Talk:Structural functionalism
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 |
This article is supported by the Sociology WikiProject, which gives a central approach to Sociology and related subjects on Wikipedia. Please participate by editing the article Structural functionalism, or visit the project page for more details on the projects. |
| Start | This article has been rated as Start-Class on the quality scale. |
| High | This article has been rated as High-importance on the importance scale. |
Can someone put the references and 'see also's' back, as someone got rid of them, and I'm not sure how to - Thanks Anthropax 18:24, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
I was taught that Malinowski and Evans-Pritchard were functionalists, and Radcliffe-Brown the structural-functionalist (more Durkheimian). Elsewhere (the structuralism article?) the point is made that R-B takes a top-down approach to functionalism (i.e. the function is to satisfy collective needs), whereas Malinowski and E-P view function in terms of individual needs. This needs to be included, but I dislike this school of anthropology and haven't attended to my studies enough to change the article myself! (anon)
[edit] Parsons
Does his theory need a new page to itself? From my Anthropology lecturers, I got the impression that this was the British form of Structural-Functionalism, not the American school, which is different. Anthropax 02:22, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
As it is said in the article, Malinowski was the head of brittish functionalism, and Radcliffe-Brown and Evans-Pritchard (the former being a disciple of RB) were structural-functionalists, that is to say, they aimed at the study of the social as a whole, rather than to individuals; and that whole is different than the sum of its parts.
From what I understand Parson is the chief peson associated with s-f. This article is certainly incomplete without mentioning him, and if there are two schools of s-f it should be mentioned as well.-- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk 21:18, 23 February 2007 (UTC)
it would be useful to make a seperate article, or at least make a section in this one, that talks about the relation and differences between structural functionalism and 'structuralism', since both use the same buzzword and were in vogue at around the same time (50's-60's ?), though in different disciplines/geographical-institutional locations. they also seem to be motivated by a rising concern for 'structure', and may therefore have an interesting historical relationship/loosely common origin. (if nothing else, this would be useful to aleviate confusion .. i have in mind something like the 'cybernetics and systems theory' article, which explicitely analyses the relationship between these oft-confused subjects, although in that case the two are much more related than here.)
