structure, custom, idea, belief, and so forth, has 
positive functions. For example, rabid nationalism can be highly dysfunctional in a world 
of proliferating nuclear arms. 
 
? Third, Indispensability: It says that all standardized aspects of society not only have 
positive functions but also represent indispensable parts of the working whole. This 
postulate leads to the idea that all structures and functions are functionally necessary for 
society. No other structures and functions could work quite as well as those that are 
currently found within society. Merton’s criticism, following Parsons, was that we must at 
least be willing to admit that there are various structural and functional alternatives to be 
found within society. 
 
? Merton’s position was that all these functional postulates rely on non-empirical 
assertions based on abstract, theoretical systems. At a minimum, it is the responsibility of 
the sociologist to examine each empirically. Merton’s belief that empirical tests, not 
theoretical assertions, are crucial to functional analysis led him to develop his “paradigm” 
of functional analysis as a guide to the integration of theory and research. 
 
 
? Merton made it clear from the outset that structural-functional analysis focuses on 
groups, organizations, societies, and cultures. He stated that any object that can be 
subjected to structural-functional analysis must “represent a standardized (that is, 
patterned and repetitive) item”. Such as social roles, institutional patterns, social 
processes, cultural patterns, culturally patterned emotions, social norms, group 
organization, social structure, devices for social control, etc.” 
 
Functions v/s dysfunction: 
• Early structural functionalists tended to focus almost entirely on the functions of one 
social structure or institution for another. However, in Merton’s view, early analysts 
tended to confuse the subjective motives of individuals with the functions of structures 
or institutions. The focus of the structural functionalist should be on social functions 
rather than on individual motives. 
• Functions, according to Merton, are defined as “those observed consequences which 
make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given system”. 
• However, there is a clear ideological bias when one focuses only on adaptation or 
adjustment, for they are always positive consequences. It is important to note that one 
social fact can have negative consequences for another social fact. To rectify this serious 
omission in early structural functionalism. 
• Dysfunction: Merton developed the idea of a dysfunction. Just as structures or 
institutions could contribute to the maintenance of other parts of the social system, they 
also could have negative consequences for them. Slavery in the southern United States, 
for example, clearly had positive consequences for white southerners, such as supplying 
cheap labor, support for the cotton economy, and social status. It also had dysfunctions, 
such as making southerners overly dependent on an agrarian economy and therefore 
unprepared for industrialization. 
• Non-function: Merton also posited the idea of non-functions, which he defined as 
consequences that are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration. Included here 
might be social forms that are “survivals” from earlier historical times. Although they may 
have had positive or negative consequences in the past, they have no significant effect on 
contemporary society. 
• Net balance: To help answer the question of whether positive functions outweigh 
dysfunctions, or vice versa, Merton developed the concept of net balance. The usefulness 
of Merton’s concept comes from the way it orients the sociologist to the question of 
relative significance. To return to the example of slavery, the question becomes whether, 
on balance, slavery was more functional or dysfunctional to the South. Still, this question 
is too broad and obscures a number of issues (for example, that slavery was functional for 
groups such as white slaveholders). 
• Levels of functional analysis: To cope with problems like above, Merton added the idea 
that there must be levels of functional analysis. Functionalists had generally restricted 
themselves to analysis of the society as a whole, but Merton made it clear that analysis 
also could be done on an organization, institution, or group. Returning to the issue of the 
functions of slavery for the South, it would be necessary to differentiate several levels of 
Page 3


 
 
Robert Merton’s Structural Functionalism 
• Talcott Parsons’ student Robert Merton criticized some of the more extreme and 
indefensible aspects of structural functionalism. But equally important, his new 
conceptual insights helped give structural functionalism a continuing Usefulness. 
 
Difference between Merton and Parsons: 
? While Parsons advocated the creation of grand, overarching theories, Merton 
favored more limited, middle range theories.  
?  Merton was more favorable toward Marxian theories than Parsons was. In fact, 
Merton and some of his students (especially Alvin Gouldner) can be seen as having 
pushed structural functionalism more to the left politically. 
 
A Structural functional model: 
Merton criticized what he saw as the three basic postulates of functional analysis: 
 
? First, Functional unity of society: This postulate holds that all standardized social and 
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society as a whole as well as for 
individuals in society. This view implies that the various parts of a social system must 
show a high level of integration. However, Merton maintained that although it may be 
true of small, primitive societies, this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more 
complex societies. 
 
? Second, Universal functionalism: It says that all standardized social and cultural forms and 
structures have positive functions. Merton argued that this contradicts what we find in 
the real world. It is clear that not every structure, custom, idea, belief, and so forth, has 
positive functions. For example, rabid nationalism can be highly dysfunctional in a world 
of proliferating nuclear arms. 
 
? Third, Indispensability: It says that all standardized aspects of society not only have 
positive functions but also represent indispensable parts of the working whole. This 
postulate leads to the idea that all structures and functions are functionally necessary for 
society. No other structures and functions could work quite as well as those that are 
currently found within society. Merton’s criticism, following Parsons, was that we must at 
least be willing to admit that there are various structural and functional alternatives to be 
found within society. 
 
? Merton’s position was that all these functional postulates rely on non-empirical 
assertions based on abstract, theoretical systems. At a minimum, it is the responsibility of 
the sociologist to examine each empirically. Merton’s belief that empirical tests, not 
theoretical assertions, are crucial to functional analysis led him to develop his “paradigm” 
of functional analysis as a guide to the integration of theory and research. 
 
 
? Merton made it clear from the outset that structural-functional analysis focuses on 
groups, organizations, societies, and cultures. He stated that any object that can be 
subjected to structural-functional analysis must “represent a standardized (that is, 
patterned and repetitive) item”. Such as social roles, institutional patterns, social 
processes, cultural patterns, culturally patterned emotions, social norms, group 
organization, social structure, devices for social control, etc.” 
 
Functions v/s dysfunction: 
• Early structural functionalists tended to focus almost entirely on the functions of one 
social structure or institution for another. However, in Merton’s view, early analysts 
tended to confuse the subjective motives of individuals with the functions of structures 
or institutions. The focus of the structural functionalist should be on social functions 
rather than on individual motives. 
• Functions, according to Merton, are defined as “those observed consequences which 
make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given system”. 
• However, there is a clear ideological bias when one focuses only on adaptation or 
adjustment, for they are always positive consequences. It is important to note that one 
social fact can have negative consequences for another social fact. To rectify this serious 
omission in early structural functionalism. 
• Dysfunction: Merton developed the idea of a dysfunction. Just as structures or 
institutions could contribute to the maintenance of other parts of the social system, they 
also could have negative consequences for them. Slavery in the southern United States, 
for example, clearly had positive consequences for white southerners, such as supplying 
cheap labor, support for the cotton economy, and social status. It also had dysfunctions, 
such as making southerners overly dependent on an agrarian economy and therefore 
unprepared for industrialization. 
• Non-function: Merton also posited the idea of non-functions, which he defined as 
consequences that are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration. Included here 
might be social forms that are “survivals” from earlier historical times. Although they may 
have had positive or negative consequences in the past, they have no significant effect on 
contemporary society. 
• Net balance: To help answer the question of whether positive functions outweigh 
dysfunctions, or vice versa, Merton developed the concept of net balance. The usefulness 
of Merton’s concept comes from the way it orients the sociologist to the question of 
relative significance. To return to the example of slavery, the question becomes whether, 
on balance, slavery was more functional or dysfunctional to the South. Still, this question 
is too broad and obscures a number of issues (for example, that slavery was functional for 
groups such as white slaveholders). 
• Levels of functional analysis: To cope with problems like above, Merton added the idea 
that there must be levels of functional analysis. Functionalists had generally restricted 
themselves to analysis of the society as a whole, but Merton made it clear that analysis 
also could be done on an organization, institution, or group. Returning to the issue of the 
functions of slavery for the South, it would be necessary to differentiate several levels of 
 
 
analysis and ask about the functions and dysfunctions of slavery for black families, white 
families, black political organizations, white political organizations, and so forth. In terms 
of net balance, slavery was probably more functional for certain social units and more 
dysfunctional for other social units. Addressing the issue at these more specific levels 
helps in analyzing the functionality of slavery for the South as a whole. 
• Manifest and latent functions: Merton also introduced the concepts of manifest and latent 
functions. These two terms have also been important additions to functional analysis. 9 In 
simple terms, manifest functions are those that are intended, whereas latent functions 
are unintended. The manifest function of slavery, for example, was to increase the 
economic productivity of the South, but it had the latent function of providing a vast 
underclass that served to increase the social status of southern whites, both rich and 
poor. 
• Unanticipated consequences: Unintended consequences or “debunking.” or looking 
beyond stated intentions to real effects. A latent function is one type of unanticipated 
consequence. 
• A structure may be dysfunctional for the system as a whole yet may continue to exist. or 
example, discrimination against females is generally functional for males. One could argue 
that these forms of discrimination adversely affect those who discriminate by keeping 
vast numbers of people underproductive and by increasing the likelihood of social 
conflict. 
• Merton contended that not all structures are indispensable to the workings of the social 
system. Some parts of our social system can be eliminated. This helps functional theory 
overcome another of its conservative biases. By recognizing that some structures are 
expendable, functionalism opens the way for meaningful social change. Our society, for 
example, could continue to exist (and even be improved) by the elimination of 
discrimination against various minority groups. 
 
Social Structure and Anomie: 
? Merton’s the best-known contributions to structural functionalism. 
? Relationship between culture, structure, and anomie. 
? Merton defines culture as “that organized set of normative values governing behavior 
which is common to members of a designated society or group” and social structure as 
“that organized set of social relationships in which members of the society or group are 
variously implicated”. Anomie occurs “when there is an acute disjunction between the 
cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of members of the group 
to act in accord with them”. 
? For example, in American society, the culture places great emphasis on material success. 
However, by their position within the social structure, many people are prevented from 
achieving such success. If one is born into the lower socioeconomic classes and as a result 
is able to acquire, at best, only a high school degree, one’s chances of achieving economic 
success in the generally accepted way (for example, through succeeding in the 
conventional work world) are slim or nonexistent. Under such circumstances (and they 
are widespread in contemporary American society) anomie can be said to exist, and as a 
result, there is a tendency toward deviant behavior. 
Page 4


 
 
Robert Merton’s Structural Functionalism 
• Talcott Parsons’ student Robert Merton criticized some of the more extreme and 
indefensible aspects of structural functionalism. But equally important, his new 
conceptual insights helped give structural functionalism a continuing Usefulness. 
 
Difference between Merton and Parsons: 
? While Parsons advocated the creation of grand, overarching theories, Merton 
favored more limited, middle range theories.  
?  Merton was more favorable toward Marxian theories than Parsons was. In fact, 
Merton and some of his students (especially Alvin Gouldner) can be seen as having 
pushed structural functionalism more to the left politically. 
 
A Structural functional model: 
Merton criticized what he saw as the three basic postulates of functional analysis: 
 
? First, Functional unity of society: This postulate holds that all standardized social and 
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society as a whole as well as for 
individuals in society. This view implies that the various parts of a social system must 
show a high level of integration. However, Merton maintained that although it may be 
true of small, primitive societies, this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more 
complex societies. 
 
? Second, Universal functionalism: It says that all standardized social and cultural forms and 
structures have positive functions. Merton argued that this contradicts what we find in 
the real world. It is clear that not every structure, custom, idea, belief, and so forth, has 
positive functions. For example, rabid nationalism can be highly dysfunctional in a world 
of proliferating nuclear arms. 
 
? Third, Indispensability: It says that all standardized aspects of society not only have 
positive functions but also represent indispensable parts of the working whole. This 
postulate leads to the idea that all structures and functions are functionally necessary for 
society. No other structures and functions could work quite as well as those that are 
currently found within society. Merton’s criticism, following Parsons, was that we must at 
least be willing to admit that there are various structural and functional alternatives to be 
found within society. 
 
? Merton’s position was that all these functional postulates rely on non-empirical 
assertions based on abstract, theoretical systems. At a minimum, it is the responsibility of 
the sociologist to examine each empirically. Merton’s belief that empirical tests, not 
theoretical assertions, are crucial to functional analysis led him to develop his “paradigm” 
of functional analysis as a guide to the integration of theory and research. 
 
 
? Merton made it clear from the outset that structural-functional analysis focuses on 
groups, organizations, societies, and cultures. He stated that any object that can be 
subjected to structural-functional analysis must “represent a standardized (that is, 
patterned and repetitive) item”. Such as social roles, institutional patterns, social 
processes, cultural patterns, culturally patterned emotions, social norms, group 
organization, social structure, devices for social control, etc.” 
 
Functions v/s dysfunction: 
• Early structural functionalists tended to focus almost entirely on the functions of one 
social structure or institution for another. However, in Merton’s view, early analysts 
tended to confuse the subjective motives of individuals with the functions of structures 
or institutions. The focus of the structural functionalist should be on social functions 
rather than on individual motives. 
• Functions, according to Merton, are defined as “those observed consequences which 
make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given system”. 
• However, there is a clear ideological bias when one focuses only on adaptation or 
adjustment, for they are always positive consequences. It is important to note that one 
social fact can have negative consequences for another social fact. To rectify this serious 
omission in early structural functionalism. 
• Dysfunction: Merton developed the idea of a dysfunction. Just as structures or 
institutions could contribute to the maintenance of other parts of the social system, they 
also could have negative consequences for them. Slavery in the southern United States, 
for example, clearly had positive consequences for white southerners, such as supplying 
cheap labor, support for the cotton economy, and social status. It also had dysfunctions, 
such as making southerners overly dependent on an agrarian economy and therefore 
unprepared for industrialization. 
• Non-function: Merton also posited the idea of non-functions, which he defined as 
consequences that are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration. Included here 
might be social forms that are “survivals” from earlier historical times. Although they may 
have had positive or negative consequences in the past, they have no significant effect on 
contemporary society. 
• Net balance: To help answer the question of whether positive functions outweigh 
dysfunctions, or vice versa, Merton developed the concept of net balance. The usefulness 
of Merton’s concept comes from the way it orients the sociologist to the question of 
relative significance. To return to the example of slavery, the question becomes whether, 
on balance, slavery was more functional or dysfunctional to the South. Still, this question 
is too broad and obscures a number of issues (for example, that slavery was functional for 
groups such as white slaveholders). 
• Levels of functional analysis: To cope with problems like above, Merton added the idea 
that there must be levels of functional analysis. Functionalists had generally restricted 
themselves to analysis of the society as a whole, but Merton made it clear that analysis 
also could be done on an organization, institution, or group. Returning to the issue of the 
functions of slavery for the South, it would be necessary to differentiate several levels of 
 
 
analysis and ask about the functions and dysfunctions of slavery for black families, white 
families, black political organizations, white political organizations, and so forth. In terms 
of net balance, slavery was probably more functional for certain social units and more 
dysfunctional for other social units. Addressing the issue at these more specific levels 
helps in analyzing the functionality of slavery for the South as a whole. 
• Manifest and latent functions: Merton also introduced the concepts of manifest and latent 
functions. These two terms have also been important additions to functional analysis. 9 In 
simple terms, manifest functions are those that are intended, whereas latent functions 
are unintended. The manifest function of slavery, for example, was to increase the 
economic productivity of the South, but it had the latent function of providing a vast 
underclass that served to increase the social status of southern whites, both rich and 
poor. 
• Unanticipated consequences: Unintended consequences or “debunking.” or looking 
beyond stated intentions to real effects. A latent function is one type of unanticipated 
consequence. 
• A structure may be dysfunctional for the system as a whole yet may continue to exist. or 
example, discrimination against females is generally functional for males. One could argue 
that these forms of discrimination adversely affect those who discriminate by keeping 
vast numbers of people underproductive and by increasing the likelihood of social 
conflict. 
• Merton contended that not all structures are indispensable to the workings of the social 
system. Some parts of our social system can be eliminated. This helps functional theory 
overcome another of its conservative biases. By recognizing that some structures are 
expendable, functionalism opens the way for meaningful social change. Our society, for 
example, could continue to exist (and even be improved) by the elimination of 
discrimination against various minority groups. 
 
Social Structure and Anomie: 
? Merton’s the best-known contributions to structural functionalism. 
? Relationship between culture, structure, and anomie. 
? Merton defines culture as “that organized set of normative values governing behavior 
which is common to members of a designated society or group” and social structure as 
“that organized set of social relationships in which members of the society or group are 
variously implicated”. Anomie occurs “when there is an acute disjunction between the 
cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of members of the group 
to act in accord with them”. 
? For example, in American society, the culture places great emphasis on material success. 
However, by their position within the social structure, many people are prevented from 
achieving such success. If one is born into the lower socioeconomic classes and as a result 
is able to acquire, at best, only a high school degree, one’s chances of achieving economic 
success in the generally accepted way (for example, through succeeding in the 
conventional work world) are slim or nonexistent. Under such circumstances (and they 
are widespread in contemporary American society) anomie can be said to exist, and as a 
result, there is a tendency toward deviant behavior. 
 
 
? In this context, deviance often takes the form of alternative, unacceptable, and 
sometimes illegal means of achieving economic success. Thus, becoming a drug dealer or a 
prostitute in order to achieve economic success is an example of deviance generated by 
the disjunction between cultural values and social-structural means of attaining those 
values. This is one way in which the structural functionalist would seek to explain crime 
and deviance. 
? Thus, in this example of structural functionalism, Merton is looking at social (and cultural) 
structures, but he is not focally concerned with the functions of those structures. Rather, 
consistent with his functional paradigm, he is mainly concerned with dysfunctions, in this 
case anomie. 
 
Conclusion: while Davis and Moore wrote approvingly of a stratified society, Merton’s work 
indicates that structural functionalists can be critical of social stratification. 
 
Major criticism of structural functionalism: 
 
From late 1930s to early 1960s it was a dominant structural theory but in late 1960s its 
criticism increased. 
 
Substantive criticisms: 
1. History: One major criticism is that structural functionalism does not deal adequately with 
history .In fact it was developed as a reaction to evolutionary approach of certain 
anthropologists. In its criticism of evolutionary theory and came to focus on either 
contemporary or abstract societies. 
2. Social change: Structural functionalists also are attacked for being unable to deal effectively 
with the process of social change. In structural-functional theory. In which all the elements 
of a society are seen as reinforcing one another as well as the system as a whole. This makes 
it difficult to see how these elements can also contribute to change. 
3. Conflict: The most often voiced criticism of structural functionalism is that it is unable to 
deal effectively with conflict. Alvin Gouldner argues that Parsons, as the main 
representative of structural functionalism, tended to overemphasize harmonious 
relationships. Irving Louis Horowitz contends that structural functionalists tend to see 
conflict as necessarily destructive and as occurring outside the framework of society. 
 
• The overall criticisms that structural functionalism is unable to deal with history, change, 
and conflict has led many to argue that structural functionalism has a conservative bias. 
• It may indeed be true that there is a conservative bias in structural functionalism that is 
attributable not only to what it ignores (change, history, and conflict) but also to what it 
chooses to focus on. For one thing, structural functionalists have tended to focus on culture, 
norms, and values. 
• These substantive criticisms point in two basic directions. First, it seems clear that 
structural functionalism has a rather narrow focus that prevents it from addressing a 
number of important issues and aspects of the social world. Second, its focus tends to give it 
Page 5


 
 
Robert Merton’s Structural Functionalism 
• Talcott Parsons’ student Robert Merton criticized some of the more extreme and 
indefensible aspects of structural functionalism. But equally important, his new 
conceptual insights helped give structural functionalism a continuing Usefulness. 
 
Difference between Merton and Parsons: 
? While Parsons advocated the creation of grand, overarching theories, Merton 
favored more limited, middle range theories.  
?  Merton was more favorable toward Marxian theories than Parsons was. In fact, 
Merton and some of his students (especially Alvin Gouldner) can be seen as having 
pushed structural functionalism more to the left politically. 
 
A Structural functional model: 
Merton criticized what he saw as the three basic postulates of functional analysis: 
 
? First, Functional unity of society: This postulate holds that all standardized social and 
cultural beliefs and practices are functional for society as a whole as well as for 
individuals in society. This view implies that the various parts of a social system must 
show a high level of integration. However, Merton maintained that although it may be 
true of small, primitive societies, this generalization cannot be extended to larger, more 
complex societies. 
 
? Second, Universal functionalism: It says that all standardized social and cultural forms and 
structures have positive functions. Merton argued that this contradicts what we find in 
the real world. It is clear that not every structure, custom, idea, belief, and so forth, has 
positive functions. For example, rabid nationalism can be highly dysfunctional in a world 
of proliferating nuclear arms. 
 
? Third, Indispensability: It says that all standardized aspects of society not only have 
positive functions but also represent indispensable parts of the working whole. This 
postulate leads to the idea that all structures and functions are functionally necessary for 
society. No other structures and functions could work quite as well as those that are 
currently found within society. Merton’s criticism, following Parsons, was that we must at 
least be willing to admit that there are various structural and functional alternatives to be 
found within society. 
 
? Merton’s position was that all these functional postulates rely on non-empirical 
assertions based on abstract, theoretical systems. At a minimum, it is the responsibility of 
the sociologist to examine each empirically. Merton’s belief that empirical tests, not 
theoretical assertions, are crucial to functional analysis led him to develop his “paradigm” 
of functional analysis as a guide to the integration of theory and research. 
 
 
? Merton made it clear from the outset that structural-functional analysis focuses on 
groups, organizations, societies, and cultures. He stated that any object that can be 
subjected to structural-functional analysis must “represent a standardized (that is, 
patterned and repetitive) item”. Such as social roles, institutional patterns, social 
processes, cultural patterns, culturally patterned emotions, social norms, group 
organization, social structure, devices for social control, etc.” 
 
Functions v/s dysfunction: 
• Early structural functionalists tended to focus almost entirely on the functions of one 
social structure or institution for another. However, in Merton’s view, early analysts 
tended to confuse the subjective motives of individuals with the functions of structures 
or institutions. The focus of the structural functionalist should be on social functions 
rather than on individual motives. 
• Functions, according to Merton, are defined as “those observed consequences which 
make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given system”. 
• However, there is a clear ideological bias when one focuses only on adaptation or 
adjustment, for they are always positive consequences. It is important to note that one 
social fact can have negative consequences for another social fact. To rectify this serious 
omission in early structural functionalism. 
• Dysfunction: Merton developed the idea of a dysfunction. Just as structures or 
institutions could contribute to the maintenance of other parts of the social system, they 
also could have negative consequences for them. Slavery in the southern United States, 
for example, clearly had positive consequences for white southerners, such as supplying 
cheap labor, support for the cotton economy, and social status. It also had dysfunctions, 
such as making southerners overly dependent on an agrarian economy and therefore 
unprepared for industrialization. 
• Non-function: Merton also posited the idea of non-functions, which he defined as 
consequences that are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration. Included here 
might be social forms that are “survivals” from earlier historical times. Although they may 
have had positive or negative consequences in the past, they have no significant effect on 
contemporary society. 
• Net balance: To help answer the question of whether positive functions outweigh 
dysfunctions, or vice versa, Merton developed the concept of net balance. The usefulness 
of Merton’s concept comes from the way it orients the sociologist to the question of 
relative significance. To return to the example of slavery, the question becomes whether, 
on balance, slavery was more functional or dysfunctional to the South. Still, this question 
is too broad and obscures a number of issues (for example, that slavery was functional for 
groups such as white slaveholders). 
• Levels of functional analysis: To cope with problems like above, Merton added the idea 
that there must be levels of functional analysis. Functionalists had generally restricted 
themselves to analysis of the society as a whole, but Merton made it clear that analysis 
also could be done on an organization, institution, or group. Returning to the issue of the 
functions of slavery for the South, it would be necessary to differentiate several levels of 
 
 
analysis and ask about the functions and dysfunctions of slavery for black families, white 
families, black political organizations, white political organizations, and so forth. In terms 
of net balance, slavery was probably more functional for certain social units and more 
dysfunctional for other social units. Addressing the issue at these more specific levels 
helps in analyzing the functionality of slavery for the South as a whole. 
• Manifest and latent functions: Merton also introduced the concepts of manifest and latent 
functions. These two terms have also been important additions to functional analysis. 9 In 
simple terms, manifest functions are those that are intended, whereas latent functions 
are unintended. The manifest function of slavery, for example, was to increase the 
economic productivity of the South, but it had the latent function of providing a vast 
underclass that served to increase the social status of southern whites, both rich and 
poor. 
• Unanticipated consequences: Unintended consequences or “debunking.” or looking 
beyond stated intentions to real effects. A latent function is one type of unanticipated 
consequence. 
• A structure may be dysfunctional for the system as a whole yet may continue to exist. or 
example, discrimination against females is generally functional for males. One could argue 
that these forms of discrimination adversely affect those who discriminate by keeping 
vast numbers of people underproductive and by increasing the likelihood of social 
conflict. 
• Merton contended that not all structures are indispensable to the workings of the social 
system. Some parts of our social system can be eliminated. This helps functional theory 
overcome another of its conservative biases. By recognizing that some structures are 
expendable, functionalism opens the way for meaningful social change. Our society, for 
example, could continue to exist (and even be improved) by the elimination of 
discrimination against various minority groups. 
 
Social Structure and Anomie: 
? Merton’s the best-known contributions to structural functionalism. 
? Relationship between culture, structure, and anomie. 
? Merton defines culture as “that organized set of normative values governing behavior 
which is common to members of a designated society or group” and social structure as 
“that organized set of social relationships in which members of the society or group are 
variously implicated”. Anomie occurs “when there is an acute disjunction between the 
cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of members of the group 
to act in accord with them”. 
? For example, in American society, the culture places great emphasis on material success. 
However, by their position within the social structure, many people are prevented from 
achieving such success. If one is born into the lower socioeconomic classes and as a result 
is able to acquire, at best, only a high school degree, one’s chances of achieving economic 
success in the generally accepted way (for example, through succeeding in the 
conventional work world) are slim or nonexistent. Under such circumstances (and they 
are widespread in contemporary American society) anomie can be said to exist, and as a 
result, there is a tendency toward deviant behavior. 
 
 
? In this context, deviance often takes the form of alternative, unacceptable, and 
sometimes illegal means of achieving economic success. Thus, becoming a drug dealer or a 
prostitute in order to achieve economic success is an example of deviance generated by 
the disjunction between cultural values and social-structural means of attaining those 
values. This is one way in which the structural functionalist would seek to explain crime 
and deviance. 
? Thus, in this example of structural functionalism, Merton is looking at social (and cultural) 
structures, but he is not focally concerned with the functions of those structures. Rather, 
consistent with his functional paradigm, he is mainly concerned with dysfunctions, in this 
case anomie. 
 
Conclusion: while Davis and Moore wrote approvingly of a stratified society, Merton’s work 
indicates that structural functionalists can be critical of social stratification. 
 
Major criticism of structural functionalism: 
 
From late 1930s to early 1960s it was a dominant structural theory but in late 1960s its 
criticism increased. 
 
Substantive criticisms: 
1. History: One major criticism is that structural functionalism does not deal adequately with 
history .In fact it was developed as a reaction to evolutionary approach of certain 
anthropologists. In its criticism of evolutionary theory and came to focus on either 
contemporary or abstract societies. 
2. Social change: Structural functionalists also are attacked for being unable to deal effectively 
with the process of social change. In structural-functional theory. In which all the elements 
of a society are seen as reinforcing one another as well as the system as a whole. This makes 
it difficult to see how these elements can also contribute to change. 
3. Conflict: The most often voiced criticism of structural functionalism is that it is unable to 
deal effectively with conflict. Alvin Gouldner argues that Parsons, as the main 
representative of structural functionalism, tended to overemphasize harmonious 
relationships. Irving Louis Horowitz contends that structural functionalists tend to see 
conflict as necessarily destructive and as occurring outside the framework of society. 
 
• The overall criticisms that structural functionalism is unable to deal with history, change, 
and conflict has led many to argue that structural functionalism has a conservative bias. 
• It may indeed be true that there is a conservative bias in structural functionalism that is 
attributable not only to what it ignores (change, history, and conflict) but also to what it 
chooses to focus on. For one thing, structural functionalists have tended to focus on culture, 
norms, and values. 
• These substantive criticisms point in two basic directions. First, it seems clear that 
structural functionalism has a rather narrow focus that prevents it from addressing a 
number of important issues and aspects of the social world. Second, its focus tends to give it 
 
 
a very conservative flavor; structural functionalism has operated in support of the status 
quo and the dominant elites. 
 
Methodological Criticisms: 
 
1. One of the often expressed criticisms is that structural functionalism is basically vague, 
unclear, and ambiguous. Part of the ambiguity is traceable to the fact that structural 
functionalists choose to deal with abstract social systems instead of real societies. 
2. A related criticism is that although no single grand scheme ever can be used to analyze all 
societies throughout history; structural functionalists have been motivated by the belief 
that there is a single theory or at least a set of conceptual categories that could be used to 
do this. Many critics regard this grand theory as an illusion, believing that the best sociology 
can hope for is more historically specific, “middle-range” theories. 
3. There are no adequate methods to study the questions of concern to structural 
functionalists. 
4. Another methodological criticism is that structural functionalism makes comparative 
analysis difficult. If the assumption is that a part of a system makes sense only in the context 
of the social system in which it exists, how can we compare it with a similar part in another 
system? For example: If the English family makes sense only in the context of English 
society, how can we compare it to the French family? 
 
Logical Criticisms: 
1. Teleology:  teleology is defined as the view that society (or other social structures) has 
purposes or goals. In order to achieve these goals, society creates, or causes to be created, 
specific social structures and social institutions. Critics  (Turner and Maryanski) argue that 
social theory should take into account the teleological relationship between society and its 
component parts. they argue that the problem with structural functionalism is not teleology 
per se, but illegitimate teleology. 
• For e.g. it is illegitimate to assume that because society needs procreation and 
socialization it will create the family institution. A variety of alternative structures could 
meet these needs; society does not “need” to create the family. 
• The structural functionalist must define and document the various ways in which the 
goals do, in fact, lead to the creation of specific substructures. It also would be useful to 
be able to show why other substructures could not meet the same needs. A legitimate 
teleology would be able to define and demonstrate empirically and theoretically the 
links between society’s goals and the various substructures that exist within society. An 
illegitimate teleology would be satisfied with a blind assertion that a link between a 
societal end and a specific substructure must exist. 
 
2. Tautological : A tautological argument is one in which the conclusion merely makes explicit 
what is implicit in the premise or is simply a restatement of the premise. In structural 
functionalism, this circular reasoning often takes the form of defining the whole in terms of 
its parts and then defining the parts in terms of the whole. Thus, it would be argued that a 
social system is defined by the relationship among its component parts and that the