Parsons And Science

Parson's theories come under the theoretical frame work of Structural Functionalism. "This approach commits the sociologist to the study of interactions between individuals without the notion of Ð''social structure' or indeed of Ð''society' being implied at all." (Hamilton 1983) Functionalism "explains social action by reference not to individual agents but to systematic needs which have to be met"(King 2004) Central to Parsons work is the aim "of combining two institutions of society, one Ð''active,' the other Ð''systemic" (Bourricaud 1984). I think that Parson's work mainly focused on his attempt to integrate all social sciences into the science of social action, this could be contributed to his positivist framework. Parsons also believed that morality in social action is the main element to help preserve social order, generally focused on social action and systems. William Outhwaite describes Parsons as Ð''the midwife of modern sociology' (2002). I think this description of Parsons is perfect as it cleary shows his link to science while also showing the break threw he made in American Sociology.

Parsons is so important to American Sociology as American sociologists at the time of Parsons such as Compte and Spencer drew a lot from the theories of European sociologists. With these European theories they fabricated their own around them with links to American sociology. However Parsons "intended to alter the foundations of sociology by centring American sociology squarely in European traditionsÐ'...He sought a radical shift in the elementary premises, concepts and aims of American Sociology."(Seidman 1998)

Parson's first theory was outlined in the book "The Structure of Social Action" written in the 1930s. This book was revolutionary in that it "closed the classical period of sociology and opened the contemporary debate about action and structure, sentiments and actions, values and meaning." (Turner, Bryan 2001) It re-examined the writings of Parson's great predecessors, including Max Weber, and Ð"‰mile Durkheim. From their works he attempted to obtain from them a single "action theory" based on the belief that human action is voluntary, intentional, and symbolic. Seidman explains this book as an "exercise in general theoryÐ'...the aim was only to set out the foundations for a general theory of society."(1998) The major topics discussed throughout this book are the unit act and the elements of this being "an agent, an end, a situation consisting of means and conditions and a normative orientation."(Gould 1991) Also discussed is the characterization of utilitarianism in terms of the unit act. Analyzing the two ways in which utilitarianism may disintegrate, while still remaining within the more general positivist framework. "This book laid the groundwork for parson's own developing theory."(Ritzer and Goodman 2003)

Within Parson's later work also known as; Ð''structural-functional theorizing,' he broke down the Ð''action system' into four functional imperatives, in his famous Ð''AGIL scheme.' With this scheme, he introduced an analytical framework to look at society as a social system that must serve basic functions in order to maintain existence; Parsons identifies four functional imperatives each must society to deal with: adaptation (A), goal attainment (G), integration (I), and latent-pattern maintenance (L). He argued that, in line with these analytical boundaries, society as a whole tends to differentiate into four primary subsystems: the economic subsystem that is specialized in relation to the adaptive function of society, and three other primary subsystems that likewise meet the goal-attainment function, the integration function, and the latent-pattern-maintenance function of society.

The Action system was a major component of Parson's theory and an elaboration of his Ð''Structure of Social Action.' Incorporated into it was his "clear notion of levels of social analysis."(Ritzer and Goodman 2003) This theory was a general outline of a system of action, however social action comprised only one of four subsystems, the others being culture, personality, and behaviour. Parsons link to science is clearly visible within this theory due to the hierarchical organization of this theory, also "the lower levels provide the conditions, the energy, needed for the higher levels...The lowest level, the physical and the organic environment, involves the nonsymbolic aspect of the human body, its anatomy and physiology." (Ritzer and Goodman 2003) This emphasises Parsons link and connection within his theories to science, biology in particular. Parsons was not weary of admitting the connection he saw between sociology and biology; "Biology is our nearest neighbour in the community of sciences andÐ'...substantive relationships should be expected. We are both part of the same larger Ð''community of knowledge'." (Parsons as cited by Binns 1977) This opinion could be perhaps attributed to his background in the functionalist and positivist school of thought and as Anthony King argued "functionalism makes the fatal error of reducing individuals to mere cogs in the objective social system."(2004) This wok led Parsons to concentrate mainly on the Ð''ordered structure' of society his first priority, therefore not concerning the issue of social change at least until much later in his career.

When the social change began to play such a major role in society because of events such as; the industrial revolution, the educational revolution and the democratic revolution, Parson's theories began to change slightly and develop to conform to the new developments within society; he outlined "a vision of humanity evolving from Ð''primitive' to modern societies." (Seidman 1998) Parsons called the new structures which played the major role in this as Ð''evolutionary universals.' But he was "simply just out of touch with a changing world" (Seidman 1998) This cold be due to the fact that he was pimarily concerned with a problem of values in moden society: