Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-q99xh Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-26T07:26:52.626Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ideology and General Theory: The Case of Sociological Functionalism

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 June 2009

George A. Huaco
George A. Huaco
Affiliation:
University of New Mexico
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

It is a commonplace of our recent past that functionalism and the second system of Talcott Parsons (a distinctive version of functionalism) rose to power or attained hegemony in American sociology shortly after the end of World War II, retained this hegemony through the 1950s and 1960s, and lost a near-exclusive hold in the early 1970s when many of the younger sociologists abandoned a holist or transindividual perspective in favor of an interpersonal face-to-face context (associated with the social psychological concerns of symbolic interaction and ethnomethodology). What accounts for this? Why did functionalism and the second system of Parsons capture the intellectual allegiance of so many intelligent men and women in American sociology precisely at the end of World War II? What explains the almost total hegemony of this persuasion of general theory for more than two decades? Finally, what accounts for the fact that many younger sociologists withdrew their allegiance to these views at the end of the 1960s or early 1970s?

Type
The Development of Development
Information
Comparative Studies in Society and History , Volume 28 , Issue 1 , January 1986 , pp. 34 - 54
Copyright
Copyright © Society for the Comparative Study of Society and History 1986

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Abrahamson, Mark. 1973. “Functionalism and the Functional Theory of Stratification: An Empirical Assessment”. American Journal of Sociology, 78:5, 1237–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
AFL-CIO Economic Policy Committee. 1975. “World Trade in the 1970s,” in Economic Power Failure: The Current American Crisis, Rosen, Sumner M., ed., 112–23. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Austin, John J. 1961. Philosophical Papers, Urmson, J. O. and Warnock, G. J., eds. Oxford: The Clarendon Press.Google Scholar
Black, Max. 1961. “Some Questions About Parsons' Theories,” in The Social Theories of Talcott Parsons, Black, Max, ed., 268–88. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Bluestone, Barry, AND Harrison, Bennett. 1982. The Deindustrialization of America. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
Cairncross, Frances, and McRae, Hamish. 1975. The Second Great Crash. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Cullen, John B. 1981. “Testing Functional Theory with Occupational Positions: A Reply to Jenkins”. American Journal of Sociology, 87:1, 180–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cullen, John B., AND Novick, Shelley M. 1979. “The Davis-Moore Theory of Stratification: A Further Examination and Extension”. American Journal of Sociology, 84:6, 1424–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Kingsley. 1937. “The Sociology of Prostitution”. American Sociological Review, 2:5, 744–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Kingsley. 1939. “Illegitimacy and the Social Structure”. American Journal of Sociology, 45:1, 215–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Kingsley. 1948. Human Society. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar
Davis, Kingsley. 1959. “The Myth of Functional Analysis as a Special Method in Sociology and Anthropology”. American Sociological Review, 24:6, 757–73.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Davis, Kingsley, AND Moore, Wilbert E. 1945. “Some Principles of Stratification”. American Sociological Review, 10:2, 242–49.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Edelson, Marshal. 1976. “Toward a Study of Interpretation in Psychoanalysis,” in Explorations in General Theory in Social Science: Essays in Honor of Talcott Parsons, Loubser, Jan J., Baum, Rainer C., Effrat, Andrew, and Lidz, Victor Meyer, eds., I, 151–81. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Fararo, Thomas J. 1976. “On the Foundations of the Theory of Action in Whitehead and Parsons,“in Explorations in General Theory in Social Science: Essays in Honor of Talcott Parsons, Loubser, Jan J., Baum, Rainer C., Effrat, Andrew, and Lidz, Victor Meyer, eds., I, 90–122. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Foucault, Michel. 1970. The Order of Things. New York: Random House.Google Scholar
Gans, Herbert J. 1972. “The Positive Functions of Poverty”. American Journal of Sociology, 78:2, 275–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Heidegger, Martin. 1962[1927]. Being and Time. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Heílbroner, Robert, AND Thurow, Lester C. 1981. Five Economic Challenges. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Hempel, Carl G. 1965. Aspects of Scientific Explanation. New York: Free Press.Google Scholar
Hook, Sidney. 1962. From Hegel to Marx. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan Press.Google Scholar
Jenkins, Craig J. 1981. “On the Neofunctionalist Theory of Inequality: A Comment on Cullen and Novick”. American Journal of Sociology, 87:1, 177–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Jack, AND Levin, William. 1982. The Functions of Discrimination and Preju dice. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
LevyMarion J., Jr. Marion J., Jr. 1952. The Structure of Society. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Lipset, Seymour Martin, AND Ladd, Everett Carll, Jr. 1972. “The Politics of American Sociologists”. American Journal of Sociology, 78:1, 67–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Loubser, Jan J. 1976. “Action and Experience,” in Explorations in General Theory in Social Science: Essays in Honor of Talcott Parsons, Loubser, Jan J., Baum, Rainer C., Effrat, Andrew, and Lidz, Victor Meyer, eds., 1, 240–63. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Mannheim, Karl. 1952[1929]. Ideology and Utopia, Wirth, Louis and Shils, Edward A., trans. New York: Harcourt Brace.Google Scholar
Merton, Robert K. 1968[1948]. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Nagel, Ernest. 1957. Logic without Metaphysics. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott. 1937. The Structure of Social Action. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott 1951. The Social System. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott. 1964. “Evolutionary Universals in Society”. American Sociological Review, 29:3, 339–57.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parsons, Talcott 1966. Societies: Evolutionary and Comparative Perspectives. Englewood Cliffs: Prentice-Hall.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott, AND Bales, Robert F. 1955. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott; Bales, Robert F.; and Shils, Edward A. 1953. Working Papers in the Theory of Action. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott, AND Shits, Edward A. with the assistance of James Olds. 1962[1951]. “Values, Motives and Systems of Action,” in Toward a General Theory of Action, Parsons, Talcott and Shits, Edward A., eds. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Parsons, Talcott, AND Smelser, Neil J. 1956. Economy and Society. Glencoe: Free Press.Google Scholar
Rosen, Sumer M. 1975. “Introductio?,” in Economic Power Failure: The Current American Crisis, Rosen, Sumner M., ed., 1–44. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Steel, Ronald. 1967. Pax Americana. New York: Viking Press.Google Scholar
Thompson, William Irwin. 1976. Evil and World Order. New York: Harper and Row.Google Scholar
Thurow, Lester C. 1980. The Zero-Sum Society. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
F, Van Zyl Slabben. 1976. “Functional Methodology in the Theory of Action,” in Explorations in General Theory in Social Science: Essays in Honor of Talcott Parsons, Loubser, Jan J., Baum, Rainer C., Effrat, Andrew, and Lidz, Victor Meyer, eds., I, 46–58. New York: Free Press, Macmillan.Google Scholar