TALCOTT PARSONS

TALCOTT PARSONS (1902-

82)
He was 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 acknowledged Marx to be a great thinker, but argued that he
remained firmly within the prevailing nineteenth-century way of thinking
in the social sciences, while Weber and Durkheim had, by contrast,
contributed to breaking it down.
One of the main targets of Parsons’s criticism was utilitarianism, which,
involves the idea that people’s actions follow fundamentally practical
objectives, and that the human mind is essentially a mechanism for
calculating the most effective way to get the most rewarding results.
In the seventeenth century, Thomas Hobbes's work, notably his book
"Leviathan," presented a significant model. Hobbes argued that humans are
self-interested beings living in a world of limited satisfactions. Each person
seeks to fulfill their desires and realizes that they must compete to achieve
their goals. Hobbes saw individuals as inherently selfish, viewing others as
obstacles or tools for personal satisfaction. This leads to a "war of all against
all" unless rational individuals recognize the need for cooperation. While this
scenario might seem grim, Hobbes acknowledged that people value their
lives and would establish societal restrictions to prevent mutual destruction.
Thus, individuals form societies and willingly yield some autonomy to a
sovereign ruler to avert the dire consequences of unchecked competition
and conflict.
Parson challenges both positivist and idealist perspectives. Positivists
assume complete knowledge among social actors, disregarding variation and
error. Idealists emphasize national spirit and ideas, neglecting practical
obstacles to idea realization. Idealism overemphasizes values and neglects
social practice. Weber somewhat aligns with idealism, connecting early
capitalism to the Protestant ethic. However, he neglects needs and utilities
in favor of values. Positivists assert rigid, singular actions from complete
information, leaving no room for values, errors, or variations. Parson
criticizes the inflexibility of this approach.
Parsons was intrigued by Durkheim, Weber, Pareto, and Marshall because they all
sought to break away from utilitarian assumptions. These thinkers rejected the idea
that people's goals are haphazard. Unlike Hobbes's concept, where the specific desires
are unimportant, what matters is that people possess numerous desires that exceed
available resources, leading to competition. However, Durkheim, Weber, and others
realized that people's goals are not random; they are influenced by society and
interrelated systematically. For instance, Durkheim examined concepts like anomic
suicide by studying how people's desires are shaped. These desires are influenced by
social structures aligned with stratification and norms, which dictate acceptable wants.
Parsons aimed to create a comprehensive scientific framework for understanding
human life. After an interval of fourteen years and several essays, he published two
books in 1951: "The Social System" and "Toward a General Theory of Action." These
books showcased his ambitious plans. "Toward a General Theory" involved
contributions from various disciplines to establish a unified theoretical foundation for
social sciences, including psychology, sociology, economics, and political science.
Parsons envisioned these fields integrated within a single framework he designed.
"The Social System" focused on the sociological aspect of his project, outlining how
this unified theory would apply in sociology. He presented a vision of social life based
on motivated compliance, drawing from the works of four influential theorists.
Motivated compliance: Social life does work, rather than disintegrating into Hobbes’s
war of all against all. It works not only because people go about their activities in ways
that are socially prescribed, but also because they believe these ways to be right and
therefore they actually want to follow them.
SOCIAL SYSTEM
Parsons developed a comprehensive sociological theory called the social system,
applicable to both simple traditional societies and complex modern industrial ones.
His theory spans from individual actions to the broader social system. He analyzes
the structure and processes of social systems through a conceptual framework.
His theory of social action is central to his understanding of the social system. He
emphasizes both motivational factors, similar to utilitarian views, and the importance
of values. Parsons integrates these elements into his approach to the social system.
Parsons views action as part of a larger pattern, not happening in isolation but
forming constellations that make up a system. He derives the concept of action from
human behavior as living beings, considering their interactions with the external
world and within their minds.
In essence, Parsons' sociological theory covers various aspects, from individual
actions to the broader social system, and combines motivations and values to
provide a holistic understanding of society.
Behaviour becomes action when four conditions are present:
 It is oriented to attainment of ends or goals or other anticipated affairs,
 It occurs in situations,
 It is regulated by norms and values of society, and
 It involves in investment of ‘energy’ or motivation or effort.
For example, a lady driving an automobile to go to a temple. She is probably
going to offer prayers. In this case then the offering of the prayer is her end
or goal to which she is oriented. Her situation is the road on which she is
driving and the car in which she is sitting. Moreover, her behaviour is
regulated by social norms or values in which the offering of prayers is
recognized as desirable. In addition, she is applying her intelligence in the
skill of driving which is learnt from society. Finally, the very act of driving the
car implies expenditure of energy, holding the wheel, regulating the
accelerator and skilful negotiation through the traffic on the road. When
behaviour is seen in this analytical context, it can be defined as action.
As mentioned earlier, action according to Parsons does not occur in isolation
but occurs in constellations: These constellations of action constitute system.
These systems of action have three modes of organization which Parsons
describes as The personality system, the cultural system and the social
system.
Parsons proposed that a society's functioning consists of three main
components:
1. Cultural System: This includes the abstract behavioral patterns or norms that
prescribe how individuals should act in specific situations. For instance, think of
the rules in the highway code that dictate how drivers should operate their
vehicles under different circumstances.
2. Social System: This component involves the actual ongoing actions of people
in real situations, which are meant to align with the abstract patterns from the
cultural system. For example, drivers on the road are busy observing other
drivers, adjusting their driving strategies to fit the norms of the highway code,
which ideally should be followed by most or all drivers.
3. Personality System: This pertains to the distinct individual preferences,
reactions, and behaviors. In the context of traffic, this involves drivers'
personalities influencing their driving style, interactions, and emotions. Some
drivers might be more aggressive, while others are calmer or more considerate
of others on the road.
In essence, Parsons' framework explains that the functioning of a society
involves the interplay of these three elements: the abstract norms that guide
behavior, the actual actions of individuals, and the unique characteristics and
behaviors of each person.
In general, most drivers follow road rules not only for their own safety or
self-interest but because they believe it's the right thing to do. They
consider these rules binding for themselves and others, sometimes even
getting upset when others disregard them, even if there's no immediate
danger to them. This concept, known as "motivated compliance,"
highlights how society functions with three interconnected systems:
1. Cultural System: This consists of abstract ideas and principles that
define how people should behave.
2. Social System: This involves the organized patterns of interactions and
relationships among individuals as they collaborate with each other in
various activities.
3. Personality System: This refers to the psychological makeup of
individuals that influences how they act in different situations and interact
with others.
According to Parsons, for a society to function well, it needs to effectively
integrate and manage these three systems.
For a functional social order, cultures, social systems, and individual personalities must
interact in a coordinated manner. Cultures need to organize themselves in practical
ways to ensure that their members can actually follow their guidelines; impractical
demands would lead members to abandon the culture. Prescriptions for individual
actions must align with others' to avoid conflicting actions and maintain stability in
social systems.
Social activities should be organized to engage different personality types effectively; if
participation leads to extreme frustration or alienation, individuals might resist engaging
in those activities. According to Parsons, these conditions are essential for social order.
While a society can tolerate a few individuals with different prescriptions or incongruent
personalities, it can only function properly if the lack of alignment remains limited to a
minority.
A well-organized social order requires effective integration between culture, social
systems, and individual personalities. This integration isn't automatic or complete
according to Parsons. Even though his work was met with criticism, he acknowledges
that achieving integration in a society—comprising historical culture, complex
institutions, and diverse personalities—is a challenging task.
In a functional society that isn't collapsing into conflict, there exists a certain level of
integration as evidenced by productive activities, alignment with cultural norms, and
active engagement of individuals. The apparent stability suggests that most members
aren't alienated. However, complete integration may be lacking due to conflicts
between cultural norms and social system organization, potentially resulting in
limitations on participants' personalities.
In real societies, individuals might not be extremely disenchanted with their jobs,
fiercely opposed to authority, or completely contemptuous of the law, but they could
still feel unhappy in their work, reluctant to comply with authority figures, and not
entirely committed to adhering strictly to the law. Parsons acknowledges these
complexities, which highlight the challenging nature of integrating culture, social
systems, and individual personalities – a process that isn't automatic or guaranteed.
According to Parsons' systems analysis, societal tendencies counterbalance those
towards disintegration. The system attempts to contain dissent, isolating dissidents
and redirecting their deviations in ways that avoid harming overall integration. While
there's no theoretical guarantee that disturbances won't overwhelm the system,
Parsons suggests that the system "handles and channels" social disruptions. He
discusses the achievement and potential surpassing of the minimal level of
integration, not in terms of how society's members consciously deliberate solutions,
but from an analytical and sociological perspective. He examines how the interaction
of culture, social system, and personality leads to at least minimal integration.
The fact that a society exists to be studied indicates that it has met these minimal
integration requirements. However, the extent of integration varies depending on
how much beyond the minimum has been achieved. Importantly, Parsons
emphasizes that the three elements he identifies are integrated in the sense that all
three are present in concrete social situations. These elements interpenetrate one
another, and people in social relationships relate not only on a personal level but also
based on the social positions (statuses or status roles) they occupy.
In a workplace, people are not just seen as individuals like "Joe" and "Jim,"
but also as their roles, like a worker and a supervisor. These roles involve
not just what they do, but also rights and duties. For instance, Jim might
have the right to give orders to Joe, who is expected to follow them. This
work relationship includes both cultural aspects and becomes part of the
social system.
This social system, made up of roles and relationships, becomes a part of
individuals' personalities. The position one holds in the social system, like
a job, isn't just about tasks; it's also linked to how someone thinks of
themselves. The kind of job one has can affect self-esteem. If someone
identifies strongly with their job, they might consider their responsibilities
not just as duties, but as things they'd want to do even if not required.
In Parsons' view, the social system is a mix of cultural elements and
individual personalities. The culture is embedded in the social system
because it's turned into rules people accept for how to act and relate. It's
like how the highway code defines how drivers should operate their
vehicles. The connection between the social system and personalities
happens through internalization – people absorb and make these roles
and rules part of who they are.
BASIC UNIT OF ORGANISATION
OF A SOCIAL SYSTEM
The social system is organized through roles, which are like the building
blocks of how people interact. Roles include what an individual does, as well
as expectations others have of them. These expectations are based on
motivations and values, which are influenced by both the individual's
personality and the larger culture.
Roles are made up of two important parts: motivational orientation and value
orientation. Motivational orientation is about how people act based on their
needs and plans, while value orientation involves their judgments about
what's important, beautiful, and moral.
There are three types of motivational orientations: cognitive (thinking about
needs), cathetic (emotional response), and evaluative (efficiency in reaching
goals). Similarly, there are three types of value orientations: cognitive
(validity of judgments), appreciative (emotional responses), and moral (value
commitments).
For instance, consider a housewife buying vegetables. Her choices based
on needs and preferences show motivational orientation. However, her
choices also reflect cultural values and norms, which is the value
orientation aspect.
Roles become part of a society's culture. This is called institutionalization,
where roles and expectations are integrated into the broader cultural
framework. Society sets common standards for how roles should be
carried out, and when people follow these standards, roles become
institutionalized.
Parsons also developed the idea of "pattern variables" to explain the
choices individuals have within the social system, based on different
combinations of motivations and values.
PATTERN VARIABLES
The social system is organized through roles, which are like the building
blocks of how people interact. Roles include what an individual does, as well
as expectations others have of them. These expectations are based on
motivations and values, which are influenced by both the individual's
personality and the larger culture.
Roles are made up of two important parts: motivational orientation and
value orientation. Motivational orientation is about how people act based on
their needs and plans, while value orientation involves their judgments
about what's important, beautiful, and moral.
There are three types of motivational orientations: cognitive (thinking about
needs), cathetic (emotional response), and evaluative (efficiency in reaching
goals). Similarly, there are three types of value orientations: cognitive
(validity of judgments), appreciative (emotional responses), and moral
(value commitments).
Roles are central in the social system, and when people perform their roles,
it can create tension or strain. This strain depends on how society has set up
role expectations and how much individuals have internalized those values.
When it comes to roles, individuals face dilemmas in both motivation and
values.
Five pattern variables of role-definition are discussed by Parsons, but there
are even more possibilities:
1. Affectivity vs. Affective Neutrality: This is about choosing between
immediate personal gratification (affectivity) and giving up immediate
satisfaction for the sake of moral values (affective neutrality). It's a
balancing act between individual desires and societal moral interests.
2. Self-Orientation vs. Collectivity Orientation: Here, the dilemma is
choosing between one's own gratification and the well-being of a larger
group. This involves altruism and self-sacrifice, as people decide whether to
prioritize their own interests or those of the collective.
3. Universalism vs. Particularism: This pattern involves deciding whether to
evaluate situations based on universal standards (like legal norms) or
particular standards (like personal relationships). It's about adhering strictly
to rules or allowing personal connections to influence behavior.
4. Ascription vs. Achievement: This is about defining one's role based on
qualities assigned at birth, age, sex, kinship, etc. (ascription) versus
defining it based on personal skills and performance (achievement).
5. Specificity vs. Diffuseness: This pattern variable concerns the scope of
social interaction. Some interactions are specific and precise (like
between doctors and patients), while others are more general and
encompassing (like friendships or family relationships).
These dilemmas reflect the complexity of human behavior within a
society. They involve making choices between personal desires and
societal values, individual interests and collective well-being, personal
relationships and universal standards, ascribed qualities and
achievements, and specific interactions versus broad ones. These choices
define how people fulfill their roles and interact within the social system.
ANALYSIS
Pattern variables not only define the nature of role interactions and
expectations in a social system but also guide the general direction in
which most members of that system choose their roles. They provide
insights into the overall nature of the social system itself.
For instance, consider families as a social system. Within families, role
expectations among members are often emotional (affective), focused on
the well-being of the group (collective orientation), based on personal
relationships (particularism), tied to inherent qualities (ascription), and
encompassing in scope (diffuseness). On the other hand, belonging to a
medical association or a student association would lead to role
expectations that lean towards emotional neutrality, individual
achievement, universal standards, and specific interactions.
However, these are clear-cut examples. In real life, the choices related to
pattern variables are often much more complex and strained than in
these examples. Role performance requires individuals to evaluate
situations emotionally or neutrally. This choice presents a challenge in
many roles we play in society. For instance, a mother's relationship with
her child is highly emotional, but she also needs to discipline the child.
This requires her to balance affectivity with emotional neutrality. Similarly,
a doctor-patient relationship requires emotional neutrality to ensure
proper medical care.
Talcott Parsons' concept of pattern variables bridges the gap between
individual actions and the broader social system. These variables help
define the solutions individuals choose for the dilemmas they face when
performing roles. The combination of these solutions shapes the
characteristics of a social system. Pattern variables are essential in
structuring interactions within any social system.
SYSTEMS THEORY
In Parsons’s usage the idea of system is important. It is an abstract
general term used to capture anything from a two-person conversation to
the international system of nation states and underpins Parsons’s whole
analysis.
A system maintains its identity within an environment, being distinct from
it but interacting with it – making it an open system. Think of a living
creature like a mouse – it's separate from its surroundings but needs
things like air and food from the environment while also releasing waste
into it. This system's primary goal is to uphold its identity while navigating
its surroundings, involving two main aspects:
1. Regulating interactions with the environment.
2. Maintaining efficient internal relationships within the system.
Building on these basic ideas, Talcott Parsons aimed to understand how
social systems operate in a general sense. After his books in 1951, he
took a new approach based on his collaboration with Robert F. Bales, a
social psychologist. Bales had been working on a model for describing
behavior in task-oriented small groups, which involves four phases:
1. Gathering the necessary resources for a task.
2. Organizing to complete the task.
3. Managing internal relations, like resolving conflicts.
4. Relaxing after task completion before moving on to the next one.
Parsons used this model to develop his own concept of system
exchanges, which became a focal point of his work. His approach centers
on understanding how systems maintain their identity while interacting
with their environment and managing their internal dynamics.
Parsons adapted the four phases from Bales' model into his own four-
phase model of system exchanges. Exploring and applying this model to
various situations became a central focus of his subsequent work.
Talcott Parsons is widely regarded as the foremost figure in structural
functionalism. His theory revolves around the AGIL system, encompassing
four functional imperatives: Adaptation, Goal attainment, Integration, and
Latency. Parsons asserted that all systems, such as families, economies, or
political structures, maintain boundaries to subsist. This self-maintenance is
possible because people, as social beings, are socialized with patterned
motivational and value orientations by society. Social systems must adjust
internally and externally to sustain themselves.
According to Parsons, social systems possess a self-adjusting and self-
maintaining quality. These adjustment processes, responsible for
maintaining the social system's internal dynamics and its relationship with
the environment, are termed functions. Functions represent the processes
through which a system sustains itself.
There are certain functions without which a social system cannot subsist:
these are called ‘functional prerequisites’ by Talcott parsons.
 Adaptation
 Goal attainment
 Integration, and
 Latency
The functional prerequisites in social systems are further defined based on whether they
deal with external or internal processes, and whether the interaction is consummatory
(aiming for desired outcomes) or instrumental (focusing on means to achieve ends).
1. Adaptation: This prerequisite involves acquiring resources from the external environment
and distributing them within the system. For instance, the economic system handles
resource utilization, production, and distribution. Adaptation deals with external factors and
has an instrumental character.
2. Goal-Attainment: This involves setting goals, motivating members to achieve them, and
mobilizing their efforts. Processes are consummatory in nature, involving external
interaction. Examples include political processes and power structures, which are closely
linked to the system's ideology and organization.
3. Integration: Integration maintains coherence, coordination, and solidarity within the
system. Culture and values often perform this function in a social system, ensuring
continuity and safeguarding against disruptions. Integration is internal to the system and
has a consummatory character.
4. Latency: Latency involves storing, organizing, and maintaining the motivational energy
within the system. Its functions include pattern maintenance and tension management,
carried out by socialization processes. Tension management takes place internally in all
institutions, according to Parsons.
These functional prerequisites play a crucial role in maintaining the functioning and stability
of social systems. They encompass various aspects of interaction, resource management,
goal achievement, coordination, and maintaining the internal balance within the system.
The passage discusses the concept of complex systems and their organization into
functional phases. Different parties within a complex system have varying degrees of
involvement in different phases. The system can be broken down structurally based on
how different parts prioritize these functional phases. The author emphasizes that the
definition of a system depends on the analysis's purpose; a system can be a larger whole
or a subsystem, which can further have its own subsystems. The passage uses the
example of a family as a subsystem within a social system or as a system on its own.
Although a subsystem usually focuses on specific functions, it still needs to fulfill its own
functional requirements. For instance, the family, when considered as a subsystem of
society, can be linked to the latency phase, where people relax and recharge. However, if
analyzed as a separate system, the family's activities would also go through the AGIL
cycle (Adaptation, Goal Attainment, Integration, Latency), and certain family members
might specialize in different functional roles. For instance, in the traditional nuclear family,
the wife/mother often specialized in integrative activities, mediating and providing support
to other family members.
The AGIL model, developed by Parsons, focuses on internal relations within a system. In
this model, Parsons explores how different phases of a system interact. For instance, the
adaptive phase involves gathering resources to transform the environment, but to achieve
goals, these resources must be shared with those pursuing those goals. This sharing is
crucial to prevent resentment and alienation. Balanced exchanges between phases are
essential for a system to function properly. A simple example is how a government drives
societal goals while the economy adapts and produces resources. The government
requires resources from the economy and, in turn, supports economic activities through its
policies. This reciprocal relationship ensures the system's functionality.
The passage discusses the concept of complex systems and their organization into
functional phases. Different parties within a complex system have varying degrees of
involvement in different phases. The system can be broken down structurally based on
how different parts prioritize these functional phases. The author emphasizes that the
definition of a system depends on the analysis's purpose; a system can be a larger whole
or a subsystem, which can further have its own subsystems. The passage uses the
example of a family as a subsystem within a social system or as a system on its own.
Although a subsystem usually focuses on specific functions, it still needs to fulfill its own
functional requirements. For instance, the family, when considered as a subsystem of
society, can be linked to the latency phase, where people relax and recharge. However, if
analyzed as a separate system, the family's activities would also go through the AGIL
cycle (Adaptation, Goal Attainment, Integration, Latency), and certain family members
might specialize in different functional roles. For instance, in the traditional nuclear family,
the wife/mother often specialized in integrative activities, mediating and providing support
to other family members.
The AGIL model, developed by Parsons, focuses on internal relations within a system. In
this model, Parsons explores how different phases of a system interact. For instance, the
adaptive phase involves gathering resources to transform the environment, but to achieve
goals, these resources must be shared with those pursuing those goals. This sharing is
crucial to prevent resentment and alienation. Balanced exchanges between phases are
essential for a system to function properly. A simple example is how a government drives
societal goals while the economy adapts and produces resources. The government
requires resources from the economy and, in turn, supports economic activities through its
policies. This reciprocal relationship ensures the system's functionality.
Parsons's AGIL model is designed for subtle and nuanced applications,
although it can be further developed. It can be extended by examining the
ways different phases interact and exchange resources (such as the I and L
phases). These exchange patterns also nest within each other within the
hierarchy of sub-systems, revealing interrelations and internal exchanges.
This model is versatile, applicable from two-person situations to entire
societies and everything in between, making the elaboration of these
patterns intricate.
In addition, Parsons identified four action systems, each serving a functional
purpose: the behavioral organism for adaptation, the personality system for
goal attainment, the social system for integration, and the cultural system for
pattern maintenance. These systems operate at various levels, forming a
hierarchy where lower levels drive higher ones, and higher levels exert
control over lower ones.
Parsons primarily focused on understanding the establishment of social order.
He built his theory on several assumptions: systems are interdependent, tend
toward equilibrium, can be static or undergoing change, allocation and
integration are pivotal in equilibrium, and systems are self-maintaining. This
emphasis on order led him to largely overlook the concept of change.
Pattern variables illustrate in a precise manner the principal types of
clustering of social structures. Parsons mentions four such types.
The universalistic-achievement pattern
The universalistic-ascription pattern
The particularistic-achievement pattern
The particularistic-ascription pattern
The Universalistic-Achievement Pattern: It is a type of structure of social system in
which those value-orientations are dominant which encourage achievement based on
legal rational methods among members of society. It exemplifies modern industrial
societies where the governing values are those of equality, democracy, freedom of
enterprise, rational management and openness in social interaction. Divisions of society
based on caste, ethnicity or other particularistic values do not go well with this social
system. EXAMPLE.. the American society.
The Universalistic-Ascription Pattern: Type of configuration of roles which makes a
kind of social system in which values of legal rationality are encouraged in
performance of roles but the distribution of authority is not on the basis of
equality or democracy. Modern principles of science and technology are employed in
work and occupation in industry and communication but the distribution of these takes
place on ascriptive principles, such as membership to particular principles, such as
membership to a particular ideological association, or party, or cult. Parsons believes
that Nazi Germany is an example of one such society.
The Particularistic-Achievement Pattern: This society was dominated by
values of familism’. By ‘familism’ we mean the notion of continuity with
ancestors (ancestor worship), strong ties of kinship, but where the female
subordination in the society. But at the same time, the society also
emphasized achievement and a “code of propriety” in the conduct of roles
which was equivalent to legal rationality (universalistic principle). This type of
social structure, according to Parsons, is best seen in the classical Chinese
society. All these features were contained in Confucianism which was the
official ethic in classical China. The dominance of universalism along with the
ascription principle can be seen in the recruitment of government servants in
China who mostly belong to Communist Party of China.
The Particularistic-Ascription Pattern: Types of social structure in which
the roles are organized in terms of values which are associated with kinship,
birth and other ascriptive features. In social structures of this kind,
achievement through individual effort is not encouraged. Work, in this type “is
considered as necessary evil just as morality is a necessary condition of
minimum stability” says Talcott Parsons. Overwhelming emphasis, in this kind
of society, is placed on expressive or artistic orientations. Society is
traditionalistic as there is no incentive to disturb tradition and a strong vested
interest exist in favour of stability. Spanish Americans” in the
USA exemplify this type of social structure.
ANALYSIS
Early approaches to understanding social systems included the utilitarian, positivist, and
idealist perspectives. However, Parsons disagreed with these approaches for various
reasons. Utilitarians focused too much on external motivations, positivists left no room for
mistakes or values, and idealists overly emphasized values. As an alternative, Parsons
developed his own "action approach" theory that integrates both motivational and value
orientations.
Parsons considered roles as crucial components of social systems. When people perform
roles, they face dilemmas arising from choices presented by society, involving both their
motivations and values. Parsons explained that the contrasts in these orientations, called
pattern variables, influence how individuals behave within society.
He also introduced the concept of functional prerequisites – these are essential needs like
adaptation, goal achievement, integration, and maintaining traditions. Without these, a
social system can't function properly.
Furthermore, Parsons analyzed different types of social system structures based on
universalism, particularism, ascription, and achievement criteria. To illustrate these types,
he provided real-world examples from various societies.
ASSESMENT OF PARSONS
Parsons had a significant impact on American sociology for more than twenty years,
shaping an entire generation of sociologists. Some notable students of his include
Robert Merton, Kingsley Davis, Wilbert Moore, Marion J. Levy, Neil Smelser, and Harold
Garfinkel.
His accomplishments include breaking away from the overly empirical approach
prevalent in American sociology at the time. He aimed to create a unified conceptual
framework that spanned all of sociology and even integrated other social sciences. He
blended elements from British utilitarian economics, French positivism, and German
historicism to achieve this. However, while his effort countered the excessive
empiricism in American sociology, his theoretical model became too abstract to be
practically useful.
Parsons tried to combine action theory with functionalism using concepts like "pattern
variables" and "systemic analyses." But ironically, these concepts led to action theory
being overshadowed by the systemic perspective. His entire analysis revolves around
an idea of humans as overly influenced by society, underplaying individual agency.
Parsons' theory has been criticized for focusing excessively on maintaining order and
equilibrium, which makes it inclined toward preserving the status quo. He doesn't give
sufficient attention to social conflict and the potential for change within his
framework.His understanding of power carries a functionalist bias, and his functionalism
has a teleological perspective. He places a heavy emphasis on values and norms in his
analysis.Critics argue that Parsons has faced more criticism than most other modern
sociologists, often being faulted even for his writing style. Much of this criticism,
though, is shallow and repetitive, and can be disregarded relatively easily.
Three significant criticisms stand out:
1. Portrayal of Society as Harmonious: Parsons' portrayal of society as harmonious and
free from conflict is problematic. This portrayal stems from his failure to adequately
address the root of social conflict, which is the unequal distribution of power.
2. Neglecting the Role of Conflict: By focusing so much on harmony and downplaying
conflict, Parsons' theory falls short in explaining the dynamics of social change. It
doesn't adequately account for how societal shifts and transformations occur.
3. Inability to Explain Change: Due to his emphasis on harmony and the lack of conflict,
Parsons' theory struggles to offer a comprehensive explanation for how societies evolve
and undergo changes over time.
Overall, while Parsons' theory has faced considerable criticism, some of it superficial,
there are valid concerns about its ability to effectively address social conflict, change,
and power dynamics.
Each of the criticisms of Parsons' theory has its limitations. While it's true that Parsons'
initial treatment of change, conflict, and power may not align with the way his critics
viewed them, it doesn't mean his theory couldn't address these aspects. In fact, in his
later writings, Parsons made an effort to incorporate them into his framework.
From the very beginning, Parsons' theory is built on the assumption that the
organization and integration of society are complex and problematic. Integrating such
intricate arrangements within a society must involve challenges and failures. He
acknowledges that real societies are never completely integrated, and he anticipates
that tensions and conflicts will naturally arise from the discontinuities and incongruities
between different spheres of society.
Additionally, Parsons doesn't assume that a highly integrated society cannot change.
His perspective is akin to how a living organism maintains equilibrium by adapting and
evolving over time. He emphasizes the idea of a "moving equilibrium," where a system
can be balanced while still undergoing changes. Parsons had this kind of equilibrium in
mind for society, indicating that change is actually integral to his conception.
Towards the end of his career, Parsons focused on providing a general account of the
long-term evolution of Western society, tracing its origins back to ancient Greek and
Judaic cultures, a perspective heavily influenced by Weber.
In essence, while criticisms were raised against Parsons' approach, he acknowledged
the complexities of societal integration, the inevitability of tensions, and the dynamic
nature of change in his theory, which he further emphasized in his later works.