Structural – Functionalism
The stability and continuity of any society or culture depends on the organization and arrangement of its various elements or units. This organization and system is possible only when these different elements or units contribute their own in maintaining this organization or system. These units make or can make this contribution only while performing their ‘determined’ or ‘pre-determined’ role. Here the word ‘determined’ or ‘pre-determined’ is used in the sense that society is not an accidental event which at the same time instructs its producing units to do a particular kind of work or expects that They will do those things. Any society, even if it is a primitive society, is the result of the continuous interactions of many generations. During this it is decided or determined that what will be the place in the whole social structure (howsoever simple and simple) the various building units of the society will be and they have to maintain the social organization and order i.e. In the end, what kind of role has to be played for the stability and continuity of the society. This is the function of those elements or units. More clearly, the various building elements or units of the society which play or contribute their respective roles to maintain the social order or organization are called functions. So it is clear that society is not a monolithic system. It consists of many units, parts, organs or elements and it is ‘expected’ from them that what is social structural-functionalism?
A theoretical and methodological approach used to analyze social phenomena with reference to the structure of society and the functional relationships of its parts is commonly termed as structural-functional analysis. Structural-functional analysis is based on the assumption that the social units (groups, institutions, etc.) in which there are interactions, they mutually influence each other and keep adjusting with each other.
Thus, as the process of evolution progresses, the consensus of function becomes closer. In less developed individual and social animals, the functions of organs are less dependent on each other, whereas in both types of developed animals the combination of functions, which gives life to the whole, separate functions, which give life to different organs. are the basis of, also make it possible.
When organs have little differentiation, they can easily perform each other’s functions. But where this variation is more, one part can perform the function of another part either very inefficiently or not at all. For example, in today’s highly diverse complex society, the family cannot be expected to do the work of a state or trade union or at least a college.
The stability and continuity of the social system or organization is dependent on the fact that each part continues to perform its assigned function properly.
Changes in structures cannot occur without changes in functions. In this way, Spencer has tried to explain the social function in terms of or similar to the organic function. Malinowski’s Functionalism Among anthropologists, the scholars who have tried to explain the cultural system from the functionalist point of view, the names of Malinowski and Radcliffe-Brown are particularly noteworthy.
First we will mention Malinowski’s ideas. According to you, culture is the means by which man succeeds in maintaining his physical and mental and ultimately intellectual existence. Man is not only a zoological animal but also a social animal and in both these forms he has many physical and mental needs. Without fulfilling these needs, the existence of human being as a social animal can never exist. For the fulfillment of these needs, man creates culture and through it maintains his physical and mental or intellectual existence.
In other words, different parts of culture not only have a specific form but also have a specific function. No element of culture (irait) or unit is useless, some work of human being must come out of it. The existence of any cultural element depends on whether it is being useful to human beings or not. In short, this is Malinowski’s functionalism. Human needs are many, such as economic needs, social needs and mental needs.
For the fulfillment of these needs, man takes recourse to religion, language, art, technique, literature and many other material and non-material objects, whose total sum or totality is called culture. If we carefully try to know why all these things, that is, the emergence of different units of culture, we will clearly know that the root of each of these units is some kind of human being.
There is no need. Human beings use big machines ranging from bow and arrow to fulfill their economic needs, employs social institutions for the fulfillment of social needs, language, religion, art etc. to fulfill their mental needs. takes help. Therefore, it is clear that the unit of culture must have some function in one form or the other. Even if there is a candle, it must have some function or the other in the cultural structure or in the whole way of life of man. This candle works to give light, this candle can be a symbol of religion or can also be a trade mark of a company.
To understand all the functions of this candle in any culture, it is necessary that we find out the functional arrangement of this candle culture from all other units or aspects. Similarly, when we know the functional relationship of each unit of culture with other units, then somewhere we will know with certainty how those units work together in maintaining the overall way of life of the members of that group. Therefore, it is clear that the separate existence of different units of a culture is neither possible nor possible. Each of these has a functional relationship with each.
But why does this relationship happen? The simple answer is that human needs are also not separate, they are all related to each other because they all have the same place of origin and that place of origin is the human himself. Since man himself is the source of all these needs, all these needs are interconnected and therefore the various units or aspects of the culture that serve as the means of fulfilling these needs are also interconnected. The basis of this interrelation is the zoological motivations and needs of human beings. An important objective of the organization of any culture is to provide the means to satisfy the above mentioned zoological motivations and needs of human beings. Thus Malinowski believes that no element, organ or unit of culture can be such that it does not serve anything, that is, which is useless.
Your statement is that every element of culture is meant to perform some or the other function and it continues to exist only so long as it continues to perform some function in the whole system of life. One of the basic objectives of the organization of any culture, as we have mentioned above, is to work to meet the diverse needs of human life. If this is true then how is it possible that any cultural element can exist without function. Since every cultural element has some contribution, that is, some function, in the maintenance of the whole life-law or order, every element of culture has an internal and functional relationship with every other element. As a result, these innumerable cultural elements are not separate from each other, but are attached or related to each other and all together give a totality to the culture. Thus, according to Malinowski, the fundamental cause of cultural integration is the work performed by each unit of that culture.
This is Malinowski in relation to cultural organization. functionalist theory or approach. It will become more clear from the following discussion, according to Malinowski, culture is the invention of man created by the zoological needs of man. Culture is the totality of the means by which the physical-mental existence of human beings is maintained. Malinowski has mentioned seven basic biological needs of man. They are the body’s needs for nutritional, productive, physical comfort, safety, speed, growth and health. Each of these needs is met by various human-made cultural elements. In other words, these seven basic needs are met by various cultural elements working together or in combination.
It is true that these cultural elements or the means of fulfilling the above needs are not the same in every society; The types and forms of these cultural elements are different in each society, hence the formation or structure or form of culture of each society is also different. Whatever be the form or similarity, the plan for the regular fulfillment of the above important physical-mental needs of human beings is found in every culture. The success of the scheme depends upon the organization of their various units. If the various units are scattered, they are unconnected or isolated from each other, no plan can ever succeed. Different units of the same culture are also related to each other, there is a kind of organization in them because the main function of these elements and the basis of their existence is the regular fulfillment of the vital physical-mental needs of human beings in an organized form. The whole form of all these cultural elements engaged in their respective work is, according to Malinowski, called culture. of these cultural elements or of the whole culture by separating them from their functions.
It is foolish to even imagine existence. Since Malinowski places great emphasis on functionalism of cultural elements, his approach is therefore called ‘functionalism’. The biggest weakness of Malinowski’s functionalism is that you have taken man as a mere bundle of needs and desires. To accept this view is to disregard the higher feelings and ideals of man.
Functionalism of Radcliffe – Brown
The second major promoter of functionalism is Radcliffe Brown. Radcliffe Brown is a major functionalist thinker. According to Brown, the function of different aspects of social behavior is not to satisfy individual needs but to maintain the social structure of society. Durkheim had a great influence on Brown’s ideas. Like Durkheim, Brown has also emphasized the importance of the structure of society and the functions of various institutions. For the study, Brown has adopted a comparative perspective. Brown’s major book is “Structure and Function in Tribal Society”. According to Brown, the concept of structure and function can be used only when society and living organism are accepted. Presenting this similarity in a more developed form. And making the meaning of function more clear, Radcliffe-Brown has written that the life of an organism can be seen as a function of its structure.
The continuity of the structure is maintained only through the continuity of the function. If we discuss any one part or part, then its function is the role it plays or the contribution that it makes to the life of the organism as a whole. Radcliffe-Brown believes that three problems have been created by organic systems – anatomy i.e. study of structure, physiology i.e. study of function and evolution. These three questions or subjects are also applicable at the level of social life. We can see the existence of a social structure; Individuals, as essential units, within an integrated whole can never succeed in any plan. Different units of the same culture are also related to each other, there is a kind of organization in them because the main function of these elements and the basis of their existence is the regular fulfillment of the vital physical-mental needs of human beings in an organized form. The whole form of all these cultural elements engaged in their respective work is, according to Malinowski, called culture. It is also foolish to imagine the existence of these cultural elements or of the whole culture in isolation from their functions. Since Malinowski places great emphasis on functionalism of cultural elements, his approach is therefore called ‘functionalism’. The biggest weakness of Malinowski’s functionalism is that you have taken man as a mere bundle of needs and desires. To accept this view is to disregard the higher feelings and ideals of human beings.