Herbert Spencer is considered as both functionalist as well as evolutionist. Function, for Spencer, is inevitable for society and this School became centre stage for theoretical orientation in sociology. He wrote in 1876 in volume 3rd of his principles of Sociology on the utility and usefulness of function. In his words, “there can be no true conception of a structure without a true conceptions its function.” At the same time, society has greater role to play for the benefit of its members. Spencer stats the society exits for the benefit of its members; not its members for the benefit of society. The claims of the body politic are nothing in themselves and become something only in so far as the embody the claims of its competent individual. The individual in spencerian theory thus, get maximum freedom and self –determination for the interests, of societal progress.
In spencers’s analysis, structure and function are interdependent and interlinked to each-other, Spencer emphasized that a change in the profile of structure occurred with the change its function. He rightly points out.
Changes of structure cannot occur without changes in functions… If organisation consists in such construction of the whole that its parts can carry on Mutually-Dependent actions, then in proportion as organization is high there must go a dependence of each part upon the rest so great that separation is fatal; and conversely, this truth is equally well shown in the individual organism and in the social organism.
Spencer was, by nature, not only functionalist but also a individualist. There many essential components are necessary for the determination of characteristics of the whole of society, and that fundamental characteristic is the individual. In this regard, spencer conceived that society would work as a vehicle for the enhancement of individual purposes. Spencer stated, “Just the kind of individuality well be acquired which finds in the most highly-organised community the fittest sphere for its manifestation…. The ultimate man will be one whose private requirements coincide with public ones. He will be that manner of man who, in spontaneously fulfilling his own nature, incidently performs the functions of a social unit”
The best society therefore is a society that applies least controls on the individual for functionalist approach of spencer if society is to evolve into higher and more advanced social structures and functions, it must move from the simple to the complex activities of a society which is related to the movement from the lesser military stage to the more industrial societies are problematic and difficult, however, the construction of his functional approach gives a broader understanding of various parts of society in brief, the relation between man (or animal) and his constituent cells is the equivalent of the relation between society and its constituent cells men this is an analogy of scale, and strongly suggestes the continually of all phenomena.
CONCLUSION
Herbert spencer is the father of social evolution. He was a leading figure in the intellectual revolution of the nineteenth century. Spencer was considered as the second founding father of sociology only after Auguste Comte. Spencer in his own time was enormously influential and played a significant role in the development of biology, psychology, sociology, and anthropology.
Unlike Comte, who wanted to guide man in the construction of a better society, spencer, instead desired to show to people through sociology that human being should not interfere with the natural processes which is going on in societies. Spencer’s thought, in fact, was evolutionary in approach and had a strong belief on the nation of “the survival of the fittest”.in this sense he was influenced by Darwin Spencer argues that the fittest people are those who are healthy and more intelligent.
His evolutionary approach provided the solution for many of the dilemmas faced by the intellectual at the time. Spencer, here discussed both with social evolution as well as natural evolution. In the social evolution, he described the involvement of two process. first, the movement from simple society to various levels of compound societies in the term of four evolutionary stage-simple Compound, doubly compound and trebly compound. Second, the change from military (or militant) to industrial society. natural evolution, to him, is the subject of all universal phenomenon-inorganic, organic and super-organic.
Organic analogy is one of the important works of Spencer. Spencer, here, tries to establish a relationship between human society and biological organism by making comparison and outlining the difference between the two. He considered society as a super-organic entity, that is, an organisational entity over and above the level of the organism. But his understanding about super-organic nature of society has created several problems. he was unable to see culture as part of an integrated whole. his explanation regarding the social evolution of societies from simple to compound, and so on, is also considered as faulty. Timasheff acccepts his theory as a philosophical theory rather than sociological.