Sign in or 
Share this
Talcott Parsons
Talcott Parsons
History:
Talcott Parsons was an American sociologist born in Colorado Springs, Colorado in 1902. When Parsons returned from studying abroad during the Roaring Twenties, a number of events during this time period may have impacted him. These events included postwar problems of unemployment, inflation, the problems associated with the Ku Klux Klan, the rise of Al Capone and the deviant behavior which originated from the Prohibition era (i.e. smuggling liquor), the Stock Market Crash in 1929, the conflict between religion and evolution being taught at schools, the 'red scare', and of course, the Great Depression (Bolender 2005). Also, the first and second wave of feminism were also in progress during his time period. The first wave of feminism started in the late 18th century and focused primarily on woman suffrage, while questioning the social attitudes toward women. Furthermore, women challenged the male dominant society by demanding equal rights and defying social conventions by choosing her own lifestyle The second wave of feminism dealt with issues concerning equal pay; equal education and equal opportunities in work; financial and legal independence; free 24-hour day care for children; free contraception and abortion on demand; a woman's right to define her own sexuality and an end to discrimination against lesbians; and freedom from violence and sexual coercion ("Feminism" 2008).
Aside from the feminist movements, World War I and World War II were also major events taking place during Parsons' time. World War I lasted from 1914-1918, during Parsons' teen years. This conflict entailed of America, Great Britain, Russia, and France fighting against the German army in Europe. At the same time, America was also fighting with Japan on the other side of the world. Both axis powers, Germany and Japan, wanted political control over other nations ("Talcott Parsons" 2006). World War II started in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Britain and France followed and were at war with Germany. Shortly, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa also joined. This war was fought for 6 years and more than 60 million people died. It ended in 1945 ("World War 2 Timeline 1939-1945" 2006). Parsons was not drafted in either of these world wars. Even though many big and influential events took place during his lifetime, the Great Depression may have impacted Parsons the most; because it was during this time he developed and published his first major work The Structure of Social Action (Bolender 2005).
During his time period, he was greatly influenced by Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, Vilfredo Pareto and the British economist Alfred Marshall. Pareto and Durkheim served as Parsons' inspiration for his theoretical structure presenting a unified social system; "Societal elements are interdependent and adjustive, meeting always the needs of the system" (ibid). Parsons adapted from Weber the "concept of social action to develop his own framework for explaining how actors come to interpret their situation" (ibid). "However, it was Pareto's conception of the mutual interpretation of human action and other systemic elements that most clearly informed Parsons' efforts to construct a macro sociological theory of systems in the positivist tradition" (ibid). And Parsons used Alfred Marshall's work to adapt the "model of the demand economy and the necessary equilibrium of the free market" (ibid).
Biography:
Parsons was born on December 13, 1902 to Mary Ingersol Parsons and Edward Parson and had five siblings. His mother was a suffragist and his father was a social gospel Protestant of academic interests. His father was the first to get an education in his family and always pushed his son in the realm of academia. Even though they were a Christian family, they were not opponents of the science of Darwinism, thus giving Parsons an early interaction with the world of science. Parsons went to high school in New York City at Horace Mann High School. After his high school graduation, Parsons completed his undergraduate education at Amherst College as a biology major. Afterwards, for graduate school Parsons attended the London School of Economics, where he studied under the famous functionalist anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski. Parsons went on to get his Ph.D. in sociology and economics at the University of Heidelberg located in Germany, where he was introduced to Max Weber's social theories. He got married to Helen B. Walker around the time he received his doctorate in 1927. Once his formal education was complete, Parsons taught economics for a year at Amherst, and then taught economics at Harvard University. In 1931, realizing the close link between economics and sociology, he joined the faculty of sociology at Harvard University and taught in his newly joined department ("Talcott Parsons" 2006).
In 1937, Parsons released his first major work, The Structure of Social Action. In this book he focused on comparing and contrasting several theorists' views and focused on the link between morality and social action. After two years, he attended a psychology institute where he became familiar with Freud's theories and shortly became interested in the fields of anthropology and psychology. In 1946, Parsons assisted in creating the department of social relations, where he was nominated as chairperson. Then, in 1949, he became the president of the American Sociological Society in 1949. In his second book, The Social System, Parsons discussed the three types of action organization, including cultural, social, and personality. Also, he discussed the main problems of society, his structural-function views, and how social order is maintained through society's parts functioning together. Parsons continued his work at Harvard until 1973, and then retired there (ibid).
According to David Martin, who seemed to be a friend of his, Parsons personality and life was as follows.Whenever Parsons associated with other scholars, he made modest contributions. As a person he was very decent and kind and professionally a good scholar. He was quite reserved and seemed to be deeply affected by his daughter Anne's death. Parsons received many honorary doctorates and the Honorary Fellowship of the London School of Economics. When Parsons went to Heidelberg in Munich, Germany to celebrate his fiftieth anniversary of his doctorate at that university, after the celebrations when he was giving a lecture, he died at the conclusion on May 8, 1979 (Martin 1979).
Areas of study:
In his lifetime, Parsons explored a broad range of topics. His interests and works included subsystems, roles, the normative order, and the interpretation of situations by social actors. In addition, he also focused on medical sociology (the doctor-patient relationship), the social development of personality, political extremism, the university, kinship, the transition to the modern family, the progressive differentiation of the religious sector and the educational world (Bolender 2005; Martin 1979).
Theories:
Parsons, unlike others, deviated from empirical research. His action theory focused less on empirical research and was more analytically based. Parsons leaned more towards logical completeness, and thus his work included more formal distinctions and less interesting research findings. Due to this reason, his earlier works, such as The Social System, faced much criticism. Since the majority of theories were empirically based during his time, Parsons was constantly asked to defend and explain his earlier literary pieces. Furthermore, Parsons' action theory didn't receive much popularity at first because of its lack of empirical findings, which were prevalent during that time (Sciulli and Gerstein 1985).
One of Parsons' most famous theory is his theory of action. This action theory's main idea is that concrete action must be explained as a result of inner laws and the interrelations of subsystem of action (Munch 1981). Parson (1951) explains in his book The Social System, "The interaction of individual actors, that is, takes place under such conditions that it is possible to treat such a process of interaction as a system in the scientific sense and subject it to the same order of theoretical analysis which has been successfully applied to other types of systems in other sciences."
Parsons' theoretical system revolved around the concepts of equilibrium, evolutionary universalities, and the identification of properties that are common to all societies . Furthermore, societal and biological evolution parallel each other and "society is no less a system than are its biological and natural counterparts. For Parsons, social systems have moved historically toward greater adaptation (adjustments that maintain the systemic order), differentiation (the specialization of social institutions and the division of labor), upgrading (greater freedom from want), inclusion (normative diversity), and value generalization (values that are more reflective of the needs of an increasingly complex system)" (Bolender 2005).
Systematic theory consists of three levels: 'part' or 'type' concepts, empirical generalizations, and analytical concepts. Each of these function uniquely in a theory. The function of part concept is to break down the idea or phenomenon into its fundamental pieces to be used as single units of a theoretical system. Empirical generalizations hypothesize the possible functions and behaviors of 'parts' of the phenomenon. This level tends to contain a high explanatory value. Finally, analytical concepts cover the general attributes of part concepts. Even though these three levels hold their own important place in a theoretical system, Parson favored the analytical level the most, as for it was the most important in his opinion. He believed that analytical elements tend to understand well the objective world. He further argued that quantitative data is only important if it can fit with analytical concepts. According to Parsons' frame of reference, the path to systematic sociological theory is as follows (Boskoff 1950):
The instrumental-expressive theory is another one of Parsons' well known theories. Parsons explained how normally, the male in the family has the role of taking care of the instrumental tasks. Such tasks include providing for the family, being responsible for supporting his wife and children, be the official head of the family and must hold a job. Furthermore, the male of the family (usually the father), must carry out the primary function of bringing income into the house of being the "breadwinner." Women, Parsons rationalized, manage the role of taking care of the expressive tasks in the household. These tasks consisted mainly of providing emotional support for the family, nurturing the family, and taking care of other household duties. Also, the woman (usually the mother) only holds a job before she has to take on child caring responsibilities; and even if she does work, the job holds a lower position than that of the male. Moreover, as described in Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, "...the warm, giving 'Mom' stands in contrast to the 'capable,' 'competent,' 'go-getting' male" (Parsons and Bales 1955). The book goes further to state that, "The more expressive type of male, as a matter of fact, is regarded as 'effeminate,' and has too much fat on the inner side of his thigh" (ibid).
Parsons is also known for his theories in the world of medicine and exploring the relationship between the physician and the patient. He concluded that the function of medical practice, commonly known as therapy, is a goal of not only the physician but that of also the patient - it's a collective effort. Parsons (1970) explains that this two way relationship between the physician and patient is the "basis of mutual trust." He further explains in his book Social Structure and Personality that the role of the physician "...is not, for instance, just a 'consumer' but to some degree a 'producer' of health service (ibid). In Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials, Diana Kendall (2007) explains Parsons' theory of the sick role and its four primary characteristics. She describes Parsons' concept of the sick role as "the set of patterned expectations that defines the norms and values appropriate for individuals who are sick and for those who interact with them." The four primary characteristics of the sick role are as follows:
Clearly, Parsons thought that illness is not beneficial to the individual and the larger society; because people who carry the sick role are not fully able to fulfill their duties required by their social roles. Subsequently, the sick role reduces the overall productivity in the work force. Another characteristic of the physician-patient relationship is the idea that the physician has more control in the relationship; as fore the patients are expected to follow the "'doctor's orders'" (ibid).
Detractors:
Even though Parsons argued that quantitative data was only useful if it fit with analytical concepts, statisticians would have argued that analytical categories have little importance unless they can unfold into quantitative data (ibid). Because of Parsons' unorthodox approach in his early works, many empirical researchers and Parsons' readers lost interest in his action theory and were unwilling to read his other pieces of sociology (Sciulli and Gerstein 1985).
George Simmel could be considered one of Parsons' enemies because when Parsons was working on his new book called Structure, even though he at first had left 16 pages aside for Simmel's essay, Parsons ended up not including Simmel's work in his book. The main reason Parsons did this was because he wanted to receive the honor for introducing German sociology to the United States. However, Parsons also mentioned that among many reasons one of the reasons he did not include Simmel's essay was because it did not fit into his thesis and that Simmel's work was more descriptive than analytic. Some argue that in the end, this action helped Parsons and sociology in general because it gave him a greater chance to expand and elaborate on his theoretical approach. However, the down fall to this was that George Simmel, who was also an outstanding theorist, didn't get a chance to rise to his fullest potential (Levine 1991).
Parsons faced a good amount of criticism when it came to his economical sociology. "Mark Granovetter was a major criticizer of Parsons' action theory. In the prominent essay "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness," Granovetter introduced the term social embeddedness, which has since become a key concept in economic sociology. The term is explicitly defined in opposition to Parsons" (Beckert 2006). Granovetter argues that actors don't act as isolated monads and actually are relevant to explanations of economic results. He also feels that the two action-theoretical positions should be kept separate from economic sociology (Beckert 2006). Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell also criticized Parsons’ action theory because they felt that “Parsons’ conceptualization of the influence of culture on the decisions of actors in economic contexts overestimates the evaluative dimension of culture”. They felt that the views of Freud during the structural-functionalist period led Parsons’ understanding of social order to be misunderstood, and that he looked at culture in a vague sort and didn’t fully account for all of the ways that culture could influence decisions (Beckert 2006).
Mark Granovetter also worked with Richard Swedberg to criticize Parsons way of viewing economic structures, more specifically his compartmentalization of sociology and economics because they felt that his separations within the categories should not be included into theoretical models (Beckert 2006).
Parsons' theory of money also came under attack by Ganssmann who feels that Parsons underestimates money's societal relevance. Christoph Deutschmann follows off of Ganssmann and also does not like how Parsons' theory of money does not recognize "wealth characteristics of money" and how money is not just economic, but can help people attain social power (Beckert 2006).
Relevance:
Parsons' research and theories still hold a strong relevance in sociology today. Granted some of his theories face more criticism than others, but without his work we would not have had other theorists follow up on his work to make new and better theories. The fact that he is taught in our class and is mentioned multiple times in our text book shows that his contributions are significant and should be considered when looking into the study of societies and how they are perceived. To some extent, Parsons' theory about the sick role and the physician-patient relationship seems to be in practice by our society. It's a given fact that even though the patient has a right to question his doctor, most individuals usually listen to the "doctor's orders" in order to improve their health. Furthermore, we allow the doctor to take control since he/she is generally more knowledgeable and has gone through professional training to accomplish his task in helping his patients. Additionally, it's also very true that generally people do want to get better so they can quickly return to their role in society; because essentially, it does affect productivity in the long run.
Even though Parsons' theory about the sick role and the physician-patient relationship holds some validity, his theory about men being in-charge of the instrumental tasks and women taking control of the expressive tasks in the household doesn't necessarily hold true. In fact, these days you see more women taking on the instrumental role in the household, as some men transition into the expressive role (e.g. stay at home dads). Also, with the variation in family structure and different types of families in our current time, this instrumental-expressive theory may not even exist because couples are now working towards dividing the household responsibilities and sharing them more equally. Finally, Parsons' idea about differentiation in regards of specialization of social institutions and the division of labor also seems to exist in our society today. An example is the system of bureaucracy present in many of our social institutions such as schools, big corporations, and even the American government where division of labor is a significant characteristic.
References:
Beckert, Jana. 2006. "Interpenetration versus embeddedness: the premature dismissal of Talcott Parsons in the new economic sociology. (New Directions in Parsons Research and Reasearch in the Tradition of Parsons)." The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, January 1, pp. 161.
Bolender, Ronald. "Talcott Parsons 1902-1979." January 22, 2005. <http://www.bolender.com/Dr.%20Ron/SOC4044%20Sociological%20Theory/Class%20Sessions/Sociological%20Theory/Parsons,%20Talcott/parsons,_talcott.htm> (June 15, 2008).
Boskoff, Alvin. May 1950. "The Systematic Sociology of Talcott Parsons." Social Forces 28(4): 393-400.
"Feminism," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2008
http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Kendall, Diana. 2007. Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Levine, N. Donald. March 1991. "Simmel and Parsons Reconsidered." The American Journal of Sociology 96(5): 1097-1116.
Martin, David. September 1979. "Talcott Parsons: 1902-1979." The British Journal of Sociology 30(3): 265-266.
Munch, Richard. January 1981. "Talcott Parsons and the Theory of Action I. The Structure of the Kantian Core." The American Journal of Sociology 86(4): 709-739.
Parsons, Talcott. 1951. The Social System. New York: The Free Press.
Parsons, Talcott. 1970. Social Structure and Personality. New York: The Free Press.
Parsons, Talcott and Robert F. Bales. 1955. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. New York: The Free Press.
Sciulli, David and Dean Gerstein. 1985. "Social Theory and Talcott Parsons in the 1980s." Annual Review of Sociology 11: 369-387.
"Talcott Parsons." 2006. http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/35.php> (June 15, 2008).
"World War 2 Timeline 1939-1945." 2006. <http://www.worldwar-2.net/ > (June 15, 2008).
History:
Talcott Parsons was an American sociologist born in Colorado Springs, Colorado in 1902. When Parsons returned from studying abroad during the Roaring Twenties, a number of events during this time period may have impacted him. These events included postwar problems of unemployment, inflation, the problems associated with the Ku Klux Klan, the rise of Al Capone and the deviant behavior which originated from the Prohibition era (i.e. smuggling liquor), the Stock Market Crash in 1929, the conflict between religion and evolution being taught at schools, the 'red scare', and of course, the Great Depression (Bolender 2005). Also, the first and second wave of feminism were also in progress during his time period. The first wave of feminism started in the late 18th century and focused primarily on woman suffrage, while questioning the social attitudes toward women. Furthermore, women challenged the male dominant society by demanding equal rights and defying social conventions by choosing her own lifestyle The second wave of feminism dealt with issues concerning equal pay; equal education and equal opportunities in work; financial and legal independence; free 24-hour day care for children; free contraception and abortion on demand; a woman's right to define her own sexuality and an end to discrimination against lesbians; and freedom from violence and sexual coercion ("Feminism" 2008).
Aside from the feminist movements, World War I and World War II were also major events taking place during Parsons' time. World War I lasted from 1914-1918, during Parsons' teen years. This conflict entailed of America, Great Britain, Russia, and France fighting against the German army in Europe. At the same time, America was also fighting with Japan on the other side of the world. Both axis powers, Germany and Japan, wanted political control over other nations ("Talcott Parsons" 2006). World War II started in 1939 when Germany invaded Poland. Britain and France followed and were at war with Germany. Shortly, Australia, New Zealand, Canada and South Africa also joined. This war was fought for 6 years and more than 60 million people died. It ended in 1945 ("World War 2 Timeline 1939-1945" 2006). Parsons was not drafted in either of these world wars. Even though many big and influential events took place during his lifetime, the Great Depression may have impacted Parsons the most; because it was during this time he developed and published his first major work The Structure of Social Action (Bolender 2005).
During his time period, he was greatly influenced by Max Weber, Emile Durkheim, Vilfredo Pareto and the British economist Alfred Marshall. Pareto and Durkheim served as Parsons' inspiration for his theoretical structure presenting a unified social system; "Societal elements are interdependent and adjustive, meeting always the needs of the system" (ibid). Parsons adapted from Weber the "concept of social action to develop his own framework for explaining how actors come to interpret their situation" (ibid). "However, it was Pareto's conception of the mutual interpretation of human action and other systemic elements that most clearly informed Parsons' efforts to construct a macro sociological theory of systems in the positivist tradition" (ibid). And Parsons used Alfred Marshall's work to adapt the "model of the demand economy and the necessary equilibrium of the free market" (ibid).
Biography:
Parsons was born on December 13, 1902 to Mary Ingersol Parsons and Edward Parson and had five siblings. His mother was a suffragist and his father was a social gospel Protestant of academic interests. His father was the first to get an education in his family and always pushed his son in the realm of academia. Even though they were a Christian family, they were not opponents of the science of Darwinism, thus giving Parsons an early interaction with the world of science. Parsons went to high school in New York City at Horace Mann High School. After his high school graduation, Parsons completed his undergraduate education at Amherst College as a biology major. Afterwards, for graduate school Parsons attended the London School of Economics, where he studied under the famous functionalist anthropologist Bronislaw Malinowski. Parsons went on to get his Ph.D. in sociology and economics at the University of Heidelberg located in Germany, where he was introduced to Max Weber's social theories. He got married to Helen B. Walker around the time he received his doctorate in 1927. Once his formal education was complete, Parsons taught economics for a year at Amherst, and then taught economics at Harvard University. In 1931, realizing the close link between economics and sociology, he joined the faculty of sociology at Harvard University and taught in his newly joined department ("Talcott Parsons" 2006).
In 1937, Parsons released his first major work, The Structure of Social Action. In this book he focused on comparing and contrasting several theorists' views and focused on the link between morality and social action. After two years, he attended a psychology institute where he became familiar with Freud's theories and shortly became interested in the fields of anthropology and psychology. In 1946, Parsons assisted in creating the department of social relations, where he was nominated as chairperson. Then, in 1949, he became the president of the American Sociological Society in 1949. In his second book, The Social System, Parsons discussed the three types of action organization, including cultural, social, and personality. Also, he discussed the main problems of society, his structural-function views, and how social order is maintained through society's parts functioning together. Parsons continued his work at Harvard until 1973, and then retired there (ibid).
According to David Martin, who seemed to be a friend of his, Parsons personality and life was as follows.Whenever Parsons associated with other scholars, he made modest contributions. As a person he was very decent and kind and professionally a good scholar. He was quite reserved and seemed to be deeply affected by his daughter Anne's death. Parsons received many honorary doctorates and the Honorary Fellowship of the London School of Economics. When Parsons went to Heidelberg in Munich, Germany to celebrate his fiftieth anniversary of his doctorate at that university, after the celebrations when he was giving a lecture, he died at the conclusion on May 8, 1979 (Martin 1979).
Areas of study:
In his lifetime, Parsons explored a broad range of topics. His interests and works included subsystems, roles, the normative order, and the interpretation of situations by social actors. In addition, he also focused on medical sociology (the doctor-patient relationship), the social development of personality, political extremism, the university, kinship, the transition to the modern family, the progressive differentiation of the religious sector and the educational world (Bolender 2005; Martin 1979).
Theories:
Parsons, unlike others, deviated from empirical research. His action theory focused less on empirical research and was more analytically based. Parsons leaned more towards logical completeness, and thus his work included more formal distinctions and less interesting research findings. Due to this reason, his earlier works, such as The Social System, faced much criticism. Since the majority of theories were empirically based during his time, Parsons was constantly asked to defend and explain his earlier literary pieces. Furthermore, Parsons' action theory didn't receive much popularity at first because of its lack of empirical findings, which were prevalent during that time (Sciulli and Gerstein 1985).
One of Parsons' most famous theory is his theory of action. This action theory's main idea is that concrete action must be explained as a result of inner laws and the interrelations of subsystem of action (Munch 1981). Parson (1951) explains in his book The Social System, "The interaction of individual actors, that is, takes place under such conditions that it is possible to treat such a process of interaction as a system in the scientific sense and subject it to the same order of theoretical analysis which has been successfully applied to other types of systems in other sciences."
Parsons' theoretical system revolved around the concepts of equilibrium, evolutionary universalities, and the identification of properties that are common to all societies . Furthermore, societal and biological evolution parallel each other and "society is no less a system than are its biological and natural counterparts. For Parsons, social systems have moved historically toward greater adaptation (adjustments that maintain the systemic order), differentiation (the specialization of social institutions and the division of labor), upgrading (greater freedom from want), inclusion (normative diversity), and value generalization (values that are more reflective of the needs of an increasingly complex system)" (Bolender 2005).
Systematic theory consists of three levels: 'part' or 'type' concepts, empirical generalizations, and analytical concepts. Each of these function uniquely in a theory. The function of part concept is to break down the idea or phenomenon into its fundamental pieces to be used as single units of a theoretical system. Empirical generalizations hypothesize the possible functions and behaviors of 'parts' of the phenomenon. This level tends to contain a high explanatory value. Finally, analytical concepts cover the general attributes of part concepts. Even though these three levels hold their own important place in a theoretical system, Parson favored the analytical level the most, as for it was the most important in his opinion. He believed that analytical elements tend to understand well the objective world. He further argued that quantitative data is only important if it can fit with analytical concepts. According to Parsons' frame of reference, the path to systematic sociological theory is as follows (Boskoff 1950):
- "Systematic theory is of fundamental importance to science. 'The highest levels of scientific development...are not reached without conceptualization on the level of what is ordinarily called that of the theoretical system'" (ibid).
- "The theoretical system basic to sociology must be a theory of social systems broader than that of sociology itself. (Three general classes of theoretical systems include nature, action and culture" (ibid).
- "Systematic theory must conform to the structural-functional type" (ibid).
- "Systematic theory must be formulated in the action frame of reference" (ibid).
- "Systematic theory must be framed in terms of operational concepts" (ibid).
The instrumental-expressive theory is another one of Parsons' well known theories. Parsons explained how normally, the male in the family has the role of taking care of the instrumental tasks. Such tasks include providing for the family, being responsible for supporting his wife and children, be the official head of the family and must hold a job. Furthermore, the male of the family (usually the father), must carry out the primary function of bringing income into the house of being the "breadwinner." Women, Parsons rationalized, manage the role of taking care of the expressive tasks in the household. These tasks consisted mainly of providing emotional support for the family, nurturing the family, and taking care of other household duties. Also, the woman (usually the mother) only holds a job before she has to take on child caring responsibilities; and even if she does work, the job holds a lower position than that of the male. Moreover, as described in Family, Socialization and Interaction Process, "...the warm, giving 'Mom' stands in contrast to the 'capable,' 'competent,' 'go-getting' male" (Parsons and Bales 1955). The book goes further to state that, "The more expressive type of male, as a matter of fact, is regarded as 'effeminate,' and has too much fat on the inner side of his thigh" (ibid).
Parsons is also known for his theories in the world of medicine and exploring the relationship between the physician and the patient. He concluded that the function of medical practice, commonly known as therapy, is a goal of not only the physician but that of also the patient - it's a collective effort. Parsons (1970) explains that this two way relationship between the physician and patient is the "basis of mutual trust." He further explains in his book Social Structure and Personality that the role of the physician "...is not, for instance, just a 'consumer' but to some degree a 'producer' of health service (ibid). In Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials, Diana Kendall (2007) explains Parsons' theory of the sick role and its four primary characteristics. She describes Parsons' concept of the sick role as "the set of patterned expectations that defines the norms and values appropriate for individuals who are sick and for those who interact with them." The four primary characteristics of the sick role are as follows:
- "People who are sick are not responsible for their condition. It is assumed that being sick is not a deliberate and knowing choice of the sick person" (ibid).
- "People who assume the sick role are temporarily exempt from their normal roles and obligations. For example, people with illnesses are typically not expected to go to school or work" (ibid).
- "People who are sick must want to get well. The sick role is considered to be a temporary role that people must relinquish as soon as their condition improves sufficiently. Those who do not return to their regular activities in a timely fashion may be labeled as hypochondriacs or malingerers" (ibid).
- "People who are sick must seek competent help from a medical professional to hasten their recovery" (ibid).
Clearly, Parsons thought that illness is not beneficial to the individual and the larger society; because people who carry the sick role are not fully able to fulfill their duties required by their social roles. Subsequently, the sick role reduces the overall productivity in the work force. Another characteristic of the physician-patient relationship is the idea that the physician has more control in the relationship; as fore the patients are expected to follow the "'doctor's orders'" (ibid).
Detractors:
Even though Parsons argued that quantitative data was only useful if it fit with analytical concepts, statisticians would have argued that analytical categories have little importance unless they can unfold into quantitative data (ibid). Because of Parsons' unorthodox approach in his early works, many empirical researchers and Parsons' readers lost interest in his action theory and were unwilling to read his other pieces of sociology (Sciulli and Gerstein 1985).
George Simmel could be considered one of Parsons' enemies because when Parsons was working on his new book called Structure, even though he at first had left 16 pages aside for Simmel's essay, Parsons ended up not including Simmel's work in his book. The main reason Parsons did this was because he wanted to receive the honor for introducing German sociology to the United States. However, Parsons also mentioned that among many reasons one of the reasons he did not include Simmel's essay was because it did not fit into his thesis and that Simmel's work was more descriptive than analytic. Some argue that in the end, this action helped Parsons and sociology in general because it gave him a greater chance to expand and elaborate on his theoretical approach. However, the down fall to this was that George Simmel, who was also an outstanding theorist, didn't get a chance to rise to his fullest potential (Levine 1991).
Parsons faced a good amount of criticism when it came to his economical sociology. "Mark Granovetter was a major criticizer of Parsons' action theory. In the prominent essay "Economic Action and Social Structure: The Problem of Embeddedness," Granovetter introduced the term social embeddedness, which has since become a key concept in economic sociology. The term is explicitly defined in opposition to Parsons" (Beckert 2006). Granovetter argues that actors don't act as isolated monads and actually are relevant to explanations of economic results. He also feels that the two action-theoretical positions should be kept separate from economic sociology (Beckert 2006). Paul DiMaggio and Walter Powell also criticized Parsons’ action theory because they felt that “Parsons’ conceptualization of the influence of culture on the decisions of actors in economic contexts overestimates the evaluative dimension of culture”. They felt that the views of Freud during the structural-functionalist period led Parsons’ understanding of social order to be misunderstood, and that he looked at culture in a vague sort and didn’t fully account for all of the ways that culture could influence decisions (Beckert 2006).
Mark Granovetter also worked with Richard Swedberg to criticize Parsons way of viewing economic structures, more specifically his compartmentalization of sociology and economics because they felt that his separations within the categories should not be included into theoretical models (Beckert 2006).
Parsons' theory of money also came under attack by Ganssmann who feels that Parsons underestimates money's societal relevance. Christoph Deutschmann follows off of Ganssmann and also does not like how Parsons' theory of money does not recognize "wealth characteristics of money" and how money is not just economic, but can help people attain social power (Beckert 2006).
Relevance:
Parsons' research and theories still hold a strong relevance in sociology today. Granted some of his theories face more criticism than others, but without his work we would not have had other theorists follow up on his work to make new and better theories. The fact that he is taught in our class and is mentioned multiple times in our text book shows that his contributions are significant and should be considered when looking into the study of societies and how they are perceived. To some extent, Parsons' theory about the sick role and the physician-patient relationship seems to be in practice by our society. It's a given fact that even though the patient has a right to question his doctor, most individuals usually listen to the "doctor's orders" in order to improve their health. Furthermore, we allow the doctor to take control since he/she is generally more knowledgeable and has gone through professional training to accomplish his task in helping his patients. Additionally, it's also very true that generally people do want to get better so they can quickly return to their role in society; because essentially, it does affect productivity in the long run.
Even though Parsons' theory about the sick role and the physician-patient relationship holds some validity, his theory about men being in-charge of the instrumental tasks and women taking control of the expressive tasks in the household doesn't necessarily hold true. In fact, these days you see more women taking on the instrumental role in the household, as some men transition into the expressive role (e.g. stay at home dads). Also, with the variation in family structure and different types of families in our current time, this instrumental-expressive theory may not even exist because couples are now working towards dividing the household responsibilities and sharing them more equally. Finally, Parsons' idea about differentiation in regards of specialization of social institutions and the division of labor also seems to exist in our society today. An example is the system of bureaucracy present in many of our social institutions such as schools, big corporations, and even the American government where division of labor is a significant characteristic.
References:
Beckert, Jana. 2006. "Interpenetration versus embeddedness: the premature dismissal of Talcott Parsons in the new economic sociology. (New Directions in Parsons Research and Reasearch in the Tradition of Parsons)." The American Journal of Economics and Sociology, January 1, pp. 161.
Bolender, Ronald. "Talcott Parsons 1902-1979." January 22, 2005. <http://www.bolender.com/Dr.%20Ron/SOC4044%20Sociological%20Theory/Class%20Sessions/Sociological%20Theory/Parsons,%20Talcott/parsons,_talcott.htm> (June 15, 2008).
Boskoff, Alvin. May 1950. "The Systematic Sociology of Talcott Parsons." Social Forces 28(4): 393-400.
"Feminism," Microsoft® Encarta® Online Encyclopedia 2008
http://encarta.msn.com © 1997-2008 Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.
Kendall, Diana. 2007. Sociology in Our Times: The Essentials. California: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Levine, N. Donald. March 1991. "Simmel and Parsons Reconsidered." The American Journal of Sociology 96(5): 1097-1116.
Martin, David. September 1979. "Talcott Parsons: 1902-1979." The British Journal of Sociology 30(3): 265-266.
Munch, Richard. January 1981. "Talcott Parsons and the Theory of Action I. The Structure of the Kantian Core." The American Journal of Sociology 86(4): 709-739.
Parsons, Talcott. 1951. The Social System. New York: The Free Press.
Parsons, Talcott. 1970. Social Structure and Personality. New York: The Free Press.
Parsons, Talcott and Robert F. Bales. 1955. Family, Socialization and Interaction Process. New York: The Free Press.
Sciulli, David and Dean Gerstein. 1985. "Social Theory and Talcott Parsons in the 1980s." Annual Review of Sociology 11: 369-387.
"Talcott Parsons." 2006. http://www.planetpapers.com/Assets/35.php> (June 15, 2008).
"World War 2 Timeline 1939-1945." 2006. <http://www.worldwar-2.net/ > (June 15, 2008).
|
kumudk |
Latest page update: made by kumudk
, Jun 18 2008, 12:57 AM EDT
(about this update
About This Update
Edited by kumudk
145 words deleted view changes - complete history) |
|
Keyword tags:
None
More Info: links to this page
|
There are no threads for this page.
Be the first to start a new thread.
