Main trends of research in the social and human ... - unesdoc - Unesco

108 P. F. kzarsfeld
One author, W. Buckley, has specifically tried to assess the contribution of
general system theory to sociology.75 I disagree with him on one point. He views
the new ideas as opposed to functionalism, whereas it would seem more correct
to see in general systems theory another phase in the basic intellectual drive
which lies behind functionalist thinking in sociology. As I have described before,
there has always been a ‘new’ functionalism, and we are now presented with yet
another. I think that Buckley only shows that the more recent functionalist
writers, because they are more subtle, increasingly make observations which were
not caught by earlier functionalists. I shall revert to this point presently. In any
case, Buckley’s book is a good summary of the literature since the Davis paper
in 1959, just as the latter brought us up to date after Merton’s paper in 1949.
The whole development of functionalism, and its ability to maintain itself
under changing intellectual conditions, is probably best illustrated by a topic
which has aroused much controversy: the role of conflict in functional analysis.
2. The problem oj” conflict. In the hands of the British anthropologist, function-
alism was a revolutionary tool. He wished to prevent British colonial officers
from destroying aboriginal peoples by thoughtless tampering with parts of their
social system. The emphasis was on the positive contributions which each ele-
ment made. In application to modern societies, this turned out to have conser-
vative implications; after all, many things in our society are bad and should not
be left alone. This led functionalists to introduce the notion of dy~function.7~ A
society, for instance, may have as its main goal the idea of success but may not
provide all its members with an opportunity to achieve it. Then many will either
resort to criminal ways of attaining success or retreat to drugs in order to forget
the ‘social prescribed’ achievement (anomie). Something must be done about
such deviance to restore the equilibrium of the social system. Functional
analysis pointed the way to the necessary remedies: a better balance between
aspiration and opportunities.
Thinking in terms of dysfunction, anomie and similar concepts did not long
appease the critics of functionalism. After all, it still meant accepting society
as it is and simply repairing some marginal difficulties. The whole approach
actually seemed to make the sociologists even more conservative. Lewis Coser,
a leader in this trend, put it in the following way: ‘The self-image of many a
sociologist has changed from that of a self-conscious advocate of reform to
that of a troubleshooter and expert in human relations.’ But Coser did not
desert the functional position. ‘Conflict as well as cooperation has social functions.
Far from being necessarily dysfunctional a certain degree of conflict is an
essential element in group function and the persistence of group life.’ While
Coser still has as his main frame of reference the persistence of group life, the
shift in attention from deviance to conflict is significant. It introduces the political
aspect of the social structure. The issue is no longer to bring the deviants
back into the fold. What Coser wants is the institutionalization and tolerance of
coAict’.77 The basic imagery is no longer the social worker, but the labourmediator.
A perpetual cycle from conflict to conflict resolution has new become part
of the function of the social system.