Structural Functionalism | Anthropology Optional for UPSC PDF Download

Radcliffe-Brown's emphasis on social function is derived from the influence of the French Sociological School. This school developed in the 1890s around the work of Emile Durkheim who argued that "social phenomena constitute a domain , in order, of reality that is independent of psychological and biological facts. Social phenomena, therefore, must be explained in terms of other social phenomena and not by reference to psychological needs, drives impulses and so forth.
In addition, Durkheim stressed the importance of studying social phenomena as they function to maintain the solidarity of social structures Radcliffe-Brown shared this emphasis of studying the conditions under which social structures are maintained. He also believed that the functioning of societies, like that of other natural systems; is governed by laws that can be discovered through systematic comparison.

Malinowski Vs Radcliffe-Brown
Radcliffe-Brown was a critic of the theory of Functionalism as put forth by Malinowski. Unlike Malinowski who placed great emphasis on theory of need and culture as a functional instrument, Radcliffe-Brown laid great emphasis on concept of social-structure in his analysis of functionalism.
According to Radcliffe Brown, function is "the contribution an institution makes to the maintenance of social structure". He was of a opinion that the theory of society in terms of social structure has nothing in common with theory of culture and biological needs with which Malinowski was associated. As the concept of structure is wedded with concept of function, this school came to be known as Structural Functional School.

Radcliffe-Brown's Concept of Function
Radcliffe-Brown established an analogy between social life and organic life to explain the concept of function. His emphasis on examining the contribution of phenomena in maintaining social order, and his disregard for individual needs, is apparent in this analogy. He argued that as long as a biological organism lives, it preserves the continuity of structure, although it does not preserve the unity of its constituent parts. That is, over a period of time, while the constituent cells do not remain the same, the structural arrangement of the constituent units remains similar. He suggested that human beings, as essential units, are connected by a set of social relations into an integrated whole. Like the biological organism, the continuity of social structure is not destroyed by changes in units. Although individuals may leave the society by death or other means, other individuals may enter it. Therefore, the continuity is maintained by the process of social life, which consists of the activities and interactions of individual human beings and of organized groups into which they are united. The social life of a community, then is the function of any recurrent activity, is the part it plays in the social life as a whole and thereby, the contribution it makes to the structural continuity.
Social structure, according to Brown is an arrangement of persons in institutionalized roles and relationships The continuity of this arrangement, according to him, is structural continuity. Since individual and groups, constituting social structure constantly change, structural continuity is dynamic. In this continuity, while the matter changes, the form remains the same. The matter of social structure are the individuals, the form of social structure is supplied by social institutions. Brown defined social institutions as socially established norms or patterns of behavior. Institutions provide status and roles which are guided by the norms and values of those institutions. Thus, according to Radcliffe-Brown, social structure has to be described by the institutions.