Talcott Parsons

Talcott Parsons (1902-82) was for many years the best-known sociologist in the United States, and indeed one of the best-known in the world. He produced a general theoretical system for the analysis of society that came to be called structural functionalism. Parsons' analysis was largely developed within his major published works:

The Structure of Social Action (1937), The Social System (1951), Structure and Process in Modern Societies (1960), Sociological Theory and Modern Society (1968), Politics and Social Structure (1969).  Talcott Parsons viewed society as a system. He argued that any social system has four basic functional prerequisites: adaptation, goal attainment, integration and pattern maintenance. These can be seen as problems that society must solve if it is to survive. The function of any part of the social system is understood as its contribution to meeting the functional prerequisites.   Another in support of Functionalism is Talcott Parsons. Parsons claims that society is the way it is as social structures are interconnected and dependant on each other. Functionalists therefore see change as evolutionary – change in one part of society will eventually occur in another. Social ills e.g. crime and deviance, have disabling effects on society and gradually effect other parts. They recognise interconnections between various parts of society occur due to a value consensus. Parsons believes that as society changes, it develops and the pattern variables within it will become more complex. Change, therefore, trickles throughout society. Parsons summed this up as the ‘Organic Analogy’. Criticisms of Talcott Parsons Structural Function Criticisms of Talcott Parsons' Structural Functionalism Talcott Parsons' sociological theory of structural functionalism was a dominant perspective of analyzing society until the 1960s. It was particularly very influensive in English speaking countries, especially in the United States of America, since the end of the Second World War. However, its significance began to be questioned, in the 1950s, as a result of increasing criticisms labeled at its discovered inadequacies. Criticisms arose in critical attack of Structural Functionalism's static and abstract focus on maintenance of social order, social stability/regulation and the structures within society and its lack of acknowledging social change and conflict. In other words it was criticized of its conservatism to sustain status quo. Thus, this paper will discuss the main reasons why Structural Functionalism was considered by critics as having a conservative bias in its analysis of society.