著者

中野 正大

出版者

日本社会学会

雑誌

社会学評論 (ISSN:00215414)

巻号頁・発行日

vol.21, no.3, pp.93-101, 1970-12-30 (Released:2010-02-19)

参考文献数

7

---

In this paper, we shall begin with distinguishing the three major types within a great variety of functionalism and, then, reconsider the problems of “sociological functionalism”, which is one of the three types of functionalism, from the viewpoint of “scientific explanation”. Sociological functionalism explains the existence or occurrence of a item that is the object of “functional analysis”, by showing how it contributes toward survival or integration of a society (social system) as a whole by fulfilling functional prerequisites of it. Its characteristics are, therfore, to use the theory of functional prerequisites and the model of social system and, in a analytical point of view, “holistic” and “system centered” as many people have often pointed out. My concern is to clarify whether the explanation that is provided by this sociological functionalism can be scientific one. As Hempel points out, the scientific explanation, which is synonymous with “theory”, must satisfy both the requirement of explanatory relevance and that of testability. However, when we examine sociological functional explanation with such criteria, we can see the fact that it fails to meet the minimum requirement for scientific explanation. For its major problems consist in the key concepts in it : functional prerequisites, survival, integration (or stability, equilibrium, harmony, and structural continuity), adaptation or adjustment, and functional equivalents. But yet, it seems these problems are due to the model of social system (or society) because the model functionalists have in mind is usually biological organic analogy. Accordingly, if we try to improve sociological functional explanation toward scientific one, to it is essential to make the concept of social system, we use, clear. That is, to describe the components of it in detail and specify the internal and external (environment) condition in a system. And next, to clear the key concepts above in sociological functionalism, we must set up the “permissible state” of the system which is possible to survive or integrate (stabilize or equilibrate) as Hempel and Nagel suggest. It would be indicated by specifing the “range” of possible state of it. However when we think of these difficult problems above in formulating sociological functionalism, we had better abondon it at this stage. It might be rather advisable to attempt at constructing a small hypothesis (theory) by dealing with the fields of lower (micro) level in a society, for example a subsystem, and, then, go toward the study of higher level in it.