FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS - Intercollegiate Studies Institute

FUNCTIONALISM AND ITS CRITICS 237
led him to experience "one of those moments of intellectual liberation;
when a concept comes along that gives one ' s thoughts an
ordered structure."' Almond's earlier work had lacked a systematic
theoretical focus, and had been largely descriptive or concerned with
the development of what Merton would call theories of the middle
range.'
After his conversion to a functional approach, however, Almond
moved in a somewhat different direction from that of Easton or
Parsons. While the latter tended to concentrate on conceptual
rigor, Almond remained far more concerned with developing constructs
which were tied as closely as possible to concrete problems.
Specification of the meaning of theoretical terms or examining all of
the implications of theoretical constructs seemed less important to
him than developing some ordering of the material of politics, and
he continued to borrow concepts freely from other intellectual traditions
than functionalism. It is for this reason, perhaps, that his influence
among students of comparative politics has been far greater
than that of Easton. Most of those scholars studying the politics of
developing areas have felt that it was far easier to apply Almond
than to work with Parsons ' or Easton ' s more elaborate frameworks.
Almond has denied that even his work of the period (roughly
1956-1969) can easily be subsumed under the rubric of functionalism,
and this is certainly true.' Even at the height of his " functional
period, " if we may so label it, he remained fairly ecclectic.
More recently this ecclecticism has become even more pronounced.
Functionalism is a mansion with many rooms, and has meant
somewhat different things to different theorists. Certainly Almond ' s
functionalism is, as we shall see, of a far more restricted kind than
that of Radcliffe-Brown or Parson.' Thus many of the criticisms
which have been directed against them are not applicable to him.
' Gabriel Almond,
"
Political Development: Analytic and Normative Perspectives,
" Comparative Political Studies, I (January, 1969), p. 449.
4
These had included: The American People and Foreign Policy ( New
York, 1950), and The Appeals of Communism ( Princeton, 1954). The term
middle range theory is from Robert K. Merton,
Structure ( New York, 1949), pp. 3-16.
5
In a personal communication.
Social Theory and Social
°For a discussion of the variety of approaches subsumed under the rubric
of functionalism, and the variety of interpretations of its essential nature, see
Francesca M. Cancian, "Varieties of Functional Analysis, " International En-