11. All Outl¡rle 01 the Socitll Syste17Z

T.us SECOND PART OF TItE GEN­eral lntrodllcüon ¡s ~tesigned 10 present an outline of the muin conceptual rcsources of current socio­h.'lgic::d thconj.1t is neccssarilv incomplete in at k¡lst tv,~o \'¡ilys_ F'irst, it is inevit'ably a personal statc­ment, t1~¡ng components ami ¡he ways of org:lnizing t:hcm th:it secm múst srr;¡legic 10 the ::\uthor. Anv dísccrning reader \l..'!il recogr;ízc tJwt thcse máteriaf'i come hom manv sourCe5. Sur tnis is not meJO( to be ¡) sc:hol~¡rlv ~ssa'\i in the historv of theory. al· tempüng to dücuTTlcnl thc immel1se diversily ()f smrrces and intluenecs. 1t is, on the contrary, guíded bv ;1 conviclion of lhe cnormous significance of the cícment of sysícm in rhe theory of <lny scientific ulscipl¡n~. Bccause of this, great attcntion had to be (~iYen [O the Systemlltic fil of the diffcfent theoretícal ~omp()l1ents, ~ regilrding both theír seleclion ,~nd thcir t.!rnpírical s¡gnHic~\nce. At thc presenr sí~gc of th(~oreticul dc\'clopment, (In}' such systematic at­tcmpt mnst he tentativc. j\:!ajt)f changcs are to be e'>pcctcd. as have indeed occurred within the course CVCil oí its relntively mature developnv;nc

Sccond. Ihi::; oulline. ís incomple:tc becausc, long :as Ü is for un íntmductlon_ it is a mere fragment of \',.-ha! vv()uld be required to m"ke tbe best possihle case for sys!cmatíc theory by outlining an adcquatc systemaLic thcory; this would clearly require a major treaüse.' Thus, tbe present essay is defkienl in conceptual precision. lt ¡neludes only a \'cry frag. mcnrarv statemcnt 01: rhe lodcaL mcthodoloi~ical, ond cn{nirical grounds for selecting such concepts. Fl!rthcr'morc, the deve10pment it presenls is incon:l­pJcte, and the upplicatíon to empíric:al maleriuIs is meretv illustralivc. Th~ princip::tl gain, however, bought at the cost

oC thes~ <lDd doubtles:'.-l other deftcicndes. is the at-

L Fmll~ the -:.:.tJthor's l"oJnl oí "iew 1111" wol11d lake 1hc fnrm c,f il nuher Llf-re:iCI,¡ng rey¡s.íon oí his enrlle!" book. Thr.> SOcl.,[ S,1'sfí'm (1951). 1'0 be reason:'ibly a¡Jequ:'ite, the rcsU!l wm!ld h:~ve H\ be :1. longC'f book lhan lhll.t cne wrls (aboUl 550 p'JRes) .

. 3 (;

BY TALCOTT PARSONS

tempt to cover alI the main probJcms that a sys­tcmatíc thCOfV must [:lee.

This atten;pt hl)S becn based on toe conviction t.ha1 there are lWo cssentbl reference points for this tvpe of svstemntic analvsís: a c1asslficZl(ion of the f~nctionai rcquircmcms of a system and (he ar­nm~emcnt of thcse wüh r.cfcrencc to processes of control in the cybcrnetic sense. More spcdfically, [he theory úf sodal systems bclongs wíthin th~ more general dass of conccptuaJ schemcs secn m the fmOle oi rcference of actioll, \Vit.hin tnat frame­work, the boundaries of social sysLcms have been defincd in tcrms of lheir rehltions, first to each otber. t.hen to [he behaJ"¡oral organism. to the per­SOnalilY oi the indíviduaL tmd to cultural SYSiems. Tht: reítHion ro tbe physic:lJ environment is medi­<leed lhrough these athers, and henee is not directo Secn in this context, a social svstem is always "open," cngaged in processcs of interchange with envíroning systems.

.It will furtber be hc1d thál most empirical1y slg· nificant sociolo~¡cal theorv must be conccrned wílh complex syste;ñs, that í~, systems compose~. of 11mnv Subsvslems. Hence the: primary cmprrtcal type:refcre~ce has becn lO the 5ociety. which, in rhe nature of the case, is highly complex.

The b~lSíc functional c1assification underlving the whole schemc i nvolvcs the discriminatjon "of f¡Jur primary categorics: p¡~ttcrn-rnai ntennnce. i ntegra­tjon, güal-attainmi?nt, ami adaptatioD, plnced in that order in the series of control·relations. But, on an­other axis, it has beeo necessary to discriminate the sr.ruclura) componcnts of such systcms_ These will a!w:1ys constitute panerns of instítutÍonalil.cd normative culture, differenti:,Hed both f\Jflctiona)]y and by levels of spccification ami oí scgmentati()Il ot uni ts cf the svstem. Thc strucl ural classilkation is organized ab¿LIt thc concepís of systcm v:1lues, in­stitUliona)jzcd norms, collcctivitics. and roles.

lt \-\líll aIso be necessary to categoríze an'd dassify

Tt¡]cott Par~OI1S; .AII OutliHé oí tIle Sü<.:Í;¡1 Syskm 3J

the rCSQurces invorved in the iutcrchangc< prüc(!~s.cs, not onlv bctwecn a societv and its environing svs­tems, ¡;ut between slIbsystems wilhín tbc s,;cié'ty. From lhcse, finallv, ffiust be distincuisheu 1he reg­u1alorv mechanTs~s, likc monev,'" whkh are iñ-volved in dyn:.ll'nic procesE>. •

l\Iore gcncr'llly, a fundürncnt,ll distincl.ion wm be mnde bctwecn the morphological analysis of the strl1CILlrC of syslems and the "dynamic" analysis oí process. Neither has special príority over rhe olhcr cxcepl thnL, ul a parlicular leve). stable slruclural reference poinLs are ncccssary for dClcrmining gcn­erafiztLtions a{-1out proccss. Furthcrmorc, with re­SpCCI to process. it ís nccessary to distinguísh thc: "equilibrium" levcl of analysis. \vhlch assumes structure to be givcn. from the "structural dwngc·· level. whjch attempts to explaín such processes oí change. In the empírical analysis of comp)<.:x sys­tems. however. il is almost alwavs ncccssarv to as­sume some strllctural elemcnts ':to be gí .... c~ while analyzíng proccsscs of change in others. particu­larly changes in the struclUre of suhsyslcms ef lhe more extcnsivc systcm.

Th~se secm to be the mínímum (jf thcorctical problcrns and cCtmponents which must be la kcn jnto account in anv soc¡olo~ic¡)l thcorv Ihat hlVS claim lo svstematic genera I itV .... : \Ve think th3l all'of them 2row out of ¡he work ~ 01 lhe Illlthors of thc sclec~ tions wbich follow. Considerable \'aria,1Íons from their propoS3Is here put forward would prob:1bly result if olher conter.nporary theoriS[$ atlcmptl!d such n lask. BlIt \Ve Lhink they w()uld be primarily variaf.ions of emphasís. nHhcr ül~m deparmrcs from the has k theoretic::11 struclure wírh wbich wc are concerncd. \Vhelhcr or nor this is truc, ontv critic.::ll reaetion to this and olhcr attempts, and to \heorl~lik cnl analysis of empírica) dala. CMI ldL Such re(lC~ tion will be one of the mos! important tests of how far i!j()ciolúgy can be said to be on 1 he way 10 con­solidatíon as .a gcnuinc theorcticaHv codiflcd tield ni science.'· ..

It may also hdp thc rcader's oricntation lO [his introducwry nHHcriaI if somcthing is said aboul the stagcs by v./hkh it has dcvdoped ln [he author's own work. Thc most important sourccs are: for ¡he ccn­!rnl conccplion of the sotínl sys[cm amI thc h<l~cs of HS intcgration. the work uf Durkbéim; (or thc com­parative :malysis of :wcial struclurc and for lhe analysis of the borderline benvl!cn social s\'slems :1nd "culture, tha1 of 1\1<1'.': \Vchcr: and for the ~lTtictl­lation hel,"vecn sodal systerns uno pcrsün.llílY. (hat of FrcLld. Tlle first main St3gc of thinkíng W~lS doclI­mcnted. in termr:; of criticar analvsii< of rhe work of S{'vcnd othcr thcorists, in The ~'tmcTltJ'(, of Social ActEolI (J 937). A nl:W phnsc of thcorct¡~:11 íntegra­üon, p;.trticuhrly ínvo!ving sysrcmatizí1lion of lhe

general framc of rcfcrencc of aClion and thc anicu­latiün of social sys1ems with thüse of culLure and of personalily. \Vas documented in lhe [Wo public.:t­tíons. Tmwlrd a Gel/eral Tllf.'ory 01 AClioJl, in c01-l~\boration with Shils nnd olhers. and Tite Social Sy.\iem (b¡)th 1951). The schemc \Vas further s)'s­tcmatizcd and extended. partícularly by c()nsolidrH~ íng Lile "p~lttcrn variables" ¡oto (he scheme of Ihe f:(Hlr fundílrn~ntal functional problems of aU sys­tems of lie1 ion. in Working Ptlper:~ in the The01")' of A c:liOIl, wich Bales rmd Shils (1953), Thc artlc-uIa­tíon benl,'cen social systems ami pcrsonulil)', with special refcrencc to the process of sCld:llrZítlion, was further cxplored in Famlly. SOcí'lli::;lIioll ",¡d lmer­aC¡iOIl Process, wíth Bales and othcrs (1955); finall)', the prcscnt phase of the nnalysis of input­OUlput rclalions and 01' the rclations bC1wecn n lolal social s\'stcm ¡md its. subs\'stems \.\'~¡S furthcr de­veh.1p.;d~ in Ecoflomy al1d~ So ciefy, with Smelser (1956).

Some A rea:; o/ Current Theore¡ical C01l.\·enslls

Pnrt 1 (lf this General Inlroduction has ri~htlv strcsscd ¡he indctlnilt..~ness. of lh~ boundarics ()['$ocf­oJogy am.! the ways in which the:s~ h;we tendcu to shift. The divcrsity of poínls of vícw fwm \vhich important qLICSrTOnS !'lave been ~u')d may bc askcd. ana of thc frames of reference in which iH1S-\\'Crs

may be obtained. ha~ 3Iso heen di$CllSSed, Howcver, we beI¡cve thtttlherc i$ a subsLanlial

clcment of curnutatlvc cOTltinl.lity, which bccomcs the more clcal'ly visihJe \\ han SCCTl in tc-mpond per­spectivc. Thís cl~ment of c.outim1ity crm be ohscrvcJ at difíerent ¡cvds. In C'crtaín \'eTY "'cneral lNms, sDmclhing appro:lching consemms c~n he claímcd among thosc wha m~ly be con$idcn::lI pror~ssiol1~ alIy cümpc{cnL BUl, as tbc con(ent of ¡heNY be­c()mes more particularized. agrccnlC'nt tcnds HJ givc wllrt() a \var 01' (:()nn[c:tjn~ schools. Even hcr¡;, how­C'v¿r, the quc-:;tiün of just how dccp thcsc diírerences ar.:? i:- ~1 rC'k\'~lnt one. lt í~ ou!" ('()n\'¡.:[¡~)n lh~\! nlu('h

_.,,--_ .. d_btlgrecfllCnt ~om'c¡:\¡s implicit consen~u:'i,:::

~. [n my u\\·n ':;;.$C. ¡hi" n'n\'~clion wn:> :H; a r,:~ull lJf Ihe ,'(JI k S:nlcture o; Soci,¡/ Aoio!f, de:!1I pli,I"urily with t .. ~llr \)l;íjOf ,,\c:í.\l "Y.~tcm" ,)f ¡he .;:.~Il~:Ii.¡l¡~)n íroIH J~)F: Alfrf."d lI.1:\r-.:h,il1. V¡t[r¡,'dt' P:¡¡el(\ :lnd \k\ \\'cbcr. J,¡d¡;in·] l'w lhe :-:ec'o:FLln lill-'r:U\lr{; "":1.:1-able ~\l (he "(ínK', \11('\' shm!kl h' CNI~¡dt,'red a<z püinl~ i.~f "ícw ¡In,' (Otll' lhin1.els ':'11e ':lJlJ!d l\;n:e lt was pU~!.lbIL·, ho\~;e".:;;r. íO dl.'l!lun:c.tr~I(~ thal lfl('ir n~lic:.')'{u:d sdwmb ¡;"nH:q',cd in (e111h ('( ,í c(·nml\m oí rt'(eftIK~' :~nd. cl:rl;,ir, lc"d.'-o. ,~';:OUinll'n .• ,,, .. · •. ·".·'A ttworeliC:ll CI)mm,'1l ;.d¡en(:· í'":\, nN tn lhe lil~'"C i"rlllf ml'n~ \\i(h )i\lnf,n.:';-:\ ]"u: t.l(!\'~·I()pmCl1ls. Ü has b.;c n juSt ,,:; í.'entral' H) l\\..Ibi-t.""quent W()f];;,

32 CClIcr:1I In t roductiol'l

Probahly the grcntcsl conscnsus CXiS1S rcgarding thc applicability to om úisciplinc of 1 he gcncnll canon::; of scicntifk mcrhou. Thc haulc "tbl.)l![ whelhcr sdencC' is rossiblc ín tilo Iic1d of hLJm~lll socí,d behavior may he suíJ to he over in its main ph~l!'e, howevcr much nllly rcm:lin 10 be ~culcd on rn~lTly of lile subtlcr points, p~\r!icl!!nrly tIle border­línc prohkms.

This agrcemcnt c1carlv indudcs lhe role of thcorv in scicncc am.I the ;~)llIre of the conceptual scherlws which sdt!ntitk rhcory crnploys: 1110;:;;[

scholan. would accept [he b<l::.;íc rnelhüdologicaJ rrC'mí:k~s formul~üed in the work of sllch writers ~~~ A. N, \Vhitehend, L. J. Hcndcrson, nnJ J::lmes B. Conant Despite differcores of cmphasis and pref­erence for personal types 01' work, the-old battlc of theory ve.rsus cmp¡rici~m may be considered to be over. Thc same rnay be said regilnling t he medts oí nomothctlt versus jd\:~ogrnphic modeS of conceptu­aJízalion. LOl.!icallv, the situalion seems 1:0 be er.\-1Tre1y pnraIlef to that of hen.~<.Iity aod environment in tbe hiological sciences, where the fürmulation in lerms (Jf "versus" is now larceIv obso!erc, Since thís Reader lS concerncd wíth tí1e dcvelopment oí theüry, consemitls on tbís pOlm js viral.

\Víth reg;¡rd to thcory itself as ;) vital componcnt of organiz.cd scientific Kno\'v!edge, ~tnd 10 lhei..1Tcti­l.?ll formuJ.ntions as crucüll 10015 of investígatíon, two somcwhat more s.pecífic points may .¡(so be claimed as flJl1damcnt~ll and gcneral1y acceptcd. Thc íirsf of thcse is tne role of unalvticaJ ahstraction in, aH the more general thcorCi1caí ~chcmcs of sci­cnce. Thcore[ical schcrncs are made up of concepts and logical/y inteI1'elated propositiol1s. To be ca­pable ~f logical manipllJat10n: such schemes must alw:.l.ys be l"e1ali'l.Jcly simple amI cannot possibly embrace everyihing cmpiricaJly knowable aÍ'lol.lt Ihe concrete phenümcn:i at hanu. They mll~t select, l.e" abi.-itrl'lcL aceording te lheir own critc-ria of relc w

vanee 10 thcoretical pr'Oblems. Finally, the CLmccpt of systc:m is also vital {O sci­

enCe. Resides cmpirical vulidít.y une! conceptual pre­císion, thcre are IWO olhcr csseJ1ti~tl criteria üf the sc1cntific usdulness of sets OL thcoretical proposi­tions. namelv. lheir leve! ()f !!:en~r;jlity w¡lh r~f­crcnce 1'0 cmpirieal phenomct;'a anu 1heír ]o~ical intcgr~\tíon wüh ench üther, The COllcept of systcm is esscntiaJiy nothíng hut ~ln appljeatíon of thc crí­reríon of logicaJ integr~lt¡on of gencralizcd propo­sitkm5.. That is. tneoretical ?rop()~it¡ons ~lrc scien­tificaHy u:,duI in so fu as thcy are gcner<li !\nJ :ire relateu in such ways that data acc()unted [or by orle proposition mil}, by logic¡¡} infercncc, be s.nOWI1 f.o nave impiíc::aions fOí data ln¡lt .shüuld fir lnto ... ,the! propos¡l'lons in the set. The differencc belwet::n de­scriptlün and theorelical exp1anation ,is precisely

tha~ betwccn thc ísolation of particular proposítions and thcir intcgralion with caeh olher ín such Wi.lVS

that logicul in[cft'ncc i¡; possible. ." Logical integratjon. or systematization. is in tllis

sensc a maUcr oí dcgree, The ideal, howc\'cr. is a system of proposÍtioñs so rda[{~d that thcir logical imenlcpcndcnce is complete, so that aU the propo­sitiol1s in the svstem can be ri!!orouslv derived from a sct of prim'ary postula/.es '-(ll1d définitions. Fcw schcmes af sdentitic theory have approachcd this goaL hut it remains thc ideal and provides essentinl criticill ennont). \Ve do not claim, of course. that lhe schemc prescIlted here possesses anything ap-prollching complete logkal inlegration. '

Systcmatizaticm of [heory c1early implics the C<.1n;.

cept of empirical syslcm as its counterpart: this fo]­klWS fn..)m Ihe point maJe about analyticaI abstrae­tion, lf theorv is to be cmpiricallv relevant, it mttst present demó'nstrably verifiable patterns of intl!rde­pendence anH.mg empirical phenomena, In order to do this, however, it must delineate and classify phe­nomena according lO criteria of rekvance and ím­portance. An empiricnl sysrem, then, is a hody of presumptively interdependent phenomena to which a given abstn\.ct analytícal scheme is presumptively relevanl. Jt 15 impossible ro study everything at once empirically. 1\n empírical system ís ::1 theoreti­caHy defined field of relevm'H phenomena, with ref­erence to which ccrtain problem-statcments have beco abstracted.

So far, thc poínts of agreement have concerned matlers common lO all the empidcal sciences. Ap­proaching our ()wn field more closely. another cru­cial point should be madc, name1y. tfH~t thc study ()f hUfl'HHl $oc!ai bch~wjor necessarilv involvcs a frame oí refcrence hefe culled "tiction:; Thc term itself is not important. But the c(mtent it rcfers lO ís highly so. EssentiaHy, it means a type of theOl'clkal schcmc incompatible with the fürm of "rcductionism" char· ~\cteristic of a I!:rent deal of our earlier scÍentific tra­dition. Action '"treats behavior as "goal-directed," as "ada'p[iv~," .tS :'motivated." and as guided by sym­holic proccsscs. The concept of culture as dcvel­-oped in anthropology is crudal hcrc. Anothcr way of Dutting the mattcr is that neitncr tbe lheorv of me~hanics in (he older sense 1l0f tnat of ninetee'i-tth­century physíology wNllJ be adequate if simply "í.IppHcd" to thc behavioral ficld.

A ma.l0r fOCllS 01' this problem was thc ~'bchavior­ise' conlroversy of thc j 920's, The behaviorisl posi­¡ion was a major example of reductíonism and tended to denv thc scient.illc legitimacv ol' aIl >'sub­jectivc" categ~riés. of all concepts of "meaníng." A.s in thc bateles (}vcr the status of scicnce itself and O\1cr empiridsm in Ihis arca. it can b~ said that [he fig11l is overo Sociological Lheory today is clearly

Talcott P2rSOnS: A11 Outline oi tlle $ociJ.l Systc.m 33

couched in terms of motives_ goals. s'l-'mbols, menn­ings. means and cnds l anJ th'é Jjk~. ~

~Jn short. r ha ve sUCf!ested that c.eneral ::t!,!ree­ment exists rcgardíng the rclevance ;)r thc cla;sicaI caIlons of scientífk mClhod: the significance of analvtical theorv wifhin this method:'-"rhc nccessítv of añalytical abstraction for theory; thc conccpt óf sV8tem: ando finally, thc "action" fTame of refer­e;'ce. For purposes oi defining thc stlbject matter of sociology, one more point oC agreemem can be presumed, namcly. that the empirical systems I/,'¡th which sociology ís concerncd ínvolvc the imu­aclion of plunllities of human3 indivicluals. Clearlv, the studv of lhe ::mtl.lvticaJ]v isolated "individua]" "is not a pr~blem forsoéiologY. In thís cmpiricaI sense, the concern with "social syslems" ¡s one of the hallmarks of sociological íntcrcst. Hut when we remcmber that a thcoretical schcmc 1S bascd ('In analytical abSlfactioll. merely poinling to an cm­pirícal field is Ilot enough. ln arder to achieve any high klt'el of 1heoretical sp.:citlcity, it i5 neccs­s.\ry to takc posJtions on a series of úther general íssues where consensus. even in thc ~cnsc so fur taken for gr~lnteJ. cannot yet be prcsumed.

It is at this pOÍnt that the pnsitions held bv tbe editors, must be considcrcd. \Ve have hacl to f~llow speciik p()lícies of selection from a litermurc far too large tú be included tbrough more lhan :l smaJ) sample, amI we havc had to organize the selectcd material in a rclativelv dcfinite ~Hld cohcrcnt wav. \Ve do not lhínk that~ the present leveI of (;,.-rpJh.:U COnSCfl$US in the field of sociologv is high enough to provide an <lutomatic rfjtt()na!e~¡or thc l"\olkíes 'Of selection a.nd organization which must be ~\dopted in order to produce an intelligibly coher~nl ;In­

rhology, \Ve have. tbereforc. frllnklv ;)nd exolicidv brought to b¡,:ar our 0\'.:0 views ()f the most \Jscfúl nnd important organization of problcms and C'Ofl­ecpts in rhe fielJ.

T/¡e Concep! of Social Sysu!ln

Thc functíofl of this purt of the General lntro­dllction is 1(1 present :1Il oulline of om conccpl of social systcm. in order to makc explicit thc main consídcríltíons that haw f!uidcd our polides ()f sclection and organizalion. - .

Lct us start wirh thc issuc jus( mcntionc(L th:tt of the delinearíon of thc place' of social systcm, within the frame of refcrencc nr action. One :lSrecr of the issue, that (lf thc distincÜOll betwccli the

3. Jn thc mos! genernl sensc. s()cio)o~y .. h(li.lirl l'~ ml!;­van! 10 all !Í\'ing orga.nisms in so ínr as (he)" ífl\crac\, bUi for fJre~enl purpo"es ít is 110t neceS!"lry 10 \~O hcyoml I he human case.

analyrícally dcfincd d¡ ndivídual'" <md Lhc systcms generaled by the p;ocess of soci~¡[ intcrí1ctíon, c¡m be taken for gntntcd. BUl this ís llO[ enou!!h for our purposes. "'prímarily ~ec3use Íl hils to'- makc another L1l'l("dvticallv crucial distinctÍoIL namel\', tha t bctween -s()ci ti ( svstems. and cultural svstcm~!iA In thc cas~ of tlle individual·social dí:-.tinct¡-on. the­distinction ítsclf is scarccly in qucstion: the ditncul­ties ccnter aboUl its analvt.icat char:lcter and the ways o[ drawing the aml)yticaI lines. In the ca~e of the social svstem-clllwrc: distincti(ln. 1he clear necd Ü)r sucn ¡; tlistinc[ion ha~ onl\' !!mduaIlv hc("n emcrging ir¡ sN.:i<>Iogy and anthrop~[ogy." .

Social lUId ClIlwrtll SyJ!ems, ln {he most impor­tant tradicion of thoughl for the English~sp~aking conntries. that growing out of utj\jearianism ~md Dan"inian biol0gy. an indepcndc111 position for lhe $ooda] sciences depended 011 {he d"lím:ation of a neJd of Ínteres[ which could nOl simply be subsurncd under the rubric of ~eneral bjoIo!.!v. II W~\:'), aboye alL (he rubric oí ,,'social herc-dity" in Spenccr's sense, oí' '·culture" in Tvlür's scnsc_ \yhich be­cmnc' the main foclIs ()f this delineation. Rcgarded in genera} bíolog.ical terlllS, thís ficld feH dc7lrlv in thc~ realm oi ··c'ñvironment:.d'" ra1her than h(,l:':"di~ tarv in nu('nc\.:. Thc cateQ:orv of social inrcraclion playcd <l second,lTY role '"'al. "this stagi:. nlthough it '-vas cJc;¡rly imrlicit in Spencer's cmphl\~¡s (In socia! d ifferen ti t:l tion.

Thc comm<m back!!round of modem !jociologv and anthropology hi:ís ... ·emph;;¡sizcd " socio·,ctl1tu;~1 spherc. This sphcre h"d thc properti..::::; of crc:;:¡ting and maintaining a pancrned Cllallr~:] tradition. sh~lred ín vadous \vays bctween the membcrs of !i\'­íng sodeties and tr~insmit.teJ fmm gem>ration lo

!!encnníon throuch IearnitH! pr<)CCS~CS and not t'hroll~h biologicar inhcritanc'e. Al the same time, It ¡nvo"~í.~d or5!a~í7.,t~d SVl\fems of slrucum:d or "ínstí­tutionaJizcd'.:' intcraction bctwccn large nUTllb¡;;rs of individuals.

In the Unitecl Swtes. unthropologlsts na,-'c tended to cmpha:'iizc rhe cuhur;il aSr6ct of thi~ complex: sociol(lgi~t!i. the interacrivc asrect. lt !'ccms to us imr0rtant lhal the t\\'o. hm\'CVf:~r cmpirically intcr-

4, 1 he rele":\II<:e of (he tcrrn ·'~l[¡¡l.ly!¡c~r· \5 ';.'¡':jl COI1n~<::'\km. AII concrete- ht:h;!vir\]" j" (he beila,'¡o"f ((1 \'Íllu;:¡ls. nn<.l no thcüry of llllt'racl¡<~n <H-oid wirh cómpOl!I!./US oC :he bcha,'¡of '.le Dm ¡.., ver; ctiír..:-.rerll. irom wh:\1 w.,s rCÍ,:rred ":!n;¡iv¡lcallv i:;'f;b!(~(r' ~(1Tm' p¡rici~( rrwl!wd()k\~),y ¡¡] ""'(j;;l1.,)I'},~V 1 hi;.c \'¡¡aj (Ii~nn(:(¡ün bv n'-:'1,'h()lo«v

c(.'rni~d wirh ¡he ;)!1(J1Yíic:llly ,,~·.;tcm of him, bu!. ~b rlh~ c·~mC"cpliC\n clcétrly m<1k(;>:. ~OC~DJ()1.!\· í)$ych(lk1~y:' . . ..

~. ef. _\ L Kro~n.cr ~\nd I "lcl)q l'ar"¡~l". "11...-..' (\m­\:t::pl:- oC Culture ,md (\f Soc!:d SY-,lcm." _-tlli('fI,"ClIj So .. doio,,,;,,,tl R.>,'¡c,,·, O";l(ll~cr, 195)0\.

34 CClleml lntroduction

depcnclent 1hey may he, should be kepl anrdytical1y dislinct. Th\! sDciaJ-:wsrem fOLUS is on thc conditions iJwolvcd in lhe üdcr;lction of élCtl.WJ human lnoivid­uals who consCÍtlltc COncrete collcctivitics with dc­tcrrninaw mcmbcrshíp. Thc cuhural-syslcrn focm·. on ¡he othcr hand. is on "patlerns" of mcaníng. c.g., of "afiles. of norms. of orzanizcd knowJcdgc and hclicfs. oC cxpressivc '"form~-:' Th(~ basic conc'Cpt for thc intcgratíoo and intcrpcnctratjon of thc t\vo is insrilUlÍ<mali¡,atiOll, which wilI be a subject of much nltcntio[\ in subsr:quctll introductory discussions.

Tbus. :ln essential part of OUT' polícy is to dístin­gUIsh $oci;~l systerns from culwraJ systerns and to treat the former as tbe primary focus of the analyti­c~11 concerns of socíoiogicúl thcory_ However. the relat,¡oflshíps bc[ween the two are so intlmate that wc dcvotc- an entir\! part of OUT Rcader (Part Four) ro materíals emphasízing and ana]yzing these rel¡¡tions-íncIuoing, of course, many sc]ections from the work of llutbors who themselves did not emph8size lhe distinclion 01' who in man\, cases \vcre not even 3,'\.vare of it. -

As notcu. insistence on un analyticaJIy illdepend­ent socio-cultural rca1m was a majar fcatuI'c of thc intel1(!ctual bísiOrv most relevant to the back!!:round of contemporary· socioJogkal theory. Esse~tial as lhl!:\ was. its proponents overshot the mnrk by tend­ing to deoy lhe relevance of ~ocia! interaction to the !'ubhwmm 'lcvels of the biologlcal worJd. :as welJ as lhe rdevanee oC lhe subhl1man prototypes of hu­man culture. But once thc fundamenta) analvtical lines havc been esrablished, ít becomes easier io at­tempt to restore this type of balance, and wc shall attempt to do S(1 at relevant ['1aces in our more de­tailed introductory materials. The c1earcst sinr.le trend since tben has becn al) increasinn insístc~ce 011 the importance of i'motivated" sodat'inrcraction thnmghom th~ biological evo]mionary sea le, espc­ciaJly in its higher reaches.

Social Sysiems amI --the lndÍ\'iduai." Another set of prohlcms has cmeiged puralle] 'to the basíc dÍs­tinctíon ben'-cen the ¡;tociO·cuItllríl1 ane! the "indi­vídml]" realms. ) llst as social and cultural svstems \Vere not cJcadv dlfferentíatet!, the behavíor'of the uorg,mísm" has tended cven more prcdomínantly 1() he trc.1ted ~tS a unitary object of scíentific nnalysis by psych()JOglstS. At thc same time. the problem of the roI~ of ]earning h~lS becn at the center 01' psy­choJog1cal prcoccupaiion. Cc)rres.pondingly, there has recently appcarcd an an al '1,' tical dístinction paralle! to toar betwecn social ~nd cultural ~vsw tems. one thU( discríminates becwccn thc "onÚí.n­ísm'· taken ~iS ~J.n anolyticill cutcgory, centering on ¡iS gencrkaIly glven constltulion so far as Ihis is rclevnnt 10 th\:! analysis oí bchavior .:md y on the other han<.t the Hperson<llity," tbe sy:-;[cm con-

Slítutcd by the learncd comp(~ncnts oí lhe organi:a­lüm 01' his bchavior.~

lo ()rga.nÍzin.~ our materíal in [he Rcadcr we bavc not tak.¡;;n cxpl ¡cit ilCCOUl1t 01' thís dís1i nctlt)n~ but have pUl togcrher, in P"rt Thrcc, aH rbe rnain materials bCáring on the d\!termimmls of social bchavíor relevan! ro thc analvtícal1v isolntcd "ímli~ vidual" ¡)!lO his intcrdcpen&~ncc ~vith social sys­tems. \Vhen we considcr tbcsc matcríals in more detaíl in the inrroductions to thut, Pnrt antl to its subsections. we will kcep this distinc(Íon in mind.

Society. Ecollomy, ancl Poli/v. QUIte c1carlv. the considerations rcgardíng the -principal areas of knowlcdge locatcd on the bound:.trics of ¡he thcorv of social systems COf1cern [he broad problem o'r dcfining the "jurisdíctions" 01' the disciplines vi/íthin the behavion~l Of <lclian area_ 'J.,!e do not propose to discuss this problem in detail hefe. Therc is, however, another set of prohlems imcrnaI 10 the SOCÜl.l svstem which shouh.l be mentíoned before pro?c(!d"ing. problems concernjng the place Di the subJect matten; of economics ,md politicaI sc:icncc. Clcar]y. bOlh are disciplines dealíng with phascs of the functioning of 1aree-scale and differentiat.ed socia1 svstcms. ~

Somé consider tbc scope of sociologv. in a rela­tiveJy encydopcdíc scnsc. to includc ;h phases of I.he SU'11cture and functioning 01 sodal s\'stems. Bv this definirion. economics "~nd poH¡ica] science would be brnnchcs of socioloov. This is noL bo\v­ever7 our conccption. In \'er~" ~'eneral lerms. the kind of problem 01' boundaries\\'hich adses bet~',:een $ocial l\ystems and other lypes of aClion systems :uises again wiihill toe socíal system. becoming mOre salienl L!.S such systems become more high!v differcntiated. Our víew is tbat the ccollomy'"'ood the polity should be trei11ed rlS fuoctional stlbsys­tcrns wilhín a socicty. Th~ primary CO(1cern of sod­olol!v is nor with thc functioning of these subsvs­ten;s, but Wilh the O1her two primñry functiona.l sllb­systems: ¡hOSe concerned v .. 'ith thc funcrions of integnltion and of '·pattcrn-maint~nancc." Between lhe laW~r. on [he one hand, and (he eCOnonw and pO¡ilY, 00 thc otber. there eXlsts the samc order of interdependence and ínterpenetration rhat exis1s betwccn social SVSiems (15 ~1 who1c and cultural and psychologica1 (e;pcciaIly personality) syslems.

The cconomíc and po1ítrc,a1 categorics occupy promíncnt places in the organization of the se]ec-

6. Thh dlstÍnctü');'l between (annlj'tícClII'y defmed) organism and pcrSO!laltly W,lS COL ínclud~'d in ¡he gencrtl1 ilO<llysis of syslems of 3clion r~!! forward by P.ITSOl1S 2nd Shils in Towarll r; General Thcorr oj AClitm (1951). Em~ phasif, OH its irnpon:mce ís a maw:r of subscquent de­~'eIOpmc1)l. II h.:\s been most fully sl.nted ín PursoDs' "An Apprmlch (O Psy¡;:hological Theory in Tcrrns o( lIle Theo!'y (Jf ActÍon," in Sígmuild Koch Ced.), l'srt'lwlo,íD': A Srud)' 01..7 Scí(!7tc.:, V(.\1. Hr (New York: McGrnw~Hil!, 1959).

T~l1cott Par~()ns: }\11 Outlinc of tIte Social Systcm 35

tions of p¡ut 1'wo. In deuling wíth thern, howcvet'. OUT m~\in concern \vill be \ví th instit ut ional S!rllct!lre

ratber th,m \""ith the types 01' functional imcrcon· nectlon mos! importí.lnt w the ccoDomist and the po1ítical scienrist. \Vc will select the Cl.':.pects of economies :md polities thaí are most dir~ct]y rele­\l<lnt to sociologic~11 interest_ The ra.tionale of ihis se1ective procedure witl be more fuJl)' explained in two places: Iatcr in the present General lntroduc· tion and in the IntroducUon 10 Part TINo_

This rationale will become more evidcnl as \Ve proceed_ Though it i5 truc that. bistorícally. thc fields of economic and oí pol!tical theory were defined before that of sociology, ít docs not foHow that the conception of sociolc;gy with which we are hCíe working is a residual one, In the first place_ in conncction with the prohlem of societal structure. we will deaI with the hierarchv of thc relatioos of control in asocial svstem: \\'~ wiII <l r~ lle that thc economic tlnd 1he political constitute I.WO distinct and relarivclv wen deñned levels. the t,,"o Jowcst in [he hicf<lrchy from the technícílI viewpoint of social-svstem anal\, sis.' The otber tW() levels, ¡hose dealin,g- \\:jrh the ~fllnClions of integratíon anu of patter~.nuín1C'nance. are not $:'sre'fnLHically de;:],] t with in eirhci of the O[hcr t"'o disciplines, nor aTe the\'. as functions in rhe social SYSlCm, merdv a sp'ccts of culture. ~ "

Thc second reason that sociology is not u residual scicncc ís a conscqucncc oí thc ftr'sL Thc problcms of social iocegration and of partcm-muintcnancc stand in a difTcrcnt relat10n to the motJvation of the indi .... idual than do adaplation and goakHtainmcm. Thc bner two are concerned primaril~- wíth the mechanisms of --rational" oricntation to LIle condi­tions of aclioJ't. a conccptíon most highly dc\'clopcd in economíc theorv_ Thc formcr 1\\'0, 011 thc othcr hand. have to do "with "nonrational"' factors, (hat i5, thosc involved in tbe operation of inremali::.ed value~ and norms_ This proccss. as \vill be partly developcd in this ess~\y, and more eXlcnsivcly in later introductory materials (lntroductions to Parl One, Section C; lo Pan Tbrec; <InJ to Part Four), is the essential basis of the phcnolllcnon of l/1,\'(i1l1-

tionalizatioll as sccn from the roiat of vicw oI the relation of lhe individual ro his socictv,

T}¡c Orgal1izatio/I <Jf SehJCliol1S in the Readcr_ It snould no\\' be c]enr (h,![ PaI'i$ TIlrcc ami Füur are designed to de"I with the t\Vo fundamcr1u\l ilre;JS

of "bo~ndary" problems of social systcm!:': 1hose re13,t1ng to lhe individual as a sys¡em, and those

7_ This \,'le\\' has been O1o_<;t f\lBy del'(!'h1ped ¡n Euuwmy aml SoC'ieJ,v_ \Vith respcc\ lO the polity ít is Wl\leWh~H further S9clled out in "'Voting' tlnd the Equilibrium oí thc American Po!i¡ical System," in E. Hurdíck o'nd A_ J. Brod­beck (eds.), America/l V'OlÍlIg Behador (Gle:lC(IC, lit.: Th~ Free PreSoS, 1959), especially in lhe Tcchnical NOle.

reIating to thc cultural systcm, The m.1Ín ¡rea[ment of the social svstem, in a more strictly autooomOll$ SC'l1SC', will be- found not onlv in the introductof\: marerials of Pan One but ::d~s:o in Parts Two and Fivc_ These (\\.'0 PMts ;:m~ broadlv distingtdshcd a,'; follo'ws: Pan Two de~\]s \\;itb the ~iclincatlon of th~ slructllre of social s\'sterns. indudinQ' ÜIC ¡nsttw· rion¡~lízed mechnnisnls lh2t rcglllatc 't'he proccsse~ \vithin the struclure; Pan Fivc concentn\leS upon the nrobJems C00nectcu with thc struciumI chanr!cs of s~cíal systems, the procC'sses by \vhich a gí\':"cn ¡,\,slem is 1.ransf(lrrncd inw on~ of íl. difTcrcm char~ ;,;c-tcr. whether it be throu,gh Slructural d¡ffl!rL'ntía~ tion O[ through a.n alterar ion of tyrc in 11 more fundamcnt:!l sensc.

Part One is composcd of sclections introducrory to the m-ain bodv of thc R~ader in thrce diffcr­cnt rcspcélS_ First, as e"plo.ined in the Prdace une! elaboruted in thc prcccding sectíon of this General lntroduction, \Ve conccive t.he generar ion spanning thf.:', ninctccnth and twentieth ccnturÍcs 8.S rbe one which est2.hlished the majo Unes of sodolo¡zic!ll [heorv rod a v. Before that ti['ne, the socíological c1em~nt W3S

J

much more diffuSí;c! 'in a !!~ncral t~adi­tion which had strong afiilí~\[¡ons \~i¡,h the rhi~ tosopby of histor,Y' :md with a general thcory of behavior oí the typc exemplitied by utilit:lrianisn1. S~ction A of Pan One 1S dcvoted to seicctions froiH the literaturc pl'cceding the decisive crystallizíng phase of thc nc\\'cr sociologkal Ihinking. In ihis St.~ction, :lS will he cxplained more fu!ly in lhe Fore­\":ord dc..-oteú spccific::rlly io it, ,ve na\T atfcmptcd to prcscnt sekctions embodyíng the most impon<J.nt conceptual materials urilízed by ]ater thcorists-

The otbcr 1\'.'0 scctions of Pan Onc conccm (he two aspecls of ,,"'hal \\'c conccive 10 be ¡he m(lst cemral conceptual componcnls underJying lhc dc­vc10pmcnt of a more tcchnical analysis of socb,l svs1cms ,lS sllch; s\'slcl'ns (lf interaclÍDn bel\l:C'c:n i~dividl1üls_ The t¡r~r of thes.e (Scctiútl B) C0nCerm {he ways ín which the aspccrs o( beha\'jcl[ dircctl~' invol\'cd in interactÍon ar~ focuscd reblh'e lO rnorc diffusc conccptions of thc general behavior of in­dividuals. Thcsc are the conccptuil} matcrials that havc lcd 10 thc baslc structund conccpts of role and collcctivít v: the two concepts will be m,,)re fully cxplalncd' prcscntly ;}nd ilhistratcd in fal' more d~­taH in th~ $t~kCI íons i rt P art T\\'o.

Scclíon e ()f ]\tft Onc. tinalh:. conccrns tbc baslc phcnomcnon o f ·'lOS! i tutio na íi'l.'¡ [le n_ " Tbi s con, sis\s cs,"cnti;,¡lIy ín ,he inlcgration ni' culturaI-partcm c1crncTlls a~ rhe levels of valllcs anJ norms \\:ith cJcmcnts of ÜIC Inolívalíc)!1:!l sys(cms of inLj¡\'iüua]s in SL!ch W<lYS as ro ddinc and SUr¡;OTt structUrcd systcms (:-f s'ocia! intcncrion, The sc!ecríc)ns hcre are ~r2anl W illustratc SOllle of thc m()st general lypes

36 GcncmI Introduction

of insight aCle! ana[ysís underJying rhe more dctllílcd Jevclopmcnts iI111slr~H~d in thc h.ltcr Pans oí thc work. Th\.> r.í.ltiünak of lhe sdcclion amI organiza­tíOIl \,..,ith rc~pcct lo all Lhrcc of ¡hese inl roductory themcs wlII be rJiscw,scd more flllly in the relevant introo ll\:tions.

A Paradigm jor tite AJlalysis

oj Social Syslems

Le{ uso no\\! wrn (O 3. more detüiled discussion of our conccption ()f a social sYSlem. First, the cÚI1cept úf intcrpcnetration implie:s lhaL howcver important logical clo~urc may be as a theorctical ideal, empiri­caJJy soci~.d svstcms are cOl1ceived as opell systems, engagcd in éomplicl:üed proccsses of íntcrchange with envíroning sysrcms. The environing systems includc, in thís C8se, cultura] .md pcrsonality ~ys­tems, the bchaviorlll and other subsystems of the organism, and, through the organism. [he physical enviroL'nilcnt. The same: logic applics internaI1y to social svstcms. concdvcd as dilrcrentiated ílnd scgn1cméd joto a plumlity of suhsystems, each of \vhich must be treatcd analyrically as an opel1 system imcrchanging with cnvíroning subsyslems of r.he [arger ~vstcm.

The co'ñcep"t of an üpcn system intcrchanging with environ,íng systems. also implics !>o!Oularies and their maínlen::mce. \Vhen a sel of inte,rdcpcnd­ene pht~nornena shows sutlkiently definítc pattcrn­ing and stabililV over time. then we can sav that it h:¡s :.'1 "struetllr~)' and lbat jI. is fmitful to t~cat ir as a "system." A bouodary means simply (ha! a theoreüerllJy and empírically significant differcnce betwcen strllctures and prl.')cesses internal to the ~wstcm and those ex[ern¡~I 10 it exísrs ¡:¡nd lends to be rílaintained. In so fn.r ::ts bonndaries in this sense do not cxist. j( is not possíble 10 identify a set of inrer· dependent phenomemt as a system: it i~ mcrged in some other, more extensive svstem. It is thus irn­portant to distinguish a set' of phcnamena not meant to cünstitutc a SV$tem in the thcoretjcaUv rcJevant sense--c,g.. a ·certlin typc of statisticál sampJc of a popuIatíon-from a true syslem.

Slructzmzl ami FUlIctional j\1od(.~s 01 Analvsis. Bes.jdes idemifyíng a system in tcrms of its pattcflls and boundaries. a socia1 svstem can and should be anatyzed in te~)s of thrce' logical1y lndependcnt­i.c" CfOSs-cllUing--bllt aIsu intcrdependent, bases or ax:es ~,)f variabílitv. or as thev mav be called buses of selecr.i\c ahstr~c!h:)O. 0°, ,

The firsl of thesc is best defined in relation to the Jístinctio{) bet wcen "struct1.lrar and "'functional" rcference~ for :.ma!ysis. Howevcr relative these two conccpts may be. rhc distinction betwcen thcm is híghly importuuL The c.mcepl of slruccurc focuses

on those clcmcrus ()f rhe patterning of tbe systcm which may be rcgarded as inuepcndcnt al l.he lowcr-"Implhude and shortcr time-mnge lluctua­tians ln thc relation of the svstem ro its externa1 siluutíon. It thus dcsignatcs tt{c fcaturcs of the sys­lem which can, in ccrtain strategic respec.s, be Irealed as constants OVcr ccrtain ranges of v¡lrÍation in thc bchavíor of other significant element8 of the theorctical pl"()bJem.

Tbus, in a broad sensc, the American Constitu­tion has remained a stable rcfcrcncc point ovcr a period of more than a ccntury and a halL During this time, of course, the structure of American socicty has chtmged very greatly in certain respects: there bavc beco changcs in legal tcrms, through legisIation, through legal intcrpretations. and througb more informal processes. But the federal state. the divisíon bClween legislativc and exccurive branches of government, Ihe indepcndent judiciary, thc separMion ol church and stare, the basic rights of personal libcny, of assembly, and ()f property, and a variety of Nher features have for most pur­poses remained constant.

The functíonaJ reference, un thc ofher hand. diverges from the Slfuctural in tbe "dvnamic" direc-60n. Its primary theoretical sjgniñcáncc is integra­tive; functional considerarions relate te 1he prob­lem of mediatlon betwecn two fundamental sets of cxigcncies: those imposed by the relative constancy or "givenness" of a structure, and those imposcd by the givenness of lhe cnvironing símution externa] te the svslern. Síncc onlv ín él theoreticallv limiting case Ct:l~ thcse two be asstlmed to stand in :~ constant re)ation to cach orbcr, tbere wiII necessari1y exist a system of dynamic processes and mechanisms.

Concepts like <"structureH and '"funClion" can be considered as either concrete or anaJvticaI. Our present concern ls witb their an~ilyticai me~llling; we wish to state ín a preliminaty way a fundamental proposition abOlH the structure of social systems rhat will be cnlarged upon Ialer,·-'namely. that their structure as treated within the trame of reference of action comisü in institutionalized pattems of nor­mative culture. J( conslsts in components of tbe organísms {)r personalíties oI the participating indi­vidua)s only so fal' as. these "interpenetratc" Wilh the social and cultural svstems, Le .. are ·'internal­ized" in the personalitv ilnd organísm of the indi­viduaL 1 shall presentJy discl1sS the problem of clnssifyiog the elements of norm<.uive culture that enter into the structure of social SVSlems.

Tbe functional categories of social systems con­cern, tben, those features in terms of \'.'hich sys­tcm:nicaIly ordered modes of ad justmcnt operate in the changing relations between a given set of patrerns oí institutional1y establíshed structure in

Ta1cott Parsons: 1\n OUUille tlt the Social Systcm

the system anu a given sct of propenies oí' lh~ relc­vam cnvironing svstCI1l~. Hís{orici.JUv, thc most com­mon model on ~lihich Lhis relatío'nship has bccn based is that of the bchavjncf! organism. as u:;>cd 1n psychological think.ing. Fro"m tl1i5 paint oí vícw, [he functíonaJ problem is thal of analyzíng the mechanisms which make orderly response to en­vi ronment al conditions p05sib!e. \Vhen us.íng thís model in anaJvzíng social svstems, however, we Ircat llot onlv ¡he c'ñvironmclit but lhe s~ructufc oE the systcm as problemalical and subject te changc, in a scnsc \vhich !roes farthcr ¡han .he IraditionaI behav¡or psychol(.·;gist h,ls beco .\ccustomed to gO.6

In íntcrpretíng this posítion. Olle s.hould rcmem­ocr that the immediatdy environíng syo;tems of a social SV$tem are no[ Ihose of lhe physíC1l1 environ­menL They are. rather, the olhcr prímary subs)'s­tcms of thc genera! system of acLíon-i.e .. the pcrs<:mallties of íts individual nlt!mbers. thl;' be· havíorally organízcd aspccts oí the orgaoisms underlying thosC' pcrsonalítlcs, and the relevant cultura} svstcm~ in );0 far ~s lile\! art.~ not. fullv insti­tutionalizcd in the social SVS[C~1 but involv~ COin­

poncnls mher than "normative paneros 01' culture" that are inslÍlutionHlized.n

'4DYllilmic" A1ode,<; oÍ Analysis. The: ímportance of lhe second basís or ¡\xis (lf empirical V<J ríability, and hence oí theoretkal problem formulation, fol-10\\'s dircctly, A fundamental d istinct ion nlllSi be made betwecn two orders of "dynamic" problerns re.lative to a g,íven svstém. The first of these C(.'lncerns

Ihe proccsse~s whí~h go on under the aS511mption that the structural panerns of institution;!lized cul­rure are given. i.!.::., are assumed (O rcmain const:mt. This is die arca 01: problems of etjuilibrll/n/ [lS thai conccpt has becn uscd by PaTeto. Henderson. and others. and oí homeotltasis as usC'd bv CannoD, The signíficance of such pmblcms ís dír~ctly connccted wüh both the concept of sysrem und the way:. in whieh "ve havc dcfined lhe rc1ation betwccn s.truc­ture and fLlOCtíOI1.

The conccpl of equilibrium is a fundamental rcf­erence pOlm for analyzing the procc,;s.:s hy whích a systcm either comes to tCTms wÍrh thc c.'¡gendcs imposed by ti c}¡(l1Ilting environmem. wíthout eSSC)1-

ti~ll changc in its own structllrc. or enils w come lO (erms and unúcrgoes othcr proc:c~ses, SLJch as ~Iruc­tural ch~\Oge. disso)Uliol1 as a boundary-rnaínwining

8. In oddilioo, of course, oue .maJysis í~ cOllchecl ex, plicíl1y in t~rm.:i oí a<:liOIl 4.lnd núl ol (he t>P\! v[ pby~i(l.Ogy wnich has Su pn:~(~c\.lpíed many behLlVi()r p1iyC'nologi:.ts.

~. lL 1$ loo tedmicaJ ~1lI ís!>uc. lo h~'l e, bm W~ would tllkc Lhe pos;tion th~\t a "y!)\c!1l in ¡he alll.llylictii scnsc has I!O ioull~Jiáfe and dícect mplll-oU¡ pilt imer.:lu.mge Wílh Ih\.' phYSIC~l ~IlVil'(.mllH!'nl; al) ::,uch in(t~r~ CJ1,,uIgé, which ís of cruda! jm.lJort~UKl" empirica.lly, is rncdlalcd. lIHougil the "beh<lv\oral org.mis.m."

Siystcrl"! (ana]ügous tI,) bíolo!!.ical death for the or~ ganism). or lhe consolitbiioll ()f sorne impairrncm lending to thc e~tahlishmcm of secondllPi Slructurcs of a ::'pathologícal" chal'nctcr, Thcor~ticall'y, thc conccpt of cqullibrium has ti normal¡ve rcf~rcncc in only one sen se. Sincc thc stn.lClUfC of social S\"$~ lems CümiSl& in ín:;tltutionalízed norm¡jtív~ cultu·rc, thc "maínrcn~lnc(''' of thcsc normativc p~ttlern$ ¡~ a ba!)ic rdcrcncc PQinl fol' ;.malyzíng lhe cquílibr'ium of lhe system. Ho\vev¡;r. \\ hcthcr thi~ main1.en:!nce actuallv O(;C\.lr~ Of no1. and in wh~¡ mC;lsurc. tS

c11lircl}' un cl11piríCtll quc:-.cjon. Furtilcrm();c, "dís­c'ILlilibrium" may lc~\d tO s(ructur~1 ch~tnge v.hicn. fro[[l a hJgher-order nonna\ivc püint üf view, lS dcs¡rabl~.

The sccond set 01' dvn:m,ic pfoblt.'fi1s <.:C!ncerns pr(Jcesses involvin~ cha~nQc jn (he ~tnlCturC of rhe sy~tem itsclL This "in\!olv;s. aho\'c t\tL problcms üf imcrcharu.!c \-viln Lile cultural svstcm. howc,'cr D"1uch lhcse ma.v~· in Lurn urpcnu llpO';l tht! im~rnal st:::,tc of ihc social svsrcm and ils rclatíons lo othe!' e-nviron­ing s\·slC'm~. Lcavíng disrincrions withín tbe cate­go'-ry 'of intt!rn,ll adJil&tivc PfOC¡;~SCS ;)",idc for lhe mornenl, one can fi:Jy th¡LI, with rcspcc( (O íts cx­tcrnal intcrcluUlgt.:,';, problcms of cquilíbriLlm lor thc socía] sygtcm involvl! primarily its rdations m its individual members ~IS pefsünalüics. and 01"­

g¿:lllísms, ano, tluough thesc, H.1 1he physical en­vÍrünmenL Problems. of SlrUC{Unl] ch::mgc, on rhe orher hand. prímarily involvc its rclations tl':'1 th!.." cultural svs.lems afrecHng its palterns of Ínslitu­tkmalized""normativC' cultl.~rc-

Hnw¿,vcr fundarncntaJ thc distin..::tilm od\\'(.·cn dynamic prohIcms. \\hích do and dI) 11()1 ln\.'olve struc1mal change m:·.y he, thc grcaL irnportancc 01' an íntcrmcdialc or mixcu C~ISl~ !;,hould be t'mpha~ sizcd. Thís is t.hc problcm (1f chí.lng~ ínvol\ing the strudure 01' subsv~k'ms of ¡he social ~\-S(t:m. htH

not the oH'r-::I.B structurul p<lltern. Th~~ mns( im­portanL caSe in this CalCg(H)' is Ih;11 01' procc~scs or structi.lral dilTcrcnti;Híon, Strilclur~ll diil"cn::n¡iil­[ion ío\"olvcs !2;cnllinc n>¡wf.:(mi;:atioJl of !he s\stcm and., thercfofc. fund,¡fl1cn-zal 5truciUral chan-t:e of variolls suh:-;ystcms and theír rcb¡jons ro cacn t,:;'l"lcr, Its analysís ·thcícforc pr~scnt\ problcms o[ strLlc~ Imal chúogc rOl" toe rckvtint .':ilIb8V~LCms, bm not ín the samc ~';;(,ilSC ror lhe wslem ';tS a \\ holco Th0 problcm;.; inVL)!\'cd corn:(':r~ ¡he o!'l:::anizmion of the ~trucn.lraf cnmpoJ'lcnts (lf socbl ~yslcm:-;, r~"lnícu­lar1y tiJe hlcr~lrch¡cal on!er in \\ hich hi.'".\' are p!:\cea, Furthcr discussíon wiH havé tn :.tw:tit d\.lrificatJt1n of (hes.:- problcrns.

TIte lIieparchy o/ RdalipllS <,1) e/mlro/. Thc third of tbe thrct: essc3rl1ial ax¡;~ of LhL'orcti¡;al ana!\'sis lliLiV b~ ddltlcd USo c()nccrniog a hícrardl\' of r~ia­tiü[-¡s of cOIHroL "fhe i..k\'d()r~nt..:l.1t l:lf theory in tbc

38 CCI1cm1 IntJOdllcUon

past gcncrmj(\n in bo(h the biological and (he IX'ha\'iMal scicnccs hi1s n!vcaiL'd the primar)' source or (be <liflkul! v undcrlvinc (he promincm red l/e­l ¡()ni~m 01' so l;HTc.h CtU~¡¡c~ lhou!;':hL This WHS lhe redllc(j()nist lCl1lkncy to ignore {'"he imponancc of the \vays in whjclllh~ org;mization of living sysrcms ínvnll.,'cd strtlctUfCS amI med1ün¡~ms that ()peraced as agencies of control---in lhe cvbcrmnic $cnse of cOíllr<))---of iheir mctaholic ~lntí bchlwioral proc­csscs. Thc c<Jnccpt of the "bch:lYior~1l orgpnism" pUl f()rw~,nl aboye is tnat of a eybcrnetic systcm loc:ncd m¡¡inlv in [he central ncrvous SVSlcm_ whích ()pCn.HL~'s throi',gh scvcml int~~rmedbry-mcchanísms lo control (he m.:.:tuhalÍc proecsscs of the organism and th¿ hehaví()r~d use oi its physíca1 facílíljeS, such as lhl~ rlloli()ns of Hmhs.

The basíc SLlbsvs(cms of the general svstcrn of actit)D constttme ;~ hierarchic¡¡) :-;~~"ks of 5l~ch agen­cies of control of lhe behnvior of individl1al~ or 11l'ganisms, The behavioral orgnnism is the point of artícubtion of toe svstem of <lctíon \vílh Lhe I1na-

. tomica[~physiol()gíC<.l·J fC¿'lturcs of lhe: physical 0[­gunism and ís lts point of contacl wilh thc physi­e.1I ~n\'iron!l1enL The personálity systcm ¡s. in lurn, a system 01' control ovcr thc bl'havíüral or!.!:anism~ the/ social system. ovcr the pcrsonalitícs of ~hs par­tícipming mcmbers: and the culmral system~ a s\'stcm of conlrol rcbtive te social sv,stcms. / It may help íf we inustrate the nat~re of this type

of hciraJ"chical rC'lalionship by discussing the sense in \vhich the social systt:'m "conl mIs" the pcrson­<tlity. Therc are tWCI maln empiric:.ll points al which thi~ cüntrol oper.ate~\ thOllgh lile principIes involved are [he same in both cases. FirsL lh~ situation Ín which any givcn individu~ll ~icls ¡s. far more tilan noy otber sel of factot's. camposcd ()f O/ha indi­víduals. not discrelelv but ín ordcrt::d scts of rela­tícmship 11.1 lile individual in poim. Hencc, as lhc sourCe of h¡!) principal facilities of action and of his princip:::d rewards nnd dcprivali(:ms, {he concrete SO~ ciaJ system excrci~es a powcrftlJ c(mlroJ (lver the ac­lion oÍ any concrc(c. ¡\duh individual. Howe\'cr. the ptllltTnillg of .he I1lOlívi.itlonal system in term:\ of whidl he f,\ces this sitll¡Jtíon a1so depend;;; upon lhe ~oclal systcm. hecrruse his own persona];¡: !ilntC!i/.f(!

h~tS neen '\hnped through lhe intern4l1iz:ltiol1 of sys­tcrn$ üf ~oci¡¡J objccts and of lhe paHems of inst1-lulíonalizt.:d culture::. This point. it should be made cJc.lr, ¡~ indepeo{lcnt of {he scnsc in \.vhích ínJi­vidl.Hds are cancrelCly aut.onomou~ or crcí1tíve rather (han "p:as"ive" or "coniorming," f(,)f ¡ndi­vióu<llilv ;}nú creotivity are, lO a con:,idcrable cx.tcnt. pbcnon{crm 01 thc in-stitutiona!ization 01' cxpccta~ lions. 'fhc socí:ll ~ys!cm which contro!~ thc pcr~on­aiity 150 hen:: C'ünccívcd ¡)nn.!ytícnlly. n~)t cüncr~tcly.

Thí:,. prohlcrn will he further díscuS5cLI in ihe Intro­duciit)fl Lo (>¡Irt Three.

Control ReJmio1!s wiihin I/¡e SuduJ Sys/eJll. The samc basic principlc of cybcrtlctic hicmrchy th<1t Hpplics to rhe rcla.¡jons hctwccn general subsystcms ()f ;lction applies ~lgaill )\'Ílhill each or thcm, notubly to social ~ystcms. wbich is of prim~lry conccrn hcrc. Tlle priuciplc of thc order of cybcrnctic priority, cümbim'u wiih primacy of relcvancc to lhe difTcrent hOllntlnry~íntcrchangc exigencias of (he xystcm, wíl1 be llSCtl as Ihe fund~\mcnlal basis for clnssífying lhe compollcms of social syslcms, Thc rclcvancc:: of this hierJrchy appties. of (':OIJTSC. lo a11 thc com­poncnts distinguishcd according to the tjrst of OUZ'

thrce rangcs of ..... ariatíon, to SlnlcWres. fUIIctions. mcch,mísms, anu catcgories of input Hno output.

The rnost slnllegrc starting poinl for expInining this bnsic ser oí dassificntions lS the category of funcllons, the link between thc structuraJ ;md the dynal11ic aspecls of the system. 1 huve suggcsted that it té; possiblc lO reduce (he essentiaJ functional imperativos of any system of action, and henec of any social system. tú four. v.:hich '1 havc caneu pattern~maintenance, íntcgration, goal-auainment j

and adaptntion. Thcse ure lisled in arder of signifi­cance from thc point of viow of cybernetic control of actit)Il processes in the Sy5teID type under can­sídt!rution.

Thl! f'mlclion 01 Pal1em-MaintclwJ1ce. The func-1í()O of pattcrn-maintenance refen; t<:~ tJ)C imperative of mainlaining the SI ahiliry of the patterns oí" insti­tutlonalized culture dcnnjn!! ¡he structure of the systel11. Therc are {wo distin"'ct ílspects of thís fUT1C­lional lmpcrativc. Thc Hrst coneerns Ihe ch<lr;¡cter of the normativo pattern il'self; the second conccrns its srate (jf "institutÍonalization:" F {om thc painl of víew of the individual partícípant in il social sys1em.

'this mav be ealled his motivatiúnal commirmt'J1I to ¡iCt in ,~"cc.(\rdance wíth cerlain normarive patterns~ 1 his, as we shal1 !)ee. Íllvolves. lheir "'inl ernalizaüon·' in lhe slrueton: of his pers()nalüy.

Accordingly. thc focus. of pattern-mainlenance líes in (he struclural categorv of vcdlles, which wiH be discusscd prt!sendy, ~ In" this conncction. the

I essential function is maintenancc. at the cul!urlll leveL of 1he stability of instítutíon,alizcd values through lh\'! pro~esscs \.vhích articulate va]ues ""iIh thc: belid SVSlem. namelv. religious hdícfs. ¡de­ology. ami the (íke. Valucs: oí CO~trse. are subject to changc. bu( \,,'hcth~r thc cmpirical telldcncy he IowJrd stabiJity or not.. lhc pmemialíties of disrup­tion from this source are verv grcaL and it is cssen­lial 10 lonk for m~chanism~ lhar tend 10 protect such order--even if it is orllerliness in the process of change.

Thc ~econd tiSpeCI of this cOli1roI function con-

T'falcott PtlfSOns: An Dlltlíne ot tll(~ Socü¡] 39

ceros the motivatíonaI commitment oí the indi­vidual-elsewhere caBed "lensioll-managemenL" A very central problem ís that of rhe mecliimisms of socialízatíon of the individual. Le., of the processes bv which the vaJues of the socíetv are íntcrnalizcd in his pcrsonality. BU( even when ~nlucs havL~ become intcmalízed, thc cornmítments ¡nvolved are sUbjccl to different kinds oí strain. Much insíght has re­cently been gaincd about the wnys in \"hích such mcchanisms as ritual. variolls types ot exprcssive symbolism, the arts, ami índeed recreatíon. operatc in thís conncctiol1. Durkheinfs anaIvsis of thc 1'unc­tions 01' rclígioLls rítual ",ay be said lO constitllLe the main poinl of depnrtlll;e here.

Pattern-maintenance ln this scnsc plays a part in the theorv oL sodal svstems. a¡; of other svslems of acti<>n. ~omparablc Oto that of the con;cpt of incrtia in rncchanics. It serves as the most fUllda~ mental refcrence poinl 10 which th~ analy ... is of other, more variable f :let o rs can be re ¡aeed. Propcrly conceived and lIscd. i, does not ímply lhe c111pirical predominance of stahility over change. I-lm,vever. when we suy lhat. because of this sct of flloctíOll,ll exigencies, social svstcms show a felldenc\' to malll­Lai~ thcir strllctur¡;¡ paHcrns. we say esscl~líally two things. First we províde él rcfcrcnc(" point for lhe orderly ana)ysÍs of a ""hale range of prob1em~ of varifltion whíC'h can be trc;ltcd as arlsinc from sources orhe}' than proccsses af struclural '-change in ,he svstem, ¡neludíng. in {he Iaucr CÚ1'lccpL its dissoluti,m. Second, \.Ve "-make it c1ear !hm whcn we do <\OaIyze s[ructural change 'Are are denling with r\

ditrcrent kind of thcoretical problem than th<H ín~ volved in equiiibratiC'n. Hcnce, there is " dirccl re­lation bc[\vcen the function ('tf patlcrn-maintenancC' -as di'itinguishcd from the other t'hrct' funcLionnl imperatíve;-and thc distincljon bet\l/een problems of equilibrium analysis. on the one h<.tnd. and the analv~í'S 01: stntctuml ch:lngc on lhe other. The distí~ctí()n betwecn these t~·() types 01: prohlems comes 10 füClIS .1t this point in "he paradígm.

TIre Ftmcti(Jll o/ Goal-A twifllllent. Fol' purposcs of cxposition il seems best lo abandon lhe ()rder of control set forlh ahove and to conCClHratc next llpan lhe functlon of gOJl-attainment ~md ltS rcIa .. líon t() adaptation. 1 n conl rast to the conslancy ()f institution:llized cultural patterns. we hHVC c-mpha­sized tne varí;:lbiJilv 01' a svstenú rC'latÍon to íts situutíon. Thc functíons of goal-auainmcm ;:lnu ad(lpt<ltion concern the structurcs, mcchanisms. und processes involved in this rclntion.

\Ve have compared pultcrn-maintenancc \vith incrtía as llscd in the thcorv 01' mechanics. Goal­auaimnenl then becomes a :'problenf' in so far as therc aríses somc discrepancy bctwecn the íncninl tcndencies of the systcm ana its "nccds" rcsulting

from interchanl!c Wilh lht~ sinultlOn. Such nceds necessarilv arise because the internal svstcm and the envir(~ning ones cannot be expeclcrÍ to follo\\: immediatc1y the ch~ulgíng oi' process. l

" A go~,l is therefore del1ned in of cg lliJibri mi."l. le is a directiünai change that tencls to reduce the discrepancy bctwccn ¡-he needs of the S)'Jiilcm. \l;Ílh respect to inpttt-output ::md t.hc C'ondí-tÍons in the environin!.!; b<:'ur upon the HfuItIIment" oC qlch'" flct:!ds, Cioal-att':lÍnmcnt or goal-orientati()n is tlws. hy contrast \v¡th r~Hcrn­maintcnancc. css~ntüllly tícd ro a srt~cifk sltualion.

A social svstem with onl\' one ('oal dctln('d in rcbtlon to ,,~ gencrlG1ily cr~lci:l[ shlmt'¡onal p('ob-1(,111, is conceivablc. [Vh)st oflcl1. hO\\'t:vcc rhe siwa­tion ¡~ complex. with nmny gon]s ;UHl rrobkms. [n slIch 3. case two fu rthc r considcnü¡ ons Tll USl r.c takcn into account. Fir$!. 10 pn.:m:Cl lite inrcu-rÍI\' of the svstcm. the ;'\cveral goals mus! be arn,ñgc~i in sorne ~cale of rcJative ur~'éncv. a scalc stl(fkíC~ll\' t1exible ro alIow for variations in the sltuatioli. Fo~ any compkx syStcm, thcrdore. h is nCCCSS:Hy fo spc:Jk of :..¡ systcm ()f goals rather 1han of a single unit:lty goal. a systcm. howevcr, \\thich musr have sorne balance belwccn intcgration as :\ s"stcm and flexible ndjustmcnt tú chllnging prcssures.-'

Por the social svsiem ::\5. such. lhe .tocus of íls f!o;:d-orientntion HC':,; in it¡¡ rch.ltíon as a :wstcm tn tbc pefsonalitics of the pnrticipming ínJivfdu::d'l_ It conccrns, thereforc, nOl commitment to t he vahr<:" of thc socicty, bur motivation ro contribl.llc what ís !l{:"cc~S;\ rv tor thc fUliclionlng of thc svstcm; (hese "con[rib~1tions" va fV accordil1g' (o parti¿'ular cxi!.!cn­cíes. For eX:1mple.' c:onsidcri';-g Amcric<ln ~ocfcty, onc mav sugr.~st 1hat, gívcn che majn SVS1crn óf valLtcs, 'thcr~"'has beca -,n lhe, cold-\\'~lr -pcriod majar problem of mot¡vating largc sector:; ('Ir the populntion LO rhc lcvi::' 1 of nallona] {'fIon n:~qll¡r~d tú susmin a position of world lí:::ider::o.hip in a unstabfc and nlpidly changing situ~\tí(\n. 1 inlerprc! mllch of the scnSl" ('ir frus! ration in ísoI'ltionism and :--'lcC:rr1h\'lsrn <l'ií. manifcstatio(l<¡ of thc stmins resulrine from th¡~ pn:)blcm.

The F1I1Iclioll of ~~daptari01;. Thc sccond COil­

sl'gucncc of p)urality of goaJs. ho\Vcvcr. conct?l'n:'­the ditTcrcnce hel\ ... ·cNl tbe funí.'tions of '-U,,,-.lll,l

lf}. \\'hcn we Si't!'élk of lhe ru,W'1 r¡ oi tne !cndin¡::, lO t",<main C'on!>.t,m!. \Ve ~'Ile;!n :his in an l>cnsc. Thc {mlptH~ {O C"n, .. irolling !-y;.,((:';'l'11'; nc:ed mH r~;main LOO!'!:,nl in rile sum{~ scnSl', amI ¡lle-ir 'i'~lrin!Í0n~ m¡l\! dü,lurl- lhl:' rd<lIifmship ll! Iht' í.'lwiwning 's}"aem, l'jm:: "('oH i~~l! ¡ lHl 1\1:11' be ,>!;lbly i n"IÍIU ¡ Í()¡1(t] i1td in ~¡ .:. ",,,'1,,,,·.1 sens!.: bur I csulI JI} a c:unl in uíng. O\JI pUl ~)f lll"W t..lI()w!,·(If~I' whích ís ;, dyunrl.li..: (;u,:!O; in Ihe ~}~lCrn'~ lntt:r'(:h.::mge~ its SilllLllí(i!L

tI, eL lhc !,1ll11Cr, PM'~,)n$> ·'\kC:lflbyi!.1n ,md Am~[k,!J1 SociilI TcnsÍúl1_'" l·a;" Rcdew, \\'intc". 1?5~, 1(1."111)111(:0 m, Chapo 7, Strflt:?!ir¡- t,jtl,i 1'J"();.'(.'s.<; !JI ,\fod,>!'I1 ;;.('d(!iii'~.

40 Ceneral Introdw.:t'ioJl

mcnt itnu adaptation. \Vhen thcrc j~ onl)" one goal) th..; problem ol' cvalu:11íng thc uscfulnc5s ()f facilltics is nflrrowcd do .... vn (O thelr reJevanc:c to :-tuaining Ihis particlIbr gonl. \Vith a pluraIity of goa)s. how': cvcr. the problcm of "cosr' ar¡se~. That is, thc same scarcc f:lciJítlcs will havc alIentalh't> tls;':S wlthín (he S\'Slcm of ()(H!}s. nnd hcncc thcir LJ:)C für Dne pur­l;ose mc,'tn~ sacriflcing the glliilS that would have hccn dcrivcd lrom thel" use for anothcr" It lS on this basis lh:lt an analytícill di;.¡finctíon must be made hetwccn thc hmcÚ()n 01" drcctíve gonl-aUaínment Llml1hat ot providíng diliposab!e hcfííti~s indepcnd­cnt of lhcir re{¡;vanc..:.: 10 <il'ly particular goal. The adaptivc funct!()r) is ucfincd o$lhc rrovision oC sllch facilities.

Jusi as 1herc 15 a pluralism of lt:"wer-order. more concrete goal;.,-, tnere is Lilso ~l pluralism of re!.)t!vc]y concrete f<lcililies. Hcncc tocre is ,1 pan\lIel proh· Icm ()f the organizmíon of sucll facilities in ~l svs­t\!n1. The rrin~ary cricerion is thc rrovision of tlexi­biJity. so Ú.tf as thís ¡s compdliblc wÍlh effectiveness: f:(lr th~ i'iys(cm" thi& means a mnximutTl of 2enera]­ízed disp'osability in the pwcesses of :lHocation' be­tween alternative uses. \Vithin ¡he c(,)mplcx type of socülI system, thís disrosability of facilitíes crystallizes abouL [he institutionillizalíon of monev and m:lrkets. More generally_ :lt the macroscopi~ ~ocia]~syslem JcvcL the functkm ()f goal-aHainment is the fOCllS of the roliticnl orgnnízation of socielies, ;,";hile that oí adaptation 18 the focus of economic orlZaniz.ation."jt

rile rnost importan! I<inds of facilities Jnvolve control (ir physic:tll objccts. nccess to the scrvíces (lf human ~H~ents and certnin cultural clements. For' their mech~nisms of control io be at all hil!hlV generaIized l particular units of such resourccs ñ;ust he -'a1icnable," i 'C" not bound to specific uses through a~cripnon. Thc m3rket system is thus a prímMY focus of thc socicty's orgunization for

'12. h sl10llld bc llOlcd th,:t lhe ab(l'i~ {ormulalÍon of tlle ~unC't~ol\of ~d.:tp¡:nliol~ cardully Q't'()id5 nny imt::lication Ih'l{ p3~5lve adJustOlC'm I~ the keYI'lote' c;f ~ldüj)tl.i1lOn. Ach,Pl3'

,km is relativc ,() lhe v:llucs ¡\na :~ü:;ls of lhe sysLem. "Good adnplíltío[lH rmly cen5í~t "jthcT' in p~ls:;iv~ ¡¡cceptance of wncHIl<)Jls ",,'ilh mlnimin\!íoJ1 of rísk or in a~ti\'e master}' af condítíon::i. The Ínclu"iún of active mas/e!'y in the CCtnCI::pL

oi aL'iélpt¡ilíOIl i5 one oC Ihe ll10sr imporialll lendcncics. of recen! d~YIi'i()pmcn~!; Ín biologica! thcc[v. An important rdcliion lx:!wccn ~hc lWo ítlHcl¡om.l C~lí~~górjes oC !!()~1-allílíl1mcm :md 3,d,lpU¡tion ílnd rhe O!(l c¡¡tcLwríe5 of ends :::md mcrtns should be nOkJ. The hns.ic (jiscrimlilafíOII oí end!\ .1mi m~';HiS rn~\y be :\<~i(J lo bt' ¡he i\pecial c~"st':, ror thi! fJf!rsonality :;ys{em, oC lht" more gi:'neul discrrmina¡ion of Ih~ funcLiOll!'l of g.oaJ~(¡nainmcnt nnd adapr:!iitm. lo at­wmpting lO ')(.!uee~,<: aIíalysls cf sodal beh:CiVíi)[' .in1() tbi!. fl arnework. UlíJiwrirm dlfC!Y was ~llilly b01h ól' nnrrowing H (() Ihe- pt:'n.onalil, ca~ (i.ibo\'~ rdl. d~nying lhe indcpendk t'nl ;mal)i(ic~~! signilk~)¡)cc (if :)oci;¡} SY.'J(N1')S.} mH.1 oi' looking ¡he indept:ndenl $i~,m¡fícélncc' of the: {unclion$ p¡¡lh:rn-maÍntenanCé a.nd 01' it~tcgr(ltíun 01' ¡,ocí31 systems themsclves.

auaptalÍOI1, Comparnblc features opcr:lte in less diffcrcntiatcd sodetics, and in more dinercntiated 5ubsystcms whcrc mmkcts do fJot penetrate. sLIch as thc familv::J

\Vithin a givcn systcm, goal-,mainrnent is ti. more imporlarll control thi.lJl adaptation. Facilities sub­serve thc aUainment oC goals, not vice vcrsa­lhough of course the provísíon or "productionH of facílides may itsclf be a goal. with a place within the more general systcl1l of goals. Thcrt! arco how­eVCf, compllcations in the impllcutions ()f this srate­mcnt.

Tire FUIlC'lioll 01 Integration, The last of the four functional jmperatives of a syslern oi actíon-in our case, a social svstcm-1s tnal of intcJ:!ration. In tbe control híentrchv. this stands bc1wce; thc func­tions of pattern-maintenance Hnd gOfl]-<tltaÍnment. Our rccognition of thc sígnificance of integration ímplies that a11 systems, except for a Hmiting case. are differenliated and scgmclHcd ioto relatívely in­dependent uníts, Le., must be 1re:lIed as boundarv­majntaining systems withín <ln envirollmenl of other sVSlems, which jn this case are other sllbsvs­tems oí the same, mOre inclusive system. Thc fu~c­tional problem of intcgration con~crns thc mutual ndju5tments of thcsc -;:-'unHs" OT subsvstems fram the point of view of their "contribuÚons" to the effcctive functioning o[ lhe system as a wholc. This, in turn, concerns theír reJation 10 the pattern­maíntenance problern. as \Ven as to the external sÍlu­ation through processes ol goal-atlainment and adaptaiiún,

In a highly ditIerentiated society, the primary focus oi {he integrative functton is found in its system of legal nNrns and the agencies í.lssociated wilh Í1s managemenL notably the courts and the legal profession. Legal norms at this leve}, rather than th~u of a supreme constitution, govern the allocatitm oí rj~hls and oblii!i){iol1s. of facilities and rewards. betw;en different units of (he complex system; such norms facilitate internal ad juslmcnts compatible with the s1abílily of the value system 01'

ics orderIy change. as wen HS with adaptation to the shliting demanrls of rhe externa! síluation. The institutionaJization of moncy and po¡.ver are pri­mariIy integnlljvc phcnomenn, like other mecha­nisms of social control in the narrower sensc. These probicrns wi1l be furlher discussed in late, sectlons of lhis cssay.

For any given type oi system-here. the soci.\I­the íntegratjve Junctíon is thc focu$ oi its most distinctivc properties and proccsscs. \Ve contend,

13. The impcnnnce oí ndaptíve fiexibility for ¡he funcl¡o'!lin~ of famílies as systems í5 well i1Juslrated in thc sludy of Robert AngelL Tiw FmlliJy EnrmmJet's lhe De­pres.siof1 (Ncw York: Chas. Scribner's Sons. 1936).

Talcott P<:lrsons: thl Ol.ltJine of the Soó';jl Sf~"tcll1 41

therefore, that thc problem$ foclIsíng abotlt the integmtive functiol'ls oí social sys.tems constitute the central core oí !he concerns of socjolo¡!,ical thcory. This point of view will guide OUt ;:m3]Yses in subsequent introductory discussions and \ViH receive strong emphasis in selections prescIned al various points in the Reader. Until a. broad strLlctLIrul outHne of the sc)cial system h¡~s been presented. it seems bese lb defer further disclIsslon of thc ways in which lhe inlegratívc function mesbes more specificaUy \vith the othcrs.

JI. CATEGORIES OF SOCIAL STRUCTURE

Historically, the theoretical pre(lccupatíons of socio)ogical thcorv have emer~ed from (\\'0 main poinls ~f referenét.~. One conc;rns rh!! re1íltions of social systcms .md culture and focuses on the proh­lem of ",alIJes and norms in [he ,¡¡;OI:~í~tI SVSTem. The second concerns the individual <lS on{anism and pen,onalíly and focuses on ¡he individuars partici­pation in social interaction. Gcncrally. n¡,;!thcr of Ihese reference point~ m,).y be considcrcd more im­port~lnt than Lhe othcr. However. sínce the forego­ing disCLlSsiot1 of functional imperatives has started with pattern-maimenance. whích chícfiy concerns the institutionalízHtion of norm¡¡tive culture, ít may help lo balance the picmre íf \Ve begín our detaíled díscussiOl1 ()f Slructure ut the other end, with thc problem of the interactÍon of indivíduals.

Social ¡ Illeraction and Roles

For SQciology. the essentlal C'oncl!pt here Js that of roh', 1 should like to treat Ihis concept ns the '(bOl!om') tcrm of a series of structural categories. of which the other terms, in us('cnding ord~r) ar~ culh'clivity, IlOtm, ano pcdl1e. (Ir is int;restilH!, and 1 think signifkant. tbat system4:\tic introductlon oí (he conccpl of role has bcen, pcrh<\p~, the most distincrlvelv American contributi(.)n lO the struc· tural aspects of socio]()gic~d theory.)

The cssentíal slarting roint is the conceptiún of two (or more) individmds interacting in such a way as to constitute an ínrerdcpcndent systcm. As per­s(malitics_ cach individual mav be cünsidacd a system with it$. own v .. dues, go;lS. etc" facing thc otncrs as par! of an "cnvíronmenf' that providcs. certain oppornmilies for goal-attainmcnt a~ \l/eH as cerlaín limili:\tions nnd sources .of fruslrarion. Though imerdependcnce can be taken iolO :1ccmmt at this level. this is no( equivalenr to trc,lting the process oí inlcractíon as a social syslcm. Truc¡ thc

actíon of alter ¡ti ::m c::,sentíal part of the C'ondítíons bearing on ¡he attainmcnt of cgo's i!oaIs, but the vital s;cíoJogicuJ qucsfian concc;'ns the nature and degrcc o[ th~ intcgration 01' l.he sysrem of imcr~ ac!ion as <t social system. Here ¡he quesrion tlr¡ses of the conditions undcr whích {he interactíon proccss; can be tre:11ed as slablc-in the ~cn!.c. at }e,lst, lhat it docs !!ot prnve tú be so mUíuaIJy frustrating that di~soIlItion of the s:ystem (Le .. for the individual. "lcavin2, the üekf') seems more likelv th:m ilS cOrHinu::t.tion. .

TEe prl.)blcm of stubililY lrnroduces considcra~ tíons of temporal con1inuíty. which immedi:~tely brings liS 10 thc relevance of norrnative ('trientarkm. lt C3n be sho\\:n lhat~ within ¡he ~ttrj()lI fr~me ol: rd~ (!rence, slable íntcruction jmrlic~ Ihal ~lCIS acquire "mcanings'l whkh are intC'rprdéd with referen.;c lO

ti. cornrnon set of nomnulvc C("nccptions. The par­ticularity of spccrtk actl:i is transcenJ~d in tcrms. oi' (he !:eneralization of lhe nonn.ltive comm()I) cuJ­ture '"as; well as in thc normnt1\'e componclit of [he expec[a(ions tb,t( get bulll into thc guíding rncch­:'Htism~ of the proces:;;- This mcans thal rhe re"pome of Altl'r te an acl ot Ego may be Íntcrprewd as ti

~anctiün c.\.prcs'\ing: an cvtilu~lli()n or lbe past a.:( and sCf\.:ing as ~\ gtJide ro dcsil-ablc fU(urc bchQvior.

The ess~ntíaIs ~)f thc Íntcraction sítuation can he ílIustratcd by <loy two-ph1ycr gamc, su~h [lS ehess. Each ptayct' i5; prc~umcd [O h:n'c sorne motivattnn I()

participatc in thc g'tmc!. incJuding a "dc~irc (') ,,,,in:' Hence. he has a goaL and, rdativc te this. sorne con­ceplion of cifecLivc ''strategie:,;.'' He mal' plan aD openjng gumbít hut he cannot c;)rry advaoce plan­nim! too far, hccaus.c [he ~itllalí()n i:i; t10t ~tah1c: it !s cont.in!;enr on lhc move.t'i madI: borh bv hímilelf .lOU by Mis ""opponcnt as {he g~lme proceeds. Tht~ ba,ic facllíties at his c()mmand C0l'1Si81 of his kno\\ il:!di!.t' of the opponunities implícit in [he ch;:.nging sitl.;;­tíon; his. comrrwnd of thcse opportunitics mcans performance of the adaptivc tune! ion. Hcncc. uf the goaI-aa,dnmenl 3nd ada¡.HI\'c tCh.:lS. ar~ dcfined r\nd [acilitic$ are pmvidcd. but (1cix

are IlOT prescribcd, Th~ facílities urc gcnemli1:C'd. and thdr ~lUücalio!l !)etwecn the p¡~y('¡S dcpcnd'i UpOll e~l(:h pl<lyer's cap:~cítjc& to take ad\.·¡H)lagc of opporllluitics.

In turn. lile nlcani.ndulncss of thc t!:oaIs and ¡hé st:lbllily oí' che gcner~S¡zcd partero o(ü;¡cílitics de­pend O!1 1he (!xistcncc of a weJ! defh~ed ser of rules. which fflrm.~ the cent('r of t he intcgratíon of the svs­teOl. The rok~, in thí~ c~!se, arl2' nüt dilT('rcn¡iatcd "(lrl

:J. pcrmanc!1t ba:-:is: raihC'r. lhe rules. de{ine ¡he ('on~ $cqtrCtlct!~ oC ~my givcn ln<)ve by onc playcr for lh~ !l.itw.ltil,n Ín whlch ¡he orhe!' must m;:~ke: his next choice, \Vichol!i sllch rules the intcractÍve process eoulJ no( b(! :.tablc l ,md th/;! sy!:.tcm oí adaptive fa ..

4,2 GClIcr;11 lJltroduction

cilitics would break down; ncithcr playcr would know what w"s cxpcctcd of 'him or what (he conse­qucnccs. of a givcn sct oC 11I0VCS wouid be. Finally, the diffcrcntiatcd ami contingcnt rules must be groUI'ldcd in á se! ai valLll:s \.vhich define thc nature l)f 1\ "good gamc'j of (his sort~ induding thc value ()f cqua1ity of opportunity for both conteswms and tbe mcallingfulncss of thc goal of ·'winoíng."

A stable 5vstcrn of íntcr:lction, tncrcfore, orIcnts its participant5 in tc:rms of mutual expcctations, which have the dual signiftc;:mce 01' expressing normative cvaJuutions and stating contingent pre­dictions of overt bchavior. This mutllaliry of expec­talions implics thnt the e\'all1alive meanings of acts are sharcd by the interacting un.its in 1\VO \'v'ays: whnl a mcmb~r does can be categorized in Lerms meaningful to both; a]so, lhev sha~c eritena of be­havior. ~o thí\t there are como:.on standards oí eval­uí\tion for partíclllar acrs.

We can say that even such an elementary two­memner svstem of social interaction has most of the strucl úra} esscnlinJs of a sud.,} svstem. Thc es­scnti;ll praperty is mutu~llíty of oríeñtation) dcfined in terms of sh<ircd patterns oi normalive culture. Such normative p:lttems are va/l/es: the normatively rcgulated complex of beh,lvior of one of the par1ici­panls is: a role; and thc system composed by the intenlction oí the two particípants. so far as it sh;¡res a common nonnative culture '\lH.l i5 distin­guishable from others by the partlcipation of tbcse twe ~md not l'lthers, is a colleclivity.

One further condítion, not prcsent in our chess garnc exanlplc, is necessary in order to complete the roster of slrucruro] cornponents. namely, dífferen­tiation be(wccn the roles oi thc partícipants. This is lO S.1Y tlial, ín 1'l105t social systems, participants do nOl do thc same things; thcÍr performances may be conccívcd as cOll2plemel11arv contríbtltions to tbe "functioníng" of [lie intcraction svslcm. \Vhen there are nI/O or .... more srructural1v di;tinct llnits which perform esscntially fhe same·flloc1iOI1 in the systcm (c,g., Duelen[ families in a community) we wi11 spcak of sCf!mentl:nion as ilistineuished from differctltia­llon, \Vhen dlfferenÜation"" oi roles is present, it be­comes necessnry to distínguísh between two" com­pom~nts ¡)f the normative culture of the system: lhal of values, which are shared bv thc members OVef aud abovc their particular rol~s. and that oí role-expcclations, which are diffcrentiated by role and therefore define rights alld ob1ígations appll­cabl,c to one role but not (o ¡he other, 1 propose ta use thc rClm vall/cs for the shared normative com­poncnt, and .he tCrIn (diffcrentíated) Ilorm for the component tha¡ í~ specific to a given role oc, in more comptex systems, te other empirical lln1tS ()f the sys(em. í.c., various collectivitíes such as families"

churchcs, business firms> govcrnmcntal agencies, un ivcrsitics.

\Vhcrc rajes are diITcnmtiatcd, the sharing of valucs bccorncs an csscntial cO!1dilion of integration of (he systcm. Only On this aSSllmption can the rcac­tions of Altcr to Ego's perform.mces have the char­fleter of sa.nctÍons reglllating Ego's action in ¡he in­terests of the SVS[CITl. However. it should be c1ear that for Alter to be in a position ro cvalualc Ego's ilctS. thc acts need not be such that A1tcr is, bv vÍr­tue of his role, expected to perform, Thus, in' mar­riage, one of the rnost lmportant diadic relatíonships in all societies, the roles of the partners are differ­entiated by sexo The mutual evaluadon oi per­formance is an essential reguJatory mechanism. but to be in a posítion to eva)uate the pnrtner's perform­a nce is not to assumc his role.

The COJlcepts oi Role and Collectivily. A role m,~y now be defined as the structUred. Le .. norma­tivcly regubted, pnrtícipation of a person in a con­crete process of social interactlon with specified, concrete role-partncrs. The system of such inter­action of a plurality of role-performers is, so far as it lS normatively regulntcd in lerrns oí common valucs and of norms sanctioned bY these common valucs. a collec[¡vity. Perforrning J a role within a colIectívity defines (he category of membership, ie., lhe as.sumption of obJigations ()f performance in that concrete interactlon 8ystem. Obligations cor~ relatively imply rights.

Since the normal individual parti~jpate5 in many collectivities, ii is a cornmonph\ce. though a crucial onc, that only in a limiting case does a single role constitute the en tire interactive behavior of a con· cretc individual. The role is rather a sector in his beha.vioral systcm l imd henee oí his personality. For most purposes, thereforc, it is not (he individual, or the persoll as sllch~ thut is a unit oi social systems, bUl rather his role,participation at the boundary dircct1y affecting his personality. It ¡s largely when interpreled as this particular boulldary~concept lhat the concept of role has an lmponant theoretical sig. nificunce for sociology.

So long as we restrict our ilIustrations to the diadic interaction system it may seem that the dis­tinclion of four analy(ica] structural components­rolet co1Jectivity, norrrt, and value-is overelab­orate. At lhis level it is stíll possible te identify val­ues and the col1cctivitv, nerros and the role. In more complex social syS(e~lS. however. there is not just one coUectivitv but manv~ and a differentiarcd norm does not defi~e expectátions for just one ro]e but for a c}ass of roles (and nIso for cJasses of collectivi­ties). The social svstems with which the sociologist llormaIly dcals are complex networks of roany dif­ferent types or categories of roles and collectivities

Talcott P2rS01lS: An Outline of the Social Srstem 43

on rnany different levels of organization. Ji lhert­fore becomes esscnlial tú conceptualizc varues and norms índcpendcntly oí any particular coIlectivity or r()le.

Va/ues and Norms

\Ve now turn fro01 the analvsi~ of intcractíon 10 that oi lhe more explicitly nor~)ative content ()f the structure of social systems. \vÍlhin which vaIlles aI1d núrms have bcen disting~is.hed. \Vc havt' already suggested that such valucs and nonns must be in­volved in any slabJe process oí interactioo, ho-wever simple. In the attempt tú :lnaIyze the structure of complex socicties, bowc\'cr. the ana)ytical{v distinct signHicance of thcsc components becon{es much more salicnt. Thc following sectíons wi 11 thcrefúre be dcvolcd to a more cxpli~ít analysis of thcm ;\nd' of their rcJations tú the se-~mcntat¡on of social Slruc­lure, to lhc varÍüus lcvcIs'''of vnlues ano norms, and to the patteros of differcntiatlcm of structure. al­ways taking account both of the problems of func­tíon and of thc svstem's reJation {o its situalÍon.

Throughollt this analysis, our majo[ conccrn wiII be LO make c)etlr the basic functional paraoigm \Ve nave presented for the imrícatc rcJations ¡nvolved in a complex soc:iety ~eglllel1ted and dílTerentiated into many subsys!cllls. A paramount underlying question wíl1 be, how is thc intcgration (')f a svstem w¡th a largc populalion and h'igh uiffercn,1ation possíblc? Or, more thcorcíícalIv. what kinds of statemcnts hu.."c to be mude, Wh~~l concepts forrnu­lntcd • .and what discriminations worked out in order to do justícc to {hese empiricnl intrktiCics'?

The concepts oí unívcrsaIism and p~lrtictllarisrn wi1J be helpful in thís connection. In any given sys~ (:m, t~e concepts oí role and conectivity are par­tH:ulanstic. Though, of coursc, we must ralk abollt classcs ami types "'of roles, a role is alw~kys the role of a particular concrete individual. Sirnilarlv, a coI­lectivity alw¡¡ys has a concrete menlbership oi spc­cHic interacting fole-incumbents. A norm. nowcver. is alwavs universalistical1v defincd withín t.be uní­vcrse of its relevancc, w¡;ether it be a unívcrsc of acls. of roJes, or of collectivities, To be sure, lhe detlnilion of a rcIevant univcl'se involvcs a particu­laIislic refcrcl'lce of a higher order: thus, a norm may apply only to citízcns Dr residents oi rhc Un ílCd Statcs. bUi ir mav cut across aU concrc[c collcctivítv­membcrship differcl1ces wühin that univcrsc. V¡~J~ ucs are aIso uníversalisticafly dcfincd in terms of relevance. \Vhcn a pDrticlllar '(ype of socio.:ty ¡s cval­ualcd as go()(L t he judgment is inhcrcntJy applícablc tú more (han one spccific sodciy.

Thc uní\'c!":!.alistic aspcct oC va]ucs implic~ lhat. al 1he rclevant leve] of rcfcrencc, thcy dre ncither situa-

tion-specifk no1' fnnction-specific. In this connec­tíon, !l shouid be rcmcmbcrcd thil1. the n10st cfllci,¡l aspects of tbe sitLwtion of a social system c()nsht in the personalitics and rile patlerns 01' culture \\Jith which the svstem Í$ in contncL \Vhcn v'llue-s. are said nor. to be sltuation-specific, it is ímplíed t.hat tbeír norm~ltiVe validity is not 'J funcl10n oftbe p3.nic:ul(lr categories of pcr$()n~d¡ties avaíI:1ble for mcmbcr­ship.· nor, for example, of the partku]ar kvds Di tc:chlloIogicnJ knowledge ZlY'ailabJc for implcmcnt­íng thcse valucs. \Vhcn situatíon-spedfichy is in­troduced t we spc~k zmalyücaHy not of '-'"lue:;, bUi of gouls.

SjmíbrIv, Valll~$ are independcnt of [be internal difTcrcmíaÚon of lhe svsterns in \4..'bich thev are in­slítutiomdízed: {he:, ür~ relev:lot on a leve! of gen­eralítv whích "(nmscends" functional diffcl'C>l1tiu­t.ion. 'The kcvnotc of diíTcrcmimion. hOWC"'CL i~ f1l11ctiom¡L H'Cllcc. norms. whi.::h by thc ahoye dcfl­nition are dí1Tcrentilltcd with rcfcr~ncc ro [unctío!1. must be function-5pccifk. Tbey :irc "lcgitimilcd" by valucs. but operate nt ~l lo\\'cr level of g~ncmlity wjth rcspect to expcctcd concrete' collcctÍ"c t1nd role performance. \Vith respcct to conCTch~ roks in concrete collectivilies. ho\"cvcr. nl()st norms are still naL situ:iticm~::;pccific-cspecblly iiince ¡he; do not specify the particular role.s hw ,Ire generally (ormu)ntc:d ín cla;:>scs and types o[ roles. ;:\nd henel! of pcrsons and Ctlllcc(ívities.

The rela1ivil)' of ¡he unlycrs.:'llisiÍc-pünicuhnist1c distínctlon mwa .agail1 he cmphasized. In ~encwL thc principie 15 that lhe uni\'crse relevan! (O ,he LJní~ versalislic dCIl)t::nts of normmjvc cUlture is d.:l1!1('d by the role and collectivity struclllrc [11 ¡he nC'xt higncr level of svstcm or~~nízado(\, lt tl1u-; rcfcr, [() a híerarchv of s~:slem-Sllhsvstem or!!;lnizatioo. "rhc top oi' lhis 'hicra;cby is ¡he ~onccpt 01 ¡joder)'. whkh is thc highest-ol'lkr concrcl~ svstcm (lf ini.cr;H::líon lrcalcd ;s thcllrcticalIv rC!cVrult für (he ~lnaJvüc;11 purpo')cs of $ociolog~/ linc1uding the p()~sibíilty of an emCfgcnt nwor!d sodctv'·).

[n lin; with lhe conceptino of th,;: strw::turc nf social 'i,\,,,lems HS cOflsi:sün~ in ihe norm;ilívc cul· LUre ins[ilUtionnlizcd in thc~ sv::acm. \\:c ha\'e so Lu" prcscntcd a cln~sific;llion ('J[ fB comp()ncn!~ (lrf!~\n­izcd with rd\2r~;nce (O the hicri¡fChica1 ord..:r of ,he ('1rganization ('lf thlé! systcm. S, ruclUTally ~pcJ.k¡nf:' thcn, tht:.' role componcnl i" ¡he n!JTTrmiívC' CMnpo, ncnt whi~h governs [he partic-ip:tlion ol individual persons in gii.'cO cnl1cctívitíes. Th~ collc.:tivíty :'IJm­

poncnl is lhe normallú:,' culture whkb ddillCS. t!le valu~s. l1<>rmS, !!oaI~oricnta[ions. ;tn" ordcring al' roles [or a conc?ctc $ystcm of í!1i\nacl ¡(m of ~rcci~ fiable: pcr::,o!l;': thc compOrlCnl of norfi15 i:-: thc ser ('If lIn¡vt:'rsali~dc ruJes (lf norms whkh Jdl\1c CXP1';C~ (ati,)i1s for the performance ()[ da:<.&cs ('li dilTL'r..::q¡¡~

44 Gelleral Introduct,iol1

ntcd unJts within 1 he sv~t('m-col1cctivitics. or roles. ns. the case may be; ;md "aluc:. Me thc normatíve p!'tttcrns dcfinü'g. in univcr:-;¡Ilíslic tcrms, (he p::tl­rcrn oC dcsjt'¡~hk úricnt~l1iün for ¡he :'\ystem as a wholc. índepcndcni of thc ;;pí::cificati~)[,¡ ()f situnHoo 01" 01' ditfcrentintcd functÍon wí(hín {he $ys!cm.

le ,hould he muele cIcar ¡hat roles art:: (!ovcrncd Qr cOIHrollcd bv (he Hormative éxigcnd~s of thc flltlctioning of ;h~~ coHcctivitic:\ wiIt;in which thcv opcratc. í(¡JJC collecüvity itself is lo be dcílneú as ~t ~vstcm. Thcrci'ore. in so far as a more inc1usive socia) sV!~lcm compri.scs filany colIcctivities as snb­svslcm;. tbc bchavíor of Ihcse c()I1cctivítie~ is con­¡j'ülkd by thc imtitutionaJíl.cd norrns that spccify how c.~lCh iypL: oí CDlIcctívic): muS1 and may behnve according ro i!s place withín lhe system. FinaJ1y, norrns thcmscIves are it:~itim¡ze(L J.nd therefore. in a normatTve sensc, cont;(,Ued. bv the value$ in:illitu~ tlona1ízcd in [he ~o-ciety. Subjc~c( (ü exigclIc1es of siluation ~md function, valucs define thc direction 'Of odct.1tation Iha! as dc¡;ínlblc for Ihe syslem as a whole.

Tlle Sfructllre of Complex Systems

Havin!:! outlincd thcse e~scntial struc1ural com­poncnts 2í'r a social system and their nmk in lhe gen­('ral }¡jcTal'chv of controL ,,'C can liO\\' ()uiline their maín pm(crn" of organizati\Jn so as to c()l1stitme a rela¡ive]y compiex system. \VhaL is here presented 1S neccssarily a schcmatic "idc31 type," one tha! pre­lend~ mere1y 1.0 cirCule and dislingui:;;h rather broad structural ca!egorjc~: \\.'C cannot take into account t.hc jmm('ns~ ~ích.ness DI Yarimls concrete ~()cial structme$. Somcthing more concrete wiH be found in rhe Introductíon f(.") Part Two.

The majo guiding Ijo(' 01' the nnnh'sis is thc con~ cept that a complex social system cónsists of Ll Dct­\York o[ Íntcrdcpendenl a. mi interpene.1ratjng sl1b­systems. éach of 'tvhich. secn at the appropriare leve] of refcrcl1ce. 1S ú socia] sy~tem in it~ ()\Vn right sub­j~ct to a11 the> fllnctíon~l] exigencics of anv su~h s"'s­¡cm re~atjvt.~ to irs institutionalizcd c~lmre and sitlJ3tion ,md pc\ssessing ~H the es;~enlial stTucturnl Ct1illponcnts. organized on the appropriatc Ievels oí dilTcrentiíJtíon and specifícation.

[he CO/1cept t>j {l SO(']t:ry. 'fhc starting point must he the concept ()f a sociel\'. defined as a C'ollectívitv, ;,c" a ~ystem oí' concret~ interacting human ¡mii­viduals. \I,:hich lS the primar; bearer or a di5tinclive instírutíonalized cullllrc and whích c~\nn()t be said io be a difre:rentiared snhsY~lL'm of a h¡~h!:.'r~order collC'ctivHy orlcnled to mO~l,f or the funciional exi­genci~s o[ ;1 .,ocial syslenL l( v.dil b~ notcd tha! thís conception j:;; !l.j'atcd ln termf> th~\t ka\'c tbr qucstion of lIle "opcnness" (lf a society in various dircC'tions

to he tre~l ted cmpiricat1y. At the :,:ocíal-system leveI, howcvcr. rathcr tha.n the cultural.l< the rn~liIl cri­(críon is relarive self-sufficicncv.

To npproHch Ihe structuraí ~\l1.alysis of the sub­systcm organizatíon of i1 socicty, we rnWH refer to thc npproprÍí.llc functionaJ exigcncic~ of hoth tbe socictaJ svstcm itself and ít:. variom :mbsvstcrns. Thc prim¿lry, over~alJ principie is Úl:lt üf difrcrcnti­~Ition in rclation tú functional cxigcncv: this is thc m:lster conccpt for 1hc analysis al sodal structure. By itsclf, howevcr~ it is not adequatc~ ¡i must be sup­plcm~nted by tbe. two principIes ol spccií1cation and segmentation. The first refers pJlmurily 1() tbe insti­tutionalized culrure componcnts o[ the strttcture, [he second to the exigencícs confromin2 thc con­crete behaving units. i:e" 10 cúUcctivities"'and roles. H sccms prefc7rable to ¡JísClISS thc latter first.

\Ve havc notcd that, in one lbut on)',' one) of its aspccts. a socícty is a single coJIcctivíty ~vith a speci­fiable. thollgh naturalIy changing, rncmbership of índividuaJs. This fact is related 10 three fundamental il.11pcratives. Fírst, therc must bc y to sOl11e dcgrcc and OI} SOlne- leveL a unitarv svstcm of institutí()nal~ izcd valucs, in this aspcct á córnmon cultllrc. In st1 fal' as rnaintem111CC oC a common value SVSlern re­guíres the kinds o[ functions col1eclÍviiks ~1USt per~ form, Ihe society will havc to constítU1e a single collectlvitv-what Durkheim caneel a "mora] com­munity." Second. !mwevec since the systcm Is dif­fercntiatcd. lhe implementaül)n of t.hesc values for diffcrcnt units rcqu¡res Ll. relativeJy consistenl sys~ tem of norms that receÍve a unitarv formulation and inlcrprctation. Jo híghly diífcrentiatcd socíclies this syste:m o[ norms takes the form of nn integrnted le­gn] sys!ern administercd by courts. The nced for co­~rdi~ated dealing \\'ith thé external sítuation is also r~lcvant. as \vill be brougbl out presentiy.

'JIu.' Segmenlatioll 01 Social Ul1if.'ii. BUí ir, for one set (,)f rcasons, a society mu~t be :l single collectivhy. othcr I'casons prcv~nr its being only that. These rca­son::; can be surnrned up in the gl.!neralized principies eccmomÍsls refer to as decermining thc ·'cconomies of 5cale:' Beyond certaín points~ tbat. is lo sny, "costs·' jncr{~~¡se as the síze of the unit of onmniza­tioo incrcases. though what the points are"" 'liar,les

14. By this criterion:el system s\lch as the CtllhoIíc Church 15 not <:i s(lcíety. It cleorJy tran~cends nnd inlerpenelnl1eS wlth :l munber oC ditTerent sodelies in whieh it~ v~1lues are more or less fllllv instilulionalj;¡.ed and ¡l:; subunil~ are con~ sl¡(tI~nr colleclivllic!', But ¡he Church, prirnarily a culturall)' oríenled social s,ys!em, 15 not il~el{ capable al mee(Íng v~ry m~my aL lhe funcdon'\l exigcndes oí a '-(lcleIY. espccially the PQlitk;¡1 ~nd economk needs. SimilnrJy, C'ven :a "world fOVL'mment:' should. <loYlhing ÚPPTOllching ltl,H conception com~~ ioto bdng" need not h$el! COilSíltule ¡.¡, "world~ ~ocícty,,' rholl!';h irs effectlvelle~:; wouid l'mplj (1 levcl of 110rmali\'e inlegrmion which would m~ke the degree oí ~t."r;:mlll!nes:') we h:n'e tradirionally 'tttribuled lo "naliona} :.ocictÍC's'· problematíca1.

T¡llcott I'arsons: An Outline oi thc Soci'Ji S.rst.cm

gready accordíng to the specific factors invülvéd. Thus, llodcr modern industrial conditions the man­ofacture of such commoditíes as automobiJcs takes place in very Jarge units indced, whcreas there seem to be ímpOliant reasons which ínhibir entrusting thc earry soclalizat ion of children primarí1y to units wilh membership muen luger than thc nuclear f:.imilv.

Pc;haps the mos[ fundamental determinant un~ derlving the segmcntatjon of social wstems is the indí~pcñsabiJity'" of the human índi~ídl1a.1 a~¡ :,ln

agency of performance. But there are essenli~\l 1irnits, nor onlv lo what a given individual can do but tú the efrc~tivcness with which individuals ca~ co-operate. Thc problems oi communÍCation ¿md othcr aspects of integration may thns nm!tiply as a resuh of un íncrcasing scale of on:anizatlon; in cer­rain respecls, therefore, subcoll~~t¡víries may ac­quire a distinctive organizanon, including n sredal intcgratiol1 or solídaríty rc1ativc to lhe large-f sys­tems of which they Hre parís,

By thc concepl s(!gmenW!iOl1 r refer, in diSCllSS,­

ing the formation of col1ectívities; to ihe dc .. 'elop­mem of subcollectivitle5, within a lnrger col1ectivit)' svstem~ in \vhich some of thc mernhers of the lar~er syslem pmlÍcípatc more intimately than in o[h~rs. (n this sensc. segmentation ís a factor indcpendent of the dUferenliation oC fuoction between the sub­collectiviries. Thus a large-scaIc SOCÍcly may coni­prise mi1!jons {)f nuclear families, (lH of wbich perform essentially similar fllllclions in lhe sociali· zation of children: here the structure is híghly seg­mClltcd bU[ n01 hi~hlv diíTcrentiated.

The necessitv ""o( sCj.!;m.entatÍon derives Jar2elv troro the probtC'ms of integration resoltÍng fro!1l'"'the other exigcIlcícs lo which uníts of tI,e svstem a.re subject. r\t lne same time. howevcT, it gives ríse 1.0 new problems of integnttion: the more units thcrc 'if<~. the ]css likely thcy wil1 be just "nnturally)' tú CÚ~ ordin:uc their activities in ways compatible wilh the smooth functioning of the, systcm as a whole. This lcnds) in more compJcx syslems, lO givc rise to special mcchanisms of integration. whích will have to be díscusscd in due course.

T/¡e Specificalioll of !\lomwtive C"lfltr(~. As .(11-ready notcd. thcrc ;5 an imporrant rclation bctwC'cn the hienlrchv of control and thc lcvcls of gencnllitv oi the components of normativc culture. "l'hus~ \'í.i1-

ues were defined as standimr at the highcst level of generality of '<conceptions '"'Clf the úc~<¡¡rable." Le., without spccHicatíon of funclion or shuation. ln comp¡trison tú valucs. lhcrcforc, nocms ¡lfC ditfcr­entit\tcd on the basls of spccification of function of the units or sLlbunits to which t-hcy apply. Subcol­lcctivities, in turn. involvc furthcr ~pccinC'ation on thc basis of situation. This is 10 say lhat, givcn its

function(s). a colIccrJvity is idcnrificd 1n 1erms of specified mcmbcrships of concrete indívidmds act· ing in concrete sítuations. \Vhcn tbc collcctivíly is rrcated us <.\ diff crcntiatcd system, rhen: nmSl be further spccitications applic<lble ro [he roles 01' [he participating mcmbcr::L

There ¡s. thcrdore, a hiérüfchv (Jf l;!cneralítv of the rattcms of nOrmLtlj\"(~ culture irrs~tuticm,al1zed in a '~odal systctn, one that corresponus w the gcn~ en!) hicntrchica1 rclations. of ils strUCttlfa} compo­nents. E:lCh ~ubunit of the sociclv. ;:tS coHecti\iiv, wiIl llave it!> ()wn instltuíionaJj2~d va]ues. whté'h shol\ld he concd\!cd ~IS specifications. at (he L[PPro~ pri<llc 1cveL of the mcn'c general V:lltlCS of the soci~ el)'. Tú cope wíth il~ own internal diíTcrcnt¡mion of functíon. fhcn. ca eh subunit will havc a sel of dlffcr~ entiated norms. which sholJld he Tcg~tr<Jed ~lS ~rccí­ficarions hoth of Ihe subcollc:c[i\'ity valncs .. md or the more general norms applicablc hOlh lo ji :lnd lO

oiher typcs 01' sllbcolleetivity. Thc principk oí spccification res! rícts the gcncralíry 01' (he pallem of culrure by introt.lucing quaiíficatiol"l:s arising from spcci::l!izalíon of function, üO Ihe (lne hand. íllid fwm specifkily of siwaüon. 01'1 the other.

The Jasl of llh! Ihrce prínc¡plc~ o[ org,mization of complex systcms. functional d¡ri'ercnt¡alÍon. has already hecn díscus;;;.cd in general terms. In accord with (his prindpIe. ~truc!urcd uniL'O acquire spedal· ized si~n¡jk.mcc in tht functíonÍnQ: of thc SVSICn1.

The g~~ncral ~chcmc of functíon~lr catcgoric:s (h~H we h~i\'c prcscntcd is vcry simple, hring'" [imitcd 1.0 four calcgMics, In llsing il. howC'vcr. on..; ffilLSt. do justice 10 lhc c01pirical complcxity of the situatio[) by taking acounr of the many ~tcp:5 in scgmcnwlion and speeificLltion. :lnd hcncl~ oC Ihc comp{)undin~ 01' rhe pattC'rrJs or dilTcrcniiation by thcir rcpctition ro!" subsvslcm~ al cucÍl lc\'cl (Jf scgmcntaliol1.

Since nur gcnc:nl! approacll has beert in (crms üf Ihe hierarchv of control obscrvcd in de"cendiní! Qr­der. a hrie( acc()unt .s.hould nüw be t!ivcn ol thc "anchoragc" of social svstcms ¡)( (he b~~sc. This ao­chorage i~ in (he pcrsonalitics amI behavToraJ orgun­i::;ms 0f (he individual mcmbcr'S and, Ilm>ll.~h lh(:~c. in tlle lo\\·cr·ordcr suhsystcms of [he crr;;¡nism ano in thc phy~ical cnvironrncnL Concrclcl;', aH süclal inicractloll !<\ hound j!.) 1110 phyS!t:.:id task. pcr(orm­;mee of ¡ndÍ\¡dll"I~ in a phvsícal cnvironmcnl: il i;> bounú tO sp;l~b¡ !ocut¡()n' in- the ph) sic:ll scn~e. Fol­lowing- ¡he tlsage of cC(llogícallv oril.'ntcd lhcorv. 1 have ~'SC\\ her; rdl'rred 1~~ thi~ spati:ll h)Ci.1lÍ01; as tlle ~'commllnity" =lspccl ~lf :i-ocíal strLlclUíC.1~ Ir can he hrokcn down m()~t convcnicntly lotO tour c()m-

1;;', ce P\it'wn<¡, "'The Pr¡ndp,ü Stn.H:1lJrc~ ()f C:nn­n\lmi¡,'" in e J. hicdrich, Ed., COJnm¡mity. Nümf'S, Vol. IÍ. Ube-nll Arb t9~9. ,~nd in p~\!'()!l~. S!n~NIf1'é' (llld Proo.'.ls ¡¡, .\!c"lan Free Pr::t<:-, 0:,9, Chnp. $,

GClIcml IlItroduclion

plcxcs: (1) rcsidcntial locatíon and thc crystaUiza­t ion of s()ckd structure around ehat foclls: (2) func~ tlonal t¡t::;k:-pcdorman.cc through occupation, ami 1hc atlcndr.nl joc¡ltion~ll problcms~ (3) jurisdictiomll appHcation 01' n()rm~lt¡vc order through the spccifi­cati~)Il of catcgorics of pCfsons. ~H1d the relcvuncc of this to thc spariaJ locutions of thcír intcrcsts iUld actívides; ;¡lid (4) the ph:'sicnl cxigcndc$ of com-1l1llnic;:ttlon une! of {he mOVCn1ents of persons anu com1nodilÍcs. !\1orc gencrally~ [he c(ttcgory af lcch­nology--,not only \vn:n is lIsually callcd "physical production:' bUl an tHsk-performancc involving the physical org'lnism Ín relatíon to ils physical en­v¡ronm~nt-hclongs in this arca of bordcdinc prob­Jcms. Tcchnology relates to physknl cxigcncics. but Ít is also básed on ("olmml rcsourcC's in their signjfj­canee :}~ facilities for social acOon. Emprrical knowledgc of lhe physicul world ís un instal1ce of such (l.cullural resource.

The lntegratio/l 01 SociefÍt's ns C()l1ectidlies. Let LIS now apprNlch the prohJem of outlining the struc-1ure lJf a cümple.x. socicty as a sOcInl systcm, As we llave saicL threc dÍ1ferent eXl1'!(!ncies undcrlie ihe fac[ that ~ society can alw~lys be rc:garded as a :single collcctivity. namely. 1he maínten:.tnce of its pMterns of inslittltionalized culture .lt lhe valuc ¡('vd, thc ímegnllion DI its SVS1elTl of dHfcrcnlintcd nerms . • md""lhc co-ordinat~d bandling oi externa] s¡tUD.~ tions,

The prevaJence of fundamental patterns of value and the !!encral cornmitment of units to cornrnon ",!lues fl.r~ so cruda) that the probJcm of t.hc relntion of (he over-all collcc1ivilv to valucs is a universal onc. Al the other end, t;owCVCf, Lhe problems of jurísdiction ami cnforccmcnt with refcrcnce lO

normtltive order are equ,1lly crucial; Ihe over-aH coUccrivitv s(rtlcturc cannot he divorced from politícal 'organization, oriented to maintainíng commitments lO this ordt'r and lo lhe jurisdictíonnl fLmctíons associated wítb. it. in relation both lo ltS (\wn pOp111üiion und to other socictics. This mcans that th0 boumlarícs of a S()CÍctv t~nd to coincide \vith 1hc tcrrÍtorÜlJ jurísdiction of the highcsl-order uniis of p()!illcal orgnnization.

Thc prímary area in which tbe probJems of value­commitmcnt are plnycd out i8 that oí religion: for most sacie (ics, the pa rtlmolint over-all colleclivÍL y has been nI the same time a religiolls collectivity ~lnd tl politic:J1 colleclivity, both ¡) "church" and a '':-:tatc."" Law, we m~lv say. h<ls lcnded to stand ln thc middh::, to be Icgítüilizc'd by religion ::lnd enforccd bv política! authoritv: oflen tne function of inter­p;'ctíng il h~l~ bccn a ~erí(ms bone of contention,

Howcver. the formula oC rclígio-p()Iitical-Jegal unity is. noC by itsclf. adeqUiltc 3S a universal gen­cral1zalion . .In rhe first place. wühin ahe over-all

coJlcctivitv thcsc functions have tended « .. 1 be diffcr­cnlíalcd \~'ith rcspcct 10 personnd ~md suhcollcc­tivitícs. HuI, in a more radical ~ensc, in rhe \Vestcrn wor1d sincc thc Christian era 1 here has becn a procesoS of fundamental diffcrcnriation oí church nnd S1~ltC. In intcrprcling the sociological implica­tions of this, onc must considcr thís procc~s in terms of the relation bctwecn sodl.1! Hnd CU1111r.:.) svste:ms, Evcn before its Protcshmt phase. \Vcslcrn <:"hrisli­anity was characlcrizcd by a spcciaJ lype of religious "índividu:llism:' In the present contC'xt. thís menns iha!.. except OH thc mos[ genera1 ]cvel ol ovcr-all societal rncmbership, the indívidual's rcligíous and social statllS did 001 necc8snrilv coincide. The church was an organizution of thc re1igious interests and oricmations ~,f lhe populatíon co'ñceived as in­dependcnt oí (but not unre1ated to) their secular or temporal oricntntions. cspccially al thc leve] of societal va[l.lt!-commitmcnl. (t \Vas a "Christhm societv;' but one in which the function ()f rcligion was more specializcd than ln othcr prc- and ;on­Christian lypes.

This 1 interpret lo mean that. in s.ocietal as distin­gUlshed from cultunll tcrms, the '"moral cornmu­nity" aspect shifted from reJigious org:,lflization as suc¡' to .he area oC interpcnet.ration bClwecn (he religious and (he secular, The paramount societal coUectivily became thc "state," administered bv laymen-er when administered. in fu el, by priests. nor. in their speci<:¡J clerical capacity. Tbis differ­entiation was never fullv carricd out in medieval Europc-for instance, ir was impo~sible 10 divest bishops of secular functions ihar wcnt bevond tbe administr:uioIl of eccleshuaical alTairs-bút it was, ncvertheless, the main patrcm.

Since the Reformation~ this process has gone farther, particularly where the princíple of the separation, as distinguis.hed from the ditrerentíation, of church and statc has prevai1ed. As in rhe Unitcd St31es lodav, thc values are 5till clellrlv anchored in theistic relÍgion (HIn God \Ve Trust""). bUl on the level of collectívity organization the ~'moral com­mllnity"' is dearly (he "polítically org:.mized com­munity:~ \Vhat has h'lppencd. esscntiaJIy. is lhat :mv :lgencv whose orjentation is primarílv cultural rathe; tha~ sacie1al has becn deprived of ícghimate authority 10 prescribe values nnd enforcé norms for the societv~ in this scnsc the societ y nas becorne "secu]arized.'· The rclígious anchorage ef 1he values is sttll tbere: bOl religien is pluralistical1y and "pri­v::.¡1elv" organized. FormaUv. thc values are em­bodi~d in the Constitution ¿;nd in [he oftlcial intcr­pretations of il, aboye aIl by judicial and legislative agencies.

The univers,Ü association oC the over-aH collec­tivíty structure with polítical organizallon i~ based

Talcott P:arsons: 1\n Ouf1inc of die Soci~~i 47

on anothcr SCL oí impcratives. involving thc spccial significancc of physical force :)s n 5anction. The centr::ll point bere is (hat. while there are many limitations on lhe ellic:lcy oi lhis sl.mctiol1. conaol of suflicicntlv superior s'ociall v organizcd fürce is almost alw¡¡ys II complclety e1Íccti~'c prevcntíve oE anv undcsíred acti()O. There[orc, withollt (he con­tr¿¡ th'tt incJudes "nclltralizati~n" of organized force, which is inhercntlv territorial ín íts rcfercncc. thc guarantcc of lhe bin~ding powcr of a normattvc order is nal possible.

1 conceive of politícal orga[]iz~ll¡on as ftlnctjon~ aIlv orgnnTzcd about thc attainOlent of colJccli¡¡e go;ls, fe., the 'll1ainmcnt 01" maintem\llce of states of ínterClction bet\.\'ccn the SVSlem and its environing sitllalion that are relatively desirablc from thc poin~t of view of Ü¡C SVSlcm, Th~ nuüntcnancc of secl1rit v <ll!ninst the ndvérsc use ()f force is a cI'lIcial col1c~­ti'\'e goal for cvcry socicty, e onsideratíons sllch as these underlv thc genent! tendcncv of the oVí!HllI

coUectivíty t'o dcv~clop an cllecti~c monopoly of t.he interna! organization of force tbrough poliee and rnBiwry agencies. Such 5L<:liemcnts t'm! nüt meant to imp1y lb<:lt the control of force is che paril­mount funcrion ()f política] organizat1on. Force is not thc on11' functíon that is primarily negaüve. Lc._ "protcctívc" in sjgníf1c~lncc. and, in genaaL govern­ment is a centnl! <lgency of posÍli~e societal gO;:ll­attainmcnt. But force ¡s so stratcgicaHy signiHcant thnl its control is 11n indispensable fuoctíon. a ncc~s­SMY, but nol sunicient. candítion of <;ocíal arder. Accordíngly. in a well-integrat\!d 5ociety. most sub­collectivities exccpt ,hose specifical1y con cerned \-vith force are almost totally dcprived of ir.

Because of the probkms Ínvotved in lbc use and control of force, the politic;.1¡ org~inílatjün I11US.t always be integrated .... '¡th the legal ~ystem, which is concerned \.-v¡lh administering [he highcst order of norms regulating the bchavior of unüs within the societv. No socictv can <1fford 10 pcrmit anv othcr norm;tÍ\;~ order t~ takc preccdence ()ver th~~r s~nc­tioned by '·politically org:mized socicty:' Indeed~ the promuIgation of 'ln)' Sllch altcrnative order is a revolutionnry aCL and thc [lgcnci('~ rc.spol1siblc ror if mtlst assume the I'C'sponsibiJity of poJitical organi­zation.

10 tJlis context i[ is of ercat signifkancc that in a fe\'.' societ¡"s. notablv i~ the Ii]odcr!1 \VCSL thc organiz:.ltion ()f thc l:gal system 11<1s au~\incd a significant dcgrcc of indepcndence in ihe judicial amI. te sanIe extenL in the Icgislativc departmcnls. Thcre are t\\'o main aspccts of this inocpenLh:m1 col· ]ectivity struclurC: the judícií.lry, wit.h cCI1ain typcs ol: insulation from thc prcssurcs oí '·p()Iltics": :)cc­ond. vcry notahle. thc devdopmcm of a legal pro­fcs~íon whosc membcrs occupy ::m ínter.sl ¡thtl St;.tWs.,

partIy through membership in the b;1r, funr.::tioning HS "ofliccrs 01' ¡he courL" ::md panly by cleating privatcly \,,-ith clicnts-índcca, prorcctcd from cven ~()vcrnmcntaJ íntervention b\.' such insiílutiüns ns prhileged communicalion. "

Summing u)'. we may sal' ibat Ihe highe$l OVct­

aIl eC'IIIcclivÍtv in c\'~n a rnodcrn ~ocictv i~, lo :ln ímpowml degrcc, ncccssnrily "mullí fun¿tíünaL" or functionalh' "dIlTusc," Al the sarne iímc. under ccrt~iÍn círC'tlm~ianCcs the dilTuscness dlarllC((!ri:-,!ic of thc more "nwnoiíthic" rdigio-p(J[ític<t1 slruc· lLlfcs-cvcn of such high dc\.'dopmelH .1 ... cb<;"íc:d China (lf lare Rcpublícan Romc-·)¡as lcmh:-J 10 difrl!renlia!l~ [tuther. "rhc most 1l()tablc oí lhcsc díf­fcrcnliations h~\vc heco lhc '·s\.;culari:w1Íoo" of poIítícal organlzatioll, \\'hich h;l~ gonc rhrough maov ,,,ra~C5 ano moues.. and thc ¡ns~¡lut¡onaIiz:dí()n ()f ¡} rdativcly illlkpem.k.nt lCg:1I functíon.~"

Thc problem of the kínd ;¡m.l dcgrcc oI dJiTcr, cntímion likc1y to ()ccur nt this híthc\l k\'t'1 of socictal colJcctivítv on:::aní:r.alion m"l~: he dc~...:ríhcd :)5 fI function of four~prímary 5C[:; '01' L1Clors. an vál'ínbj¡,; over cuJlsiderahle ran,zcs. 'nlCSC ~Lrc: (í)

the Iypc of sOcJí!lal \'alucs whi~h <.r~ more or 1C'>s fully institutionalized in {he soci(:¡,· (Chlssiñed in tcrms ()f modcs of calcgOrlZD.!ions oi' th~ ~ocÍct,... ar thc hi!!.hcst I('vd of ;~ncr:lÍjt v_ as an cvalt;~lted object~the appr()pri;:¡.j"(, c:1teg()·~·¡cs sccm lO be: tcm varian]e:;): (2) thc dcgn .. 'c ánd nwdc of t inst.ítutiormlizntíon, indllé:lín~ its "sccurin;" rdat¡ve particnJadv to thc rclÍ!.!iOlI$~ ;¡nd en/tur:)l f(\lIJl~h\­(ions of v~11uc-comIl1it~1ents in lhe :'.ocicl \: (!om:­rangc ínstiltltionalil.ation of ltc\1: valucs Ü;'f)Ií,:"::;"';1 rdalívcIv low k\'c1 of such sccllrity); r?i) thc kíDd í1nd Icvc:Í of slmetur;:¡¡ dlíTcrcntíBtlol1 (-¡f the SOClcl\'. \\.'ilh spccial rcfcrcncc t() thc \cvaltt' al1d klnd ... (l(

íntegralTvc prohlcms they impClsc 011 the: and (4) th~ kinds of situ:ltíon:J! CXi2.dlCics tO the syslcm is CXpLhccL '-,

klodes of Di/JerCIlI ¡o/ion 1\'[II(i1l Societics

KI/!sl;ip {111ft lite A rliculafimr Id!/¡ f\-r,:o/;'aíi;y Thc! llu"~l¡on 01' (he kind and lc\'cI nf functional

16. H ni.)\, be nO:t.'d ¡!'t;:\( (Iilowint¡ tht i"s¡¡,utk'fWJi:;-;;'d v:¡iues lü b~ Jelennim'd lhwng.h ;¡¡,;cnci~;), 1101 [u!íy n,)!'!­

!r()lkd hr :.hc ¡-,.;,¡r;mlO\..lrH poH¡í¡;(\l ~'\)Jk(;lÍ\ jlY ¡nw)¡'''c~ ti

,~i~n;)ín r¡ss- to il. Thc n'I;II¡I:~!y fuI! in:Hia,llNi;¡li¡;Úí.}Jj of llnylbinb~ iike ¡he se'P~ratjl.)J\ uf ~hm;:h dnd edre prob:1bly ~m i!ldc~ (11' !\lG linna¡i¿:l¡~Qn (J( yalllcs., :;'I!fh,krn pnrliy lIrhk:r~Land:!Í'.I(: lel DI:>-imdr LI(ion:lli;;¡1 ¡~~rL 'TiI~rcrorc [¡(\nally C-lFJí\'nkrl\ lO "d!Ufclw~,'-thdr \';lÍuc fo-;u::; r.: C! '"'le"'ctllv "c<:onmr\1<:, ij';Í:" ¡j~;d ~,;[ (ck¡!¡O!1 !<, [t.(\l'ernmcm fCE'erlltalc,l !'.latl~ ü{ l.h,: p;",~:m,)¡H1t ('.d<;te·J ín ,he Il\l~\¡cm WC:iL

48 Cenera) 111 troduction

diffusencss characlcrízínc sorne social structures nriscs at an addilional :¡ñd particularly ímportant point, hcsides 1hat of lhc sodcty Ll!'i "nlOra] com­mllnity." Thís is lhe point of I'lrirnflry anicubtíon with [he Oerson¡¡litiC's of [he constiwcnl mcm¡'~rs. Anv ~\!stcm soci()hH~¡(;aIlv trc~llC'd, a~ a socicrv is li"(~ly 'to includc nH~ny ;){¡ch memhcJ"s--al lca~t a thousand. anu in lllany CH!\0S lens íf nar hundreds o[ mil1iolls. Ik"::lllsl' ()f tlle lypes of exígencics notcd aboye, in [his cnmcxt ~OCil!lit'$ lcnd lO be rdmivcly híghly segmentcd. Thc typcs of units ínlc~ which lbe scgmcllt:uíOIl oC'c:urs are, ío thc /lrsl insti..lOce. those kODwn as "kimhip linir~." Kil1s}¡¡p is cssenlÍally rhe point of articulal ion. ¡.e .. interpcnelratlOn. bctween [he struc!urc of soci:1l sv8tcmS .¡¡nd thc reIations involved in Üh: bíülogíca( process of reproduction. B¡()lo~icaUv. there aré (hree crucial structur;:t] COtn­

POflC!~IS~ d) tbc (liíferemiation of human popul:l~ tions inw ['\\'0 seXo grüupiL cach with dHferent fune­ücm,., in Lile reproduc{¡v(~ proCC5::-. bUl both essenlÍ;:ll (O ir: (2) the :")harp human dilTerentÍntion b~t\Veen the nWlL1re tilnd the immature organism. involving .l rel;Hívely long perií.1d oí" gCSl<ltlOn ¿wd thc.n a

I'rolong(~d pcriod of f('13tivc "'helplessness" vvh1ch. thOllgh progres$i\'ely dccrcasíng. makes impossible ¡he order of ínch:::pcndence ch,ln!clerisric 01' tJle young 01' many o!her species: and (3) the f~lct tha.! tbe sexual unÍon of tWO specific individuals of Opposile scx is ncces~ary w, and Hk<.:ly to result jn, pregn~mcy and reproduction. Thus. biologícully al] human papuhtions ;tre diíTerentí[!tcd by sex and by gt:'ncratial1, and an: particlllaristically i'(,;~larcd to two í1.llce5tral lincs throu!!h bio[ogicaI dcscent-the filial generativo as H~~ otrspring of tW() specífic hiologicaJ parcnls and, Ihrough thcm. lhc dcscend­ants of remoter am::eslors; lhe parentClI, lhrough their commún rda¡ian hy parenthood to tneir off­spring and lO more remote descendants. The rel4l­lían bctl.Veen sexual union ami repmdllction means thar the former is never dívcstcd of <\11 llndcrlying rclation to paremial rmrenthood.

Jn soci::d stnlclore thcre ~re mam- variations. but a conSlanl ane! fundamental poinlof referencc is the nuckar farnílv. the collcctivilv consrillltt!d bv él

conjugaI p~!¡r amÚhcir hioJc'gkal ~{rspring. In ev~ry known S()CíNY, thcn: i~ inslítutíonuliz<ition of sorne contínuing sexual rehlrionship ín relntron to rcpro­duclio!1. and oí ~mml? continuing responsibilíly for such otfspring ün ¡be par( (afien backcd up by I.vidcr grollpS) 01' at ka~L ()nc of che parcnts. though gen­eral1y of l'll1tb. Gcn~ra]]:' Ih\:! nuclear family h, dur~ ing thc pcriod of rhe children's dependt:ncy_ at1east includcd in tbe pdmary unIt ()f residence-h is oflen. pnrücuiarly in l'l1ouern ¡ndu~trial societies, primanly conslilll!ive üf i1.

Withjn thís s(:uiog, t.he problem oi functjonal

diffusencss Tests first on tnc fact thaI eYery human individua! ShlrtS life ns a hclplcss infani., whosc devclopmcnt dcpcnds ülmost complctcly on his l'C­

lations 10 thc p~lflicuJar, very small circlc 01' ftdults rcsponsiblc for bis physicn! care and his socializ,~­lron. Biological pnrcnthood ís nOL cssenti.:JI te this crucial rcJation: but particularly 'Wilh rcspect tú the mothcr. the C;}:",cs \vherc ihis does not playa stnlte!!tc mle are I'ninor vadadons ,md do nO( anv-where'constilUtc a major structurallype. -

A generalIy sígnificanl cruci'll f(ll:t is that 1he LypcS of ~ocial SU'ucturc which. in ~m evolutíonary sens~, Can he cJearly carcgóri:.wu as "primitivc'; dis­play ¿l spccial promlnen.cc of kinship as a bas!s of (he c¡llegorizmíon of membcrships [lncl e1igibilitíes in imp{'1rtant collectivüícs_ Thcrc is also an impor­tant group of socictics wherc no important colIec­tivity exists thm is índepcndcnt of kinship. however complcx the internaI ramiíkatíons of the kinship sy~t('"m may he. - Kinship'" struclUrcs as such are c!early subjec\ to

important processc-s of functíonal dífferentiation. Economic .me! political J\mc[íons ilre very wídeIy inslirutionalil.ed in kinship uníts. ihough these func­[ions generallv. in exlenslon ol' membership aud in time ~pa.n. tr:,nscend lhc nucle:lf iamily. On the hic-her socíclal levc1s, howevcr. intc~rat¡ve func­tions pTCs,cnt a m.Hjor obswclc lo suctl inslitution­alizarion. beca use of th~ inherent parüclIlarísm cf kinship references. Hcnce. a! certain slag.:!s jn the structHral devel0pll1ent oC societies. partícularism on kínshíp bases presems ooe of I.ne majar obstaclcs 10 hígher-level integration. At lhc pdmary le~els of Ole function of socíalizmiol'l. pntlcrn-maimenance ís everywherc vcry closeIy hound lO kínshlp llnÍts. BOL in tcrrns ol ¡he imperative of socíetaI ynlue­stabilizatíon~ i.e .• a higber level oC patlern-mainte­nance; this necessarily ccnlers al a low leve! in lhe specification sedes. PreciseI)' because segmentation is so impoctant in the kinsbíp sphere, dependence solely on kínship unils for pattcrnwmaínrcnance is precarious, These statemeots should 1101. of courSCJ

imply that lhe conneclion canoot be maíntained throllgh diffcrentiatíon in the st.atL1S~S of different Idnship units. Thc difrerenlimion of roya! and arislOcr<ttic kínsh¡p !ineagcs from l.he '"cornmon" pcoplc is ene ll1ech~mjsm by whkh, wíthin certain Iimils, pauern-maintcnance and intcgrmive func­lians can he pcrformed without sacriñcing the kin­ship basi~ of org()njz~~tion.

Jn this sense, every struc(ural unít cardes some share in meetíng evcry fUI1clional imperatlve of Lhe society as a whoJe. But the elfcctiveness of tlHocalin o stlch r~sponsibílíries amone hi!!hly seg~ menled ~nits lends 1,0 decrcasc as the '""fun~tions go írom a lower lo a híghcr position in tlle hicrarchy of

'T'a1cott Pars.ous: An OutHne of 111e Social Systcm 49

control. There is. ro be sure. a very important coun­tervailing considcration concerning the ürrnncss of institutíonaliza1ion: as no!ed aboye:. undel' ccrrain circurnsl a I1ces a ver: im port a nI pan o f the pattern­maíntenance function mal,' be bighlv deccntralized. Sincc kinshíp units., howé~cr. are. h~v nature híghly segmcntcd beyond (he pcrformunce oE p~lllern­

maíntenancc funcüons ror thcir constituent pcr­sonaHtics and imegrntívc fUl1crions within the units themselves, thc other leas¡ problemalical fl.lJ1ction for thcsc unils is the ~conomic. lndecl1, íl IS Stri king in cornparative sociology that on1y in tht! relativc1y very recent lypC~ of modero índuslriaJ soc¡~tics (with mínor exccptions, like ~lúYe-plant,~tlon econ~ omjes) hns more Lhan a smaH fnlCtion of (he func­tion of economk production becon1c cmnncip;.ltt:d from diffuse "emhcddedne~s" in kinship structurcs~ This dcvelopment has bcen dosel)' ~!ss()ciated , ... ·1th the faer. rhat in aH cxcepl rfllly prímitive pre­industrial $ocieties, lhe major portion of produc­tivity has come from agrkl..llture. Despite Ímporwnt v:lriaüons. there are certnín common stnlcturnl featurcs ()f pcasant sodetics whcrc most ('If thc popuIatiO['l have bcen organized ns kíns.hip Bnits. living from agricutluml production in <l subsysr.em operMed predomirwntly hy mcmhers of the kinship group workíng by vinue of lheü ~tscrih¡;d !'latus in. lhe unlt. In such c:.tSCS, lhe ascríbeo pattcm hus in general exrcndcd 10 ínstitutiona.li1.ltlion oí genera· tional succession jn properry-holding and prodllC­ti\ie functloo. in an impor1ant scnse, the ftHnlly firm. in the carlier stag:cs of indllstrialism llnd be­fore. has in non,,~rícult'Ural1ield$ extcnded the sume basic ()rganlzati(~n.a] pattcrn; but cxccpt on a Véry

s.m a,1 1 sea le, this embcJdcdness h~¡s be~n confincd to thé hi!!hcr "rnan~lgcrmlH funclíons, and non-kin huye wo;ked in oper;líve c~lpadt¡es. Howc..,cr. var­ÍOllS typcs of patrínrchnl collectivilies have assimi­lated non-kin employccs in panerns of reJatiol1shíp simí1;.:¡r to those of kínship. Ag~in, cccnomic func~ tion \\'íthÜ1 lhis Slfuctuml fr:Hncwork must be pcr­forrncd at a rcIativcIv low level of dífrcrcntiatioll. Jl is dosely connccted ~vith a rathcr e1emcmary phnsc of the cconomic division of labor and (he corre­sponding extensivcness of markcl.<;'.

Anv collectivitv is <lIso. functionallv considcrcd, a poliíicaJ unít ofihc s()cícty. A unít Ukc lIle nuclear farnílv i~, howcvcr. so ~m¡)n lhat on)v hy vírhlC oC very ~p\?cial stltus can it pcrform ín~ro~tant polit­ieaI funcdons al any hur il lo\\" Icvc1 of ~rcdfic::ltíon. Thió) npplic3 CV(':o 10 lin\!agcs. though. since 1hcy C~HI institutionalízc gent:nltiona] Sllcccssiotl, lhcv can be much more importnl'll than nucJcar f(lmili~s-and, as in the case of roval famiJjcs. thcv havc bccn thc pnramount agcncié's of SOciCly-widc politic;)l rc­sponsibílüy, Thc kinship principIe has U1CIl bccn

extended 10 t,he polítkal role of a c<..mplcx of .arrstocmtÍc lincagcs which st.and rn varying rcial}(lnS to rovultv.

Tl;ere- are, hov,:¡;\'er. scvcrc fU!1Cljooal ditTiCllltrcs í n 1. he j nstiwt ion a (íZ(J.ti~Hl of n~~l rl y "pure ,. glY\.'~m­

mení by privileged kinship units. 1 t h.as b~cn most st~ibIe: in cert,lin 5.m~!l-5C'alc ;ücíelíes, lif\.c lh~ cily­SlalCS (lf antiquiry or the :-,c:mi-independcm s(ate!:i of btc medieval ~lnd C¡¡rly rrwl..h:rn Furope--­whcre. incídcntalJv. tnonnrcnv hí..t<; heen Lhe c\.cep· don r~¡!hcr than th~ rule. ~ .

h secms. aftcr 1 he ahovc an~dvs¡s. Lh;\! ¡ntegr~ltivc funclions {~nd 10 bcco(11C ~(rl1Cl·~lrallv d¡lh.!re~tíaH:(j ncar (he ¡Op of ¡he: soci\!t<Ll s\'siem (;r or!!.;]n¡z~\\Jon. m()st conspicuQusly in the c~l~e 01' '(he judiciary t.':le· Tllcnt of lhe lega! systecn. Alni()~t ah\.{lys a pdv;ále legal proression has dc\'cl(\r~d l;'¡lCC ¡HlJ ¡:~ more exceplÍonuI.

The Difjerclltialíoll Polirical Strllcttlrcs

Becausc ()f the conncctíon Df rar~mlOunl ~ocíeral cullcc(lvíty org.mÍzmíon and polí¡ic .. d fum-¡jon 0\11-

lincd, the fl1nct¡(}n~d dírrcrentiatíun of POlílic¡d Ir,~lI\l othcr S!l'ucturcs also tends 10 COlne llc:lf lhe tnp t)f

¡he sociclal hícrarchy. "hCf(! ;lr€ l\\"\,\ prelimin:lry 5tcpS. Th~ firq lS lhl! dit¡l:!'rcnt¡~it¡oH t.)f kírl."hip units carrying higb p{\lili.::al res.pol'tsihi!ity (and cnjoyíng c()rre~ponding privilegc5,-royaf ilnd ~~rístocr;:l1ic lineagc!'-!-from Ihe comrnn!1 kinshin unüs, The SC!COI~J j~ [he díir~rcn[i;lti¡)n of (he polit¡cal from the pa.ucm-m:tintcn2.ncc ,mJ írHl.~grat¡':,'e fUllction:-, \)1' such high-levd II nít~. BCC.lll:\C of t he Íl"n pCrH l ¡ves discusscd ahüvc, thi:::; m::curs ,h:l\\ \\" :md ls never compk~1c :H the top; tbough. \lf ~oürse. as In mos{ müdcrn ~oCieLíc':i no\\'. all ihC" ... ~ hmctions ¡'lIay he takcn from the kín~h¡r unils as :-,uch.

Lowcr JO\vn. howcver, :w imp,-,rlant pr()(:c~s üf diltercntiaLÍon invob:cs thc j'olilícal fU!H~·t!ütL Thc focal initiaJ probkm herc coocc-rns the n:~~trk\¡nns Ül1 the m()h.ility of rcsources ímp(l~"d by th\! tive Hspect of kimhlp. Onc cn.\ciai proce:;.s is ck\'cIopmcnt of S\.)mc.: kind tlr "·biJn:atil..~r;!c:-:,·· Für umh~rslandab!c rcnsons, ihcrc ;lfC serious ob~t;)ck$ lo the fl.:linquishmcf)r of conlroL hy rhé funC't¡(\,mlll~' dill"w,c "hh.:hL:st il111hm'j(les," ()r ¡he cln,Ss.tc[l! func­fion.s ¡)f goq::rnm~nt, in lhe ""tüp p(\ricy~ma\"'inf!" M'Id ¡alCf the lc!!ís.\ati\;(' tleld:\, lt is tllus in Ihe ",ld­mini\lfatÍvc" :ll~ca 01' pnritktJ functkm-·-.. ,thc imp1c:­mcmatíc)l) oí' de\:¡~í()lh through "technic;li" nr('l~ ccdurcs-th::li (bis pro~L'~s of ~WYC'rcnd,níon I¿nd;-; 10 ccnlCr. Enfranchiserncnl 01' poli¡icí.¡] :-:,upport is !!l2ncmilv more ditllcuh lO ín:-,¡¡(ulil)!lü}ízc bu~ S(lmt.:­

tirttcs hús h;\Pp(:fH~d--" ~.g'7 ¡ 11 C; rcá ~jcJ'not!'¡¡C:y, From this point ()t víe\\', withín c~~r¡a¡r, ¡¡m¡ls, ¡he

primacy of Lh~ "polic)' dcc.i:)lQn~" ruUSl. be tJ.kcn as

,50 Gcnl'rnl llltroduction

gívcn. \Vithin lhese limits. {he crucia] considcra~ tíons are, nrsl~ the disposrlhili[y of human ~H1d matcri;:¡1 fCSOllrCe;s, arH.L sccot\d, thcÍr ~lIa]iry rcln.­tivc lO the !1ecd. In (he hlltcr con{cxt, tbc compc~ tence ol' pcr:o.onnel b salícnt. Ckil.rly, kínship ¡lSCrip~ tinn imposé~ frus1rating limils in hoth rcspccts. Though 1 he dcficicncy may h~ partly compcnsLltcd thl'üllgh training ascríbcd pcrsonncl~ therc is no gUí.mtnlcC [b~lt tbc pcr~on ascrihcd for .. flll1ctíon by kínshlp SUlhlS is tbc O1os1 competent avnilable; in nny case, lhe vcry diH'llseness 01' kínship rclalÍ<:ms scvcrcly lil11its disp()sability.

In thís connectior.. one rnus[ consider thc rcla~ livitv of the funclioní~l C<ll:cQorics being u:)cd here. Of éours.c. thc fUllctions of a"'bun.::~aucr41;ic organiza­tion may. frol'l1 a more gencwl point of vic\'I/, faH in any cUlcgory. In parlÍCular, carly burcaucr':lcies vcry fn:.:qllcntIy have subscrved "cconomÍc" func­,ions for the sode1y. A promincJit exampJc is lhe wnlcr-control fnnction in rivcr-val1ev civiJiuitions, emphasized hv \Veber <lnd \Vittvo!!cl The esscntiaJ poiJHs, hO\\'CV/CL are r:;¡ther mat th~ [OCtAS oi col1cc­live responsibilírv for ¡he bureaucratic organization 18 thc ,;lOp control" of the over-all 50cíCI.al coIlec~ tivity amI thn't tbe proccss of ditfcrcotiation pro­cecds froO) this focal poim. This ís the primary crirerio[l of íts subserving a polilícal function, in ihat H stlbservcs f!.oals deJined as csseotiaJ to the socjelY as a sys[e~ Uhrough the C'yes~ of course, of ils "ruling groups."), and not to its sub110its in thcir "prívate ,. ~üpacities.

A parall':;] process of developmem niay occur whcre a subunÍt 01 1he society, origínallv or~J.nízed on thc basis of kínship. l.mue-rgoes~~;[n2c;ur"T dJi1cr­emiation in [he polítícal funcdolls relative tú the rnore diffuse m21trix ()f kinshíp. Perhaps the most f~!mílh, ex:~\mplc is the cvolLlTion oI rile fumilv tlrm ioto a burCílllcratic organizarion. Simílar phénom­ena 1m})', howcvcr. be found in thc milil¿¡fV flcld and rmm\' othcrs. .

lIí thís scnsc> '-ve mav S:lV that tbere are Ni/O

cssemíal srruc1mal featLlrC$ "'of burcaucracy. The c:haractcr of [he organlz:Hiol1 LmlL sce.Q in rclation to ilS environment, has tbc prímary charact~ristíc of "'functlonal spccificity" and tbus of lhe r<:btive ern::mCir~llí()n of ilS sublmits írom strnctural amaJ~ gl.unation wit.h stntctur~:,; &ubscrving olher fune­tions. For the individual nlcmber unit~, on the other h¡ind, 1 he .:~scmial point is the definilion of 1heir roks in tcrm~ or occup;::¡ticn.

Func{ionai specífid1.y [or rhc collectivÍlv ímrllies thc coUcctivÍ[y's rclative indepcndence fróm struc­!lIral jnvolvemcnts or '"fuslons" with struclUTal llnits suhscrving olhcr functions. As \Véber made so ch.~ar- hO'\o\'e:ver, thcrc musr be íl "non bureau­cratÍc" elcrnen1 jn control of such a coHectivity)

"dviní! it íts primary function:IJ orientaüons-­rndce~L Iherc mily be several laycrs oí such n011

bllTCílucratic control. AIso. jI) so far as its funcLions. nrc spccialized within the ]arQer svstcm, sllch nn organization \ViII. in addi(ion to iís i~tcrnal arrange­men's. havc to be rd~ltivcly spccitlcaBy organizcd in t.wo fundarncnt,11 respecls, First, its own mcmbcrs wm not be the primary "consumcrs" of its output, whether this output be governmcn1aJ administrative scrviccs, cconomic production, cducJ\tíon. 01' cvcn tbe "cure of souls." Thcre wiH, then. have 10 be somc form oí instilutionalizmíon of the terms on, which the outpUls are mude avaílable loor. ill sorne C<ISCS, compulsorily imposed1T upon, these ·'consumers." Oue par. iClllarly importan! line of diHcrentiation here is that bct\vcen organizatíons which do and which do not lakc tbeir beneficíaries intt) somc typc oE membcrship status. The ordinary busines.s tlrm is of tbc kínd which does nor; a physi~ cal commodity. once sold, usu<llly does not imply a conrinuiog relalíon of solidnrity hetween seller and purchascr. In slIch fields as educatíon. however, the proCC:i;S of "scHing:' of dispOS2J. c.mnot be com~ pleted in ti. single quick Iransaclion. bm ímplics both a long continlling relation betwecn lcacher 3l1d stu~ dent, ::md a process of íntcfaction impossible wíth­oul common collecljvity mcmbcrship. PupHs or students are. thus, members of tbcjr school or col­lege in a sense in whích cllstorncrs are not members oC the firm íTom which they purchase.

The third bask set of relailons of a functiol1ally specific collec1ívity to its environmcnt conccrn tbe processes of procuremcnt oí' the reSO\.lrccs nccessary for thc performance of its fLmctions. ]'hese can he dassified under two ~cneral hcadings, name]y, physical facilities, jnd~lding work premises, a¿d human scrvices. The terms of acqtlisjtjon~ utiliza­tion, ,md disposnl of (he: former are inslitutionalized as propcrty: th():,:\c oí [he latter. as occupmion. There is a fundamenta] asymmetry in the relations be­lween (hese two essentia) ¡;:ategories oC resources, ín thilt physical facilities can be definitivc1y sepa­rated from lhe agenls of theír rroduclion.~" whcreas human sCIvices are insepan1l1le from the: organlsm and pcrsonality of lhe individual agent-Ihey re­quire cither his pbysical presence al a work location Ol" control ayer his aclivüies in sorne othcr location; n.nd~ mOSl important, lltilizlltion Di the individual's serviccs is conditíoned by his adjLJstment hetween

17. For examp!e. the services of lax-collecring agencies (tre oflen unwelcome io their "coosumers." ¡he laxpayers. bul are just ,l!\ ins1itulionally reguintcd ;JS Clre the retalions o[ sel1eI'!' and buyen, ín an onHnary commcrdal markeL,

18. Ln.nd ¡s '11 sPt!dal límiting c~sel both bec::m5e of its nonproductibiJity ;)nd because lhe localion of <l given aren is ínevocílbly iixed.

Ta1cctt Parsons: An Outline 01 tIle Social System 51

the expcctations in his work ¡-ole and the othcI roles in \vhích he 1S involved_

Given that a11 hum:m personalitics :lre <lnchorcd in lhe nexLls of kinship, the most crucial of thC'se role-adjustmcnt probIcms is the one hetwcen the occupatíonal und kinship roJes of thc same person. As notcd, one vcry common case is thc simple fusían. of the two--thc "work" a persol1 docs is performed in his kinship role as such, At the oppo­site extreme is fuIl "chattej" slavcTV, where maxj~ mum disposabíWy over services is obtained through complete dcnial oC Ínslitutional Jegítimacy to any kjnship roles al L1n-cle~lr¡y, an exceptionnl and inhcrcntly unstable arr:mgcmenL The r1,,¡ost lmpl1r­tanl additional type ís the m()dern (me!' of oecupa.­tional role characterized by slructural segregatían of work roles from kínship, but with the cOl1comi­tant. expectation Lh,tt rnost normal workers will have kinshíp roles as welI---though sorne. líkc cdibale priesthoods and relígious orders. are similar lO

slavery in denying kins.hip roles. The most ímpor­tant fentures of the modcrn occupntional role are strucwral separation af the houschold and kinship group rrom control over work performance. and control of hoth perform~ll1ce and rcwan]s by the funclionally specific organizaüon. 'Ihis generaH: implies the separation of physicaJ premises oi work írom the household. and separation of property rights in physical fllciJitics and sources of Temu­neration fmm the personal property of ¡he role­incl.lmbent, 11 is importnnt that these critcria bave applicd to a very sm~lJl proporlion t.)f adult human beings. except in the modern industrial lypc of S()cletv. Th~ abo ve díscussion began with the problcm of

the structural differentiation of polilical funcllon from the ditfuse matrix involving pattcm-mainre­nance and ílltcgr~~live fllncc¡ons- It also startcu wiLh the over-alI socíctaI level 01" co!1ectivitv slructurc Le" lhe par;¡mount c()J[ectivity which ~ ¡n~l¡tutíon~ alizcs thc undcrlyíng moral ccmrnunity. By logical progression, howevcr, we arrivcd al the probkm ()f strnclurc and st:llUS io thc socicty 01: spccific­function colJectívilics gcnemJly. \Vhcn we disctlsscd the rcgulation of thelr "disro~wl" fUnClil1l1S and their acccss to disposahIe resourccs. \Ve incvítahlv touchccl on what is 1I5uullv called thc economic org::mizatiol1 of a s(")cic(\,. 'Ít is now ncccssary to discu~s Lhe ¡alter somcwh;lt more fullv and to rék)te it lO po]itical organizalioo. -

Tite Slrt1cfural Di[jenmlialitm (JI l/U!: Fcoll(lmy fr()m O¡/ter SH¡';~ysICIIlS. Political function is par­ticu]arly imirn:ltcly rclaled ro lhe collcctidty corn­ponent of social structurc, II is csscntíal1v the faci1iláticn ol atlaining colh::c1Ívc g(l~¡ls and c~n!crs on lhe decisioI'\s ¡¡hum such goals anu lh~ mübilíl.tl-

tion ()f socielalrcsources relallvc to them, espccial1y thc intc~rati('m of the reJevant coUectjvít¡c~ for thc:sc g()3Is. J)l')itícal fUDe!Ío!'! i);~ ilS noted, fundamental lO thc socie! y as a wholc_ Bu: analvlicallv, the s¡Jmc consídcrati{")-ns apply to all the S(;cíCly's s-ubcoUcc­tivity units, H follows that \'\.'hat has becn calleu tite s.peéifk-funclioIl cüllectivíty 1S dcfincd prcciscly as a coUectivity for whlch. in ilS illtemal organizmion, po]itica] function, Le., efrcctivcncss. has prímacy ov¡:r other f\1nctions_ F()r subcolJcctívWcs. ho\. ... '­e ver. the !wals ¡m:~ nol in this strLlctural scnse SCt "íntcrnall~,~' thou,gh they nmy or m;)V nol he se! autonomóus]v. and in re'fercncc tQ th; more inclu­sive ~ystem tÍ1eir goal may or m~ly nOl he polilicaL "nll1::; lhe fl.lnction of ti bu;;;inc::;s l1rm is primarily ccotlomic; ils ir:; "pmdllclion:' blll ¡ti> in[crnaI organization must be anaJyzcd first in po]itiC'¡¡/ terms, The po¡¡¡lcal í;,;, ho\\'cvcr. h\:fC cün·

hcncc. thc rc1nlíon hct\\'cl:n thc otilc!' ~~SPCC(S af lile sub~ystcm wiU

be dífTerent in diffcrcnt of specific-function colleclivities. Thc orClmízation;;, oí a govcrnment t.1dministrati\'c agcnc~. of ;:l univcr:sit\\ ~ilid of a business firm nMurnllv' dílfcr í',reatl\', ln spite of ihese variations. the r~lat¡\'e pl'omi~cncc of $pecj{lc~functíon coIlccl ivitícs in thc ~1ruclllrc 01' t.hc ~ocíelv is tbe most iml)Ort~mt ::.ingJc ind(!x of tbc differe-nti(¡liol1 of thc p()!itical frmn (';¡h(~r structl1rc", Societies diJ1'er, ho'wcv-cr, hoth in the ()f this dirfcrcntial.Íon ~H\d in its incidcncc_ Comp:\rcd lO some Emopcan sociccícs_ American sncicLV. al l¡:i.l,st until recerttlv. has had subs(anlÍ .. !llv kss' dcvcloo­meot of buré:wcr::tcv in ~ovcnmH::nl- amI mor~ of'ít in thc ficld oí ecollo¡'\lic J)roc!uctiot1,

Lntcr. WI! \\'iH discuss specít1c J'tlcdmní<:'llls which poli, ic::d functít)tl is di rTcl'cntially inSliw­¡ionalizcd. Thc most imp()rhHlt c::ttcgn.ries nla)' he dcñncd as !c:ld .... ~r~hip, t.iLHhority. and ¡W\\'CL

Economic hmerlo!), ~\S dístim;:uisbcd trom 1he poli tlcal. íl1\!oJvcs rhe prod llC'ti(~n and :dr('e3!ion of disposahlc rcsourCC$_ !':'co/lomÍ(' hm~{ion i:, cxcr­císcd on]y when import:u'tl avnibbJc rcsmm::C$ :lfC means to a]tcrnalívc ;,;:mh, í.md ai s()m~ Ma!:!c are 1101 committcd lo a ~pcdí1c lI~C< t\ naly~ís uf" s.mall grollp:> shows lhí.tt rhi.<; le.¡ aiwnys and nC\:(:~~:líi!y tfUe of soci:'ll lntcractinn, T hus ~lrpn:wal as ~l sarll.:lil)J1 cannot t::ffccüvclv regubte :lCti":\11 ¡f Íl is commÍltcd in <idVallCC 10 on'~ rr~dícié:d act oC onc group mem·, bcr witlwn{ réL'rcncc: ltl the ayaiLtbiHtv 01' IJwrc hÍf~hlv v~¡[tlcd nl1crnatin~~, Tni::: woulLl be""'c<Juh'akni

- - I

lo aW:lrding prizcs for SlICCC% il1 a comeSI, \, ¡,110m holding any competÍ! íon.

In ~()ciClV. bü\\'evcf. ~mch unlts '.l1"C ::;\rLi(:lu,.~d ,1<:;

roles and ~ollcl:(i\"Í!ies, <ls. cxcb;mgcHble phy:.;ic;J¡ facilities_ ~nd ín cert~¡n Otl'l:.:t' é,\¡(·~N¡(~:;'·-"·-é.!:: .. "l)(¡ck;:¡ges" (1í C0i1111111rlicab[c S\ rnbolic m~~tn\r~l!.

'- ~ ~

General J 11 troc1nctioJl

Trnclitiona.I1v (me majo cr¡rcri .. )l1 of thc valuc of ccon()n11C r¿SOUfCI!$ Ís rehtive .sc:,u'cíly. The oHtc!' J"nost importanc onl..~ is. general ulility for diíYerenl funcrions, Sorne rhysical commoditíe5 ;)fC CX~ trc::mely Iím¡,cd in adapt;"hilily, vI/hile others h~lve considenlblc range. For cxampk land, its utílíl y ¡imi¡¡::J only by type of soiJ <lnd clíl1la!e, cnn he LJscd fOf ,'W\\ in() iL widc v~rríctv oi thíngs. Another cxan~plc l/thc tluromobilc,J a highlv genemlizcd facíli!y of '·priVfJ.1C" lr¡¡n:-}ponatio~, ~vbosc 'llo:¡cful­ness, howcvcr. is cnLÍrely oependem on ¡he system 01' roads.

'The pnssibilities of generaJizing abollt physical commoditics and huméH'l services as resourccs arel howcver. inherentIv limitecL The utilization of SC,lTCC rcsources is': dcpcndcnt on thc instítutíon­alization 0(= mechanisms which. indepcndcnt oí: 1'05-session ol' or advance commitmcnt to nny specific commouj{ies. scrvices, informatian. eIC .. make 1t pos,.,ihlc to gain :.!ccess to widc ranges of diff(!rent facilities as need for them develops. In known societtes, thcrc ~!rC In particular (wo highly gen­eralized mcchanisms of this lype. namc)y poJitical p()wcr anc! money; thc laltcr. oí course, has pri­m<tcv of cconomÍc functlon.

B()lh p<IIhícat power and mency rC'lllirc the instítUüonaliz¿Hit)n of the disposahility of faciliries. Nc:gátivelY, ihis mean~ climirwtjng or drasticnlIy weakenÍng {he ascríptive rights ~o Stlch facilities, \vhich LITe alv,'ays prc,mincnt in tlle more unJiHcr­entJateu soci:~) SnUCltlfcs. PositiveJv. it involves ¡n~ stitutíon,llizing ~dequa!e' righlS óf control and dispo:'-\aL in lhe form of righ1s of contracto property. and occupariona] use oí human serví ces, The prorninencc of ascrípLion makes ¡he right of (115-p()sal oc ",:dienatíon" particularly important~ espe· daHy wiHl regard te human services, rclatí ve d::trily of righls of cüntroj \vithín the 1irníls of occupatiúnal cornmitmenl are tmDortanl. Thc modern institution M prop..:rty. as <lpIJliCd to physical commoditics ntthcr than money, ties together various compo­nenes which, in European feudal law, v.'ere distríb­llicd helwecn ditIcrcm units ,11] having ridlts in the samc "thing"-l:lnd being- (:}Í cotU"Sc,"-th; most ím­ponant single examplc. "Property rights hnve be­come mueh more c1earlv difl'crenlíatcd from vuriow::, \,)¡hcr cüntraclUaJ ríghts, n(Hably those involving servic\.;s, ,mc.l from political jurisdiction over )and and over pcrsons' acts on lanu. There ~\re Iimits on thc propt;rtv owner's freeclom; bUl modern Dwner­ship' is ';:m 'es~nti~ll condition of genen~lized dís­posability oí' physicaJ cornmodity resourccs, inde­pc-ndcnr of political powcr. The same appli~s, of cüursc, to thc lnstifutionalizatíon 01: occuDalionaJ r()l\!~ indudíng frcedom to contraer fOf 'services through employmcnL

i\'1oncy is not ,1 commodítY1 bm 1S a vcry special moue M lhe inslítutionaliz<11íon of cxpectaliol1s ami commilments (hrough commullJcation. lt is a gen­ercllized type of cybcrnclic mechani"Tn which rnakes it possiblc for ,he unÍ( lO mobiJize. subjcct lO norrna­(ive rcgulatío[1, whatcvcr resourcl.;$ it nccds or wishes, within thc llmits of ílS "nl~¡~ns:' cxpressed ín 111011ctary tcrms. Moncy. ín [he social system in which it operares, dcpenus on <'1 balancing system of reciprociLics. dcvelopíng out oí thc klnus of more dirfusc rccíprocí!ies which ccrtain anthropologists 1íkc 1\·1~linowski aod L~vv-Strauss havc analvzcd. Iní1ation and deflation aré symplOO1s that this re­ciprocnJ systcm is semchow out of balance.

\Ve norca that {he usefulncss of the aUlOmobile lS dependent on a system of roacis and, ir may be .added, on ¡he implementatlon oi adequare rules oí traffie controL The usefu)ness oí moncv as a much more generalized facílity lS dependent -(m ,l system oi markels <lnd adcquatc rules govcrning lhe con­linual fiow of transaciions through m:lrkcts. A mar­ket 15 a detlned social 5vstem in \vhÍch there are institutionaJized expect:~tíons of willingness to exchangc dispos<lble !::tcilírles for money and vice versa under a set oí rules for scu1ing terms and tor the righls and obl¡gations assumed and rdinquished in the process. Gcncrally, markets bccome more significantas acccss to them is not partícularistical1y restricted, espccially on an ascribcd basls.1:l The in~ sdtlltíons of comnlct and property. amI the mone­tary mcchanism irselL are the bas(!s of {he market as él system: and lhe basis of "labor market," the insti­tutlon (lf occ:upational cmploymcnt.

Aloney and Pm¡·er. The eoncept oi politíca} pOwcr has becn highly controversial ln socio]ogícal litcralllre, and therc is not the consensus ubout it that thcre ís among economists about money. 1 wau!cL hOWCVCf. mZe 10 sugges[ a concept which builds dírectly on lhe paralI~r\""ith money as a gen~ cralized mec:hanism fer contro1líng the altocalion of resources. The polilical function lUlS hecn deflned as that of faci¡¡tatin~ {he effectíve atlainment of a coHeclivity's goals. GoaHntainrn1;nt has been spe~ ci1kaliy related (o I he prucesses of chrmge in the interrelations bClween ;1 system and hs cnvlroning situmion. For those C'xercisi ng polidca] respúns¡~ bility, thís inc"írably invo]ves important elements of l1ncertaínty. E!Tecllveness. therefore. necessicates the capacily tu make decisions and lo conlmit re­so u rces, indepel1dcmly of specific: condilfons pre­scrihed il! adwmce by ascription 01' by some kind oí prlor agreemcrll or contrnct.

19. Very specb1ized markelS where ¡¡ccess is lírníted to spcdal gl'Oups of "pwiessionals_n likc Lhe New York Stock ExC'hul1~e. are not rcany exceplions to Ihb gen­craliz:.¡,tion.

'Taleett PafSOns: An OuUinc of the Social S)'stem

\-Ve may define power (in the analytical, polítical scnse) as generalized C:lpacily. indep~ndent of prior comrnitments on (he rekvant level of spec.íflciHion. to innuence thc allocatíon \)( res()urces for thc !!'o;)ls of ';1 coJIectivity through ím-okínQ- fhe- in"lil L1-

tíanalizeu ()blÍ!.~~Hi~n;s (Lc._~'lovahjcs) ~ of tnember unir:::;. utHízín!! ~ such sanctions as are te~ítjm¡zed through th:es~ obligatíans and lnstituti'onalized roles involved in lhe powcr sv!\tem. PO\ver should be conceived <Ji a circula¡ing mcdium and. for :HJV

unir. as a scarce resour..::c. F'ower is uocquall;' dí~­tríbut:ed in ¡J. sodety. a disproporlionate share beíng held by units carrying poJitícal rcsp()osibility·-jl.lSl as a disproporticmate share ()f l'hc: weahh uf an econ omkaUy de"cloped SOcíC1 y i$ control ¡el! hy [he units specializing in cc-onornlc productio¡1 ,~"J Like ecúnomic: firms. tmil:; specíalizing in po1il ¡Ca] func~ Üon are depcndent on {he rettlrll of th~ pcn\-'er (bey have "spem" 01' ··inve~ted-' through thelr dec1sions abou1 the al1ocHtion of resourcC's, This return, anal­ogous lO that frorn consumers' :'.pending, takes the form of the constíttJcnc\"s sahsfaction or dis'iatls­faction \vith thcsc decisions, and il thus dirc-Cl]v aff~cts lhe le::l<.1er$hip·~ capad!y to make furthe'r c(lmmÍtmcnts. Thc mechani:<.ms of power are not ncnrly s() sharply stn.lctured a':\ i$ 'rhe !11Clnetary mcchanism. thougb. in democnHic societies amI in various typ~s of assoclr\!ion \'vilhin thCn1, tht vote has functions as a unit whích ¡He partly :Hlalogolls lo tho:.\c ()f the rnonetary unit, lt cines nol. howcver. cover anything 1íke l'he proponion of {he \\'hole mnge ol' po\\.'cr ph¡;;onomena that thc mOlletary unit does_

Therc is a paralIel bel'ween poHtical enfranchise­meo\. as the cap'ldty to exercise politic¡ll pO\\'cr

. indcpendently of ascribed definitions üf oblígaiíon Of Lhose imposed fmm abovC_,and lhe devclopment of cünsumers' m~lrl;:t!¡S wbere the, con~mncr mav selecl from th<.: otTeríng.:; ¡¡vailablc :'Ind bave lhcfr prcferences excrdse a- crucial ínílllcncc on thc process of proul'lction ltsclf.

ll1St ~lS rnoney depends O!l (he ¡n~l iwüona[ízntion of contrae!. propC'rty, ~1!1l! ('lCCLlp,lIíon, Jkxihlc pc)litical actíon is mnll.: possiblc by lh~ ins[lLllli~)f1~

lO, In /:10th cormeclicm," í. i .. ¡mrorl~Hll no! to confll:'c inequaltt:y, Ils 3Pplied 10 "é,miillmiuft" llní! ... nlonc. wdl that for {he sociclY a, :1 whole, E;:en ;) soi.'ialbt sO":lcty impo:.ing ab""ohHe i:'4ualily oí" im:~mw on ;:1) holtsdwkl units wuuld g.ive ellcclil"e cOn1rül 1)[ musl /.if Ihe (';.:onomk reSOllrcc!> of Lhe 'mdNY 10 il~ ~(,l;:i.¡H¡<:d agt~!1cie~ ()f 1'1,)­duttion. Silnibrly, in :l "perfect" dcm!.)cr¡l~Y. ;¡!1 ~d\lll dl'il.cn(, mig,IH havc I!'qll:d pOM~r lQ ímtu.::nc.:: ¡he ::-dc¡;¡!o!l of lcadcrship :md cNwín ))i¡r.hly ~em~r;"ücd ,)rlOr.t;¡lTO¡¡S. uf g,wcrnme-nt HUL, in the "permú'<' I:Jllcll(ming. (lf C(ll­lccllve aetlün, t::üntrül of pll\\'er wonld h~wt w be .'d¡l!hdy CÚliccnuatcd in ol',!!i.íni/.ati;)r!," and kadl-'r~híp [ulc~ c[l.rry­In)!, s(l~dal rcsponsibililY for politic:l! f\lm'ti()t'l. Olherwj5{~, thcre wOllld be no dilTerenli;néd ¡)o¡í¡íc:¡! fU!1CLiol1 jil the: 5ódety,

a.lization of pOWeL The ir.stituti(lr\~Il¡z2tjon (:;f le:::d­crship í~ pHrjlh:~l to in:!! of C('nlracl in Lile; eC()HornÍc

ficld. lt ¡~ e$senti:)lh' lile imtitutíonaliz,;j1Íon of rhe righ( 10 make declslons cmnrnla¡n~ (/1(: collcc¡i"itv a,~- ;l who1c ~md lherebv imposín~ (:;~lü~atilms tm i1-" f'I1cmher units in thcir ~;¡riou~ c:"\¡;(:lcilie~,

AwlturiEy. Iikc pOlt'(:r. i~ ~l'rwther high!y ülYl­bigl.loUS [Cro1, It de::.i~n¿\{es ¡ht;;: pl)nlkal in~¡¡1 uti0r1 which is panlHcJ 10 p~orerty in ,,;cünomi(',_ 1 ¡ ¡;,; ¡be complcx l'f instítutionaliLed righl!- over toe c()n­trihutorv action::. (in CCÜ[wm!c temúnoloi!", '-:;c:r\'­ic~s-') o'f mCf~Jhcr liml~ of a c()l1C'ctjvi(\'~ 'Th:H ;-', aUlhorüv ínstiLUtlonallzcs ríghts ro m;¡l.:.é dccí:::i(m~ binding 'in spccific re:\p<a::ts-ui1 I.he rekv:lnt c:He­gories of mcmbcr unils . ..:::.g" padng t~~xe!-) tir h,l\"ing tü I:!nl'er military scrvk.c, Au!boril)' comprí,-cs t1lc general rules which gO\'ern (he ma!dn!! of <'pccific bindin!~ decísíons. P~mt.~r, on the \)[hc~ hand. is ~I mech<l~1i"im i'c!2.ulatlng lhL' proces'l (lf rn:!kin!:: aCIl\;J] commitmenls,L SDccif¡~ rje:nis (lf iJ.u(horitv -cnn be relinquic:;ni'd. jl!~t ,1:'. ~pe~~¡f¡c ri~Ü1(, 01' 0'\" ncr,;hip can he. But "élurh,lrÍ(\'" ¡" a non-drclll,llínc- mediurn in thc S3mc seme th:)l propcnv ¡ .... It is d1C' in~H¡ttJ­¡,jona1 ílunri" of [he func¡íoning úf pl,wer.~\

Some LimÍfs oi l'olirícal al/d Ecoli()/1/Jc

Spccíali:mion

As uscd here. po]iücal and c[,o!loml';; catcglnic" are !!encrn1i1.cd flJ)lctjon~d c:atc!!~,rie~ lh:l( pcnU':,H('

{he ;¡lllirt' SlrIJcture of lhe "od~;1 ~\'\.h::m, S'trucj urc-; wilh cithcr polití¡;:al 01' cconomic prírnac\- are..' fOllnu

al all fOUf k:vch l)f ¡n~títlT(í()nali¿cd f!N01<Hin:; cul­ture ülld intcrpcnNr;lic in dilrcr.:nl '\\'(t)''', Thm" díffcrenlíaled ()Cl:Ur¡¡!i()n~l j'oh: .. pcrl\wrn,mcc j, H

[01c~cl:ttegorv wíth 'rclativL' t!c('\rll;mic no matlcr jI; \,,:h~Jl fU\1ctic1na\ cnOIi..'.\t it lltilízcd, and (he sam~ ¡~ true rcgardíng lhl~ C(ln\­manJ Ol o(hcr facilities, c,g_. lhrollgh '-\\1. ner~h¡p ()f

rhysical C()mmodÍl¡C:~, This r(~llllws fí~)m {he f~lct

¡ha! thc crílcíÍOt1 (\f cconomic run.;.'tkm is th,11 it C'onc<.:rns <l r('~ource d¡~po,,~\bie ~hrütl;h !1Urb:l channd:-., Hencc, (l1i:; rCSNliC(", the "ldbor" ~')f l'C'I,l-

::,1, The,c; c(lnsitl('ratt'()f1~ ~i1G'·.' !ww al!)' an cHrd~(: ¡C~lÍ\1~,: t)¡)

rion (¡f th<: the- dec,ü,:HC Th~1( ,;,){("I' )):,)0. ,,\~'!I ~k~'¡,,¡<m :Jl

(lf ¡be,e rilan)' H\"b\'j"l\:;;'lÍ NI IhL' tol1t,"tl\'í¡y ,,\,'l-h .. lc, ~::;:~'~J~~-::;~\) ~r:~U¡ t

the­in-

¡:. flW,~t dr¡,¡n:lti\.' ~Hl C'te-i.,"~ ;(\h tHrn,- l itH ~lh.:li ~j),l't.'rH :,i ... hnini~t!';"¡()f'!, Th~ Ihcir Oti'iClé" liJ.',ht ;1( ¡he m~r\(. il 1:-. :1 ",¡,­

;,'''''''''If'''n'~ ;ln_". ~',i> ís ;'Ii'~' ¡¡"le:

wítb 'dú:Í\ 1hi" ¡¡:Áli<;i ü ~j nder"1.)rtl.l:.:;t)~:~,

5-' CClu:wl fuf roduct.iolJ

nomic thcorv, is cconomÍCnllv dilferenti.atcd if a dcvclopcd lai~or m~lrkl.'l L'xis(j. ~!nevítably, howcvcr, the!"(: are variOllS cO[1strainrs in ¡he sLructurc oi lubor mark,cls c:u;scJ hy thc imcrpcncLr:::tion of the cco!1omic:: <\Od v.<Hious non-cconomic faclors. Evcn Íl'l Ihe typcs 01' Inb()r or nlHxímum disposability­c.g., "opcratíve" dutics at rcJativcIy low levcls of l)fganil.t\tiomd rcsponsihility or tcchnícaI cornpe­tencc-thcrc are hasic ¡¡míls imposed by the in­CllI110Cl1t't:. mcmbcr~hÍp in kinshíp and (ltl1cr non­¡;conomic collcclivitícs. The hin ca!:.c ¡s. in a highly d¡nercntbted society. one ~)f thé impinging of paUern-maintcnancc funclÍons cm the econornk. As \Ve hélve secn, the s::lme kinds of limüs do nOl apply !o physical commodities. Similarly, the exccutíve role in specific-function collcctlvitíes. evcn in busi­ness firms, has spccial fcn.ture.s. becausc the politícal component of the role is so prominenl within the coIlcctivity. This fact causes much of the persistent recruiiment for s.uch roles lhroul!h chilnnels other {han a labor markct-c.g.: in [be family firm­even when malU\gement h:lS become almos[ fully '·prn[ essilmali1.ed," certa¡n constraints rcmaín. Onc constraint ís tbc "partlcularizing" of sclcction for emplüymcnt,,····-from outsíde rhe organization ()r by pmmotion. No syslem of sdeclion cntirely by com­pelitíve examim1tjon for particular posts has been Sl.lcccssful1y institutionalized, í.lppurcntIy búcallsc of the functíonal diffuseness of the role and the jm~ portance of relations bctwc.cn pcople al tbe top of an organization. In one sens~. lhe sclectÍon of leadcrship of the nuclear famíly through marriuge, lhrollgh thc "irralionul" rnechanism of romantlc Jove r<lthcr than tbrou!!h ratíonar ,HiSC8smcnt of sllítabílity for paren tul roles, is paralleL BOlh top man'lgemen1. nnd families are sm<lll groups whose members must ussoc:ia1.e verv intim<)íelv with each other oVer long periods. -' ,¡

Anolher consU'ninl 'ln thc labor market is em­ployment for professíonul roles. l-Iere the primary org~Ulizlliional goals be long [O eitbcr intcgnuive or pHttcm~maint:!nnncc functlons. Two prominent Slructural deviatíoJls from the normal commercial ma rket in (his. ficld ~Ire the "slidlng scalc" and tcnurc. Tbev are ~1~50ciated with inStitutions, Iike privilcged communicatiol'l. and acadc-mic frcedonl, (hm Ínsulate t.he role-incumbent from some of the pressurcs fron'! !aymen tha.t might impede the pcr­rÜrmallcc of complicated and delicate functions.

The differentiation of economic and political Iunctions from eac:h orher and from 1he otber two ís found operuting at the coUeclÍvitv level. In the first place, at the entlrc society's ft{nctiona! Jevc1, therc ís diífcrentüuion of collectivities with primacy of one function or anothcr. [n the cconot11ic cate­gory, tbe business firm ilO a c1ear case; volith it goes

tnonctary SLlCCCSS, i.c.~ the monctary cost-earníngs bahmcc, as thc priolary crhcrion-whcther or not it ís linkcd wíth proih aC[U:llly going to thc organi­zation's internal "propríctary" dcmcnts. Thc cost accounting (J( soclalizcd cnlcrprisc is just as subject to this critcrion as the profitability of privatc enter­prisl!. In politics Ihe c1earest case, hecausc of thc clcmcnt oi inevitable fllnctional dmuscncss dis­CLlsscd aboye, is the <:HJministrative ~lgcncy oí gov­ernment. The cxclusiveness w.íth whích crÍtcria of effectivcness govcrn the evaluution of collcctive performtlncc lS tlle rnain symptom of the degrcc of differentiation of political function. 1 n other words. the nmounl of powcr gcnerated by a colIeclivc unit--·the powcr output relative to the cost of its acquisiüon. stated in terms of the loss or impair­ment of loyahies incurred in the proccss-is the main critcrion of effectiveness. \Vhercas sorne col· lectiviries in a differcl1tíated society have polHical primacy in .. his sense, in all specitic-functioIl colIec­tivitics (l polítical component centers in what we have callcd "managemcnf' or "'Idmitlistration." In alI large-scale on~7mizatioos, thcsc functions be­come ditfcrt:ntiated fmm the operati.vc (mes.

Just us c()nstraints 00 the commcrcial or competi­tive struclurc ()f m,irkets are imposed by impioging non-economÍC fac[Ors. so in numv collectivities [here are constraims ¡'H1 the politi~a] primacy of their organízation and orientatioli to situations. In the busi-¡;ess 11r01, thc standard ef monetary slIccess íncorporates one sct of si.lch critería. In one direc~ (ion. Ü [ímÍ1s devotion lO "technicar' perfcctiún by

. applying critería oí monetary proflt-a f:lCl the imporéilnce of whíc:h technocrats cannot see­whiJe also limiIing the relcvance and Jegitimacy of pursuing política I power. In both directions) the limi1ations take thc form oí institutionalized mech­anisms of control which estabfish rnnk ordt!fS of considcrlltions whích are legitirnatcly taken into accotlnt ln decision-making.

AnOlher example oi the interpenerratíon of poli­tics and economJcs is the universality \\.'ith which t

in societ!cs with a highly developed monetary econ­omy, command of adcgu:ltc monelary funds be­comes an indispensable condítion of cffeclive opet­atioll-espcclally as the mechanism for mobilízing both physical facílities and ncccssary human serv­ices. The di[ferences bCl\vccn typcs of functionalIy spccific coIlectivJ1ies lie in lhe importance of the criterion of monetary success-whethcr a11 mone­tElry costs are expected eventually 10 be balanccd by proceeds dcrivcd from operatioIl, or ir is Jegitimate for the organization lO incur dcHcits which must be made up by spccial measures like taxation or solkit­ing contributioDS. lt is significant thal, in lhe filod­cm liberal typc of society, the critenQn of monctary

1'a1cott P;lfSOns: !\n OutIiw: ni thc SOC'Íill Sy~tcrn 55

indcpendence applics above all te two'classes of col­lectivitíes. busjness firms nnd households.

The lcadership and authoTÍty-power SlrUCttlrc ol' the modcrn university provide examples of the lirnitations on internal politic-al primacy paraI1el to i!conomic ones in non-business collcctivitics. The most impüftant opcraU\'c pcrsonncl are highly qual· ified technical speciaJísts working in many ditfercnt fields; the tightness of control by top management typical of firms engaged in physical produclion is impossible. That ¡s, internal [o lhc orgr:mization. power is much more decentralízed in its distribution than it ls in thc business organization. The institu­tion of tcnure is important botb as a roodific.ltion of [he structurc of thc labor mmket and as a limitation on ndministratlve power wilhin the organiz.ations"

FWfCI;(J1W/ Dillerel11illfion 01 Norms amI Vi/ll/cs. The samc basíc order oi functionaJ diJTerentiation we havc bcen analyzing OCcurs al thc lev~1 of diffcr­entiateLl norms. At thc ~()cictal1eveL the Jcgallnsti~ tutional complex 01' contact. property. ,md-occup::I­ti(mal roles is primari1y of ccouomic significance. This. complex ínc1udcs the institutional norros gov· erning money and its useS, ¡nvolved Ín all three. Money ís integrany involvt!d in the institution of contracl, beca use a large proportion o.f contracts involvc monetarv considcmtions, ano bccause ít 15 an institutíonali;'cd symbol-the paramCllll1l' sanc­tion of "restitutive 1aw," as Durkheim called iL Money also is the apex of lhe property syst~m; the monetary evaluatíon of other objects ¡lnd lhc con­vertibililV ef ;'rcar' assets ínto money ::lr(~ vítLll fea· tUTes of ~ny mo¡Jcrn propcrty systC~L Thc contro· versjes about units el account in sociaUst ecenomies show that moncy can be abolished on]y by invent­ing its fun¡;tional cquiv1l1ent: índeed, no socíaJist economy has scriously attcmpted te abolish it. hmv. ever much íts markct svstcm mav dirrer fmm free­entcrprisc. Moncy is ;lbsent m;ly in o. prhnitive Nallll'alwirl,):cltaft. Such a society ha~ nar rCl1chcd :t high lcvel oi differentiating cC()[lomic fLlnction. Fínallv, monc\-, is ¡nvolved with lhe: institutÍon,\1íl.a­tion of occup~tti(m, by virtl.lc of the ínstimtiol1ulizá­tion oí' tbe legitjrnacy of monetary renmneratíon for occupationalpcrforñmnccs. -

Basic ccol1omic institUlkms ~tre embüdicd in the forma] legal systcm. as :lrc tbe expccted variatior\s betwccn contcxts whcre thev are involved, \\,:ith or without primacy of econon\ic function. Thus thc directors (JI a, husiness ('orpüration are legaHy obliged. on penalty of liqllidation, lo operale to maintain finanda] solvencv~ !!ovcrnmcntaJ uDits aTe lcgallv nuthorizeí.l to imposc laxes to maint:ún the-ir fu~ct¡ons: ::md volunmry contributors to rcJígious, churitable. n.nd cJucaliomd colfcctivities are. legan)'

privilege<..l to dcduc( such contrihutíons from (ax~ abre ¡ncome.

Similar considemtiot1s llpP]Y to {he normatjve SYStCll1 govcrning political functíons. in govcrn­mental and othcr contexts. One cxample is the gov­crnmcntal cOllstitutíon oí thc prescribing the norms defining {he proccdurcs tor ~elcctjng gov­ernmenla] lelldership. (he nalurc ami limtts o{ their Hurhority whcn in o1Tict!. ilna the modes in whicn they m;))' lcgitimatel'y exercise powcr. Thc law ín­\'olvcs a cOnlpkx set of prcscriptíons fOI the norms gO'l/crning k:adcrship, ¡wchority, :md po,,:cr in pri­vate collectivides, ¡ncludíI11! thc denniÜon of vari· ations permissible by vinllc of dií'fercncC's in theír functions. An importílBt example of this in Ameri­e.m bw ¡s (he doctrine oi "puhlic intcresL~' ESSCIl­

tially, this draws ~llinc herwccn two broad cMegork·s nf ae1Ívides al\d o hence, bctween 1nc collectivitics cárrvin~ thcm on.ln one case. their ac{]ol1s ure lhcir "pri\'at~" concern. and the law 15 conccivcd DS rcgu­latory ín thc negativtf! sense. Rules kecping the ilctiv~ itícs withil1 bounds nrevemin!! thcm from injuring othcr pnrties Oí orh~f\'dse viOlating socict<ll vaJlIc~ and nOfms must b~ óhserved. I( ún the othcr hand, an activity is atTedcd wlth .a public int~rest, those pcrfol'ming ít b0th ~~njoy prívileges--,t:.g" [rno­chise~ to use ríght~ of w¡¡v-·anu assume ohH!!¡üions. like regula.tíon of rates "charged to thc puhÜc, not othcT\vÍse appUc:lblc. Esscntíally, actÍvüics which llffect lhc pubHc íntercs~ are defined as ínvolving a biger component of social political rcsponsibilíly than thosc tba( do not. The obligations I..krh·jng from this re'iponsibility musl be fulfilled: ¡hose who undcrU\kc them wilI be givcn the spccinl privileges, excmptions, nnd facilitic'J ncccs"ary for (hcir fu!Hl­ment. Undcr (he la'-\'. whctncr il be fOrmnllv W1'rfLctl or not, cvcry príl.':Hc colIectivity ha!) its ':constítu­don" or Se! ()f OO1'm5 go"crning thc polilícal func­tioo ... ncccssary for íts etfcc[iYe opcmtiol1.

The typc oí differentíation uru.:ler discus~i()tl aiso applks to valuc$, Valu('s cannot control actíon by mere "cmnnation:' Thcir il1~titL11¡ona!iz;HJOn in~ vol ves thdr spcciíkatior\ througrl a serÍC's of kvcls of furh:tion and situatkm. Th~ '-'¡¡¡ues of a prirn~!J'y functi()n~11 sub::;vstem, 01' a sacie!v, Hke tht~ CC()DOmV

or (he pality. c-onstítule thc {ini 'leve] of 5pccjfic~~~ tion rcl;:uivc: to thc ~encrr:J ~()cictal \'~llues, This spccifica[ion. il ís ~lcar. is by functioi\. For cxamplc, the CClJlCC.pt of econo!11ic r:1!¡onnI¡IY has usuaIlv becn interprClcd as ¿I psvchoI\.)!!ical gcnr.:r~d­i7.ntío;. It nl!'o has a dc1inih'.>ly n~rmntivc a¡;p:-ct: nnd a( the hi!!hest normarive Jevcl it 15 the tocus of lhe vnluc sy;tcm of ¡he ~conomy M II functional $uh­svsicm oí thc socien', .' No socicty enn a~"'ccpt economic mtionality ¡}~ lls

!mlst general ':iocletal Vi:¡luc·orícntalíon, ¡hough it

56 Gcncml Introdncf'lofl

can pInce lhe I:.'conomic highl.~~[ among it~ funcll0J1al priorir!C's. Empiric:Jlly. cconornlc mlionalHy must he C'valU:,Lted accon.ling LO its place and iimíts in IcJarion 10 [he highcr-Ieve! soC'Íctal valucs, to the svslc::m's leve1 of structllral dHl'crcntiation. ~Ind to thl.' ;;,ituation of the society. In :m fur, hawc\.'cr. as unics of rhe societv at all lhrcc of thc \cve:ls bcl()w thnt 01' '.'<tlues bL'ct~mc$ slructuraJ!v díf[crentillted in terms of rrimaey 01' cconomlc flJnctÍ(ln, thc hal!­nl<lrk of this differenlimion is that, rclatívc to their funclion~ ~md sjttlatiol\s within ¡he 5v~tem, units are to\"crncll hv lhis ecol1omic st:.md'\I\J. Thus, (hOLl~h ~oUcctivitié$ necd nol he spcciticaUy oríented to economic fllflction. r.here mi\V stíll be. in the fields of contract\ money: property,~and occllpa[ion, COnl­plexc5 1,,)f. institutionaI norOlS which t:lrc híghly emancip;3ted from non-economic coositIeraüons, For cxample, the insritutiomlJízatioo of hmd owncr~ sbip IJtakcs land far more dispo:sable as an eco­nomÍC resource tbao it wouId be! for in~tnnce, where righrs ¡ji' aJienarion Were not inslitutit'malízcJ.

Slmi.lar considerati0D$ app]y at the collectivity leveL Economíc values and norms :1pply in sorne degrce to al! coHectivities in cert:'lÍn aspl!cts oí' Ihetr functioning, whether rhis lnvolvc:s cconomic pri~ macv or not: thw, cvcn u church, v.'hose central fllnérion is r;r remtwed fmm cconomic primncy. must e\crcise sorne degree of financiaJ prudencc­Le .. subscribe, wiOún () ¡imítcd s.phere. 10 economic values. lt is, howevcr. the insr¡1 utiol1<tHzal ion of the crüerion ()f monet~Hy slIccess as the param()unt me::\sure of function \vhich ís thc hallmark ()f ~l col­lectivity'~ economjc primacy. Tbis. howéver. ís a function~\l valuc; and üs implicatic)Ds are ah'.:ays sllbJcct lo qllaUficatlon in terms of insritution.\1 varj· abiHtv at higher levels and situationa! vMiabiliL v at lowc; ones. ';rbus a firm producing dangerous d;ugs ()f nrearms i~ reguJated lO pmtecl inc()mpetent <llld

innocenr parLies from mhllsíng thesc products: such protection of thi rd partles is ane fundamental focus of the iI1S¡ÍWIÍOll of contraer. Correspondlngly. a rctaíI food lirm wm ~\dapt to 'he whims (perhaps, "convenk~ncc") oi Í(s CUSlomers as 1 he producer of p(nn:!r planls for l~lrge. fasl ships \.\'ill not, bcc!luse 01: the overwheIming importancc of tL;chnkuI Sland­nrd." of crrcct¡vc f,'Ierformance in rhe lal ter case. The c1<lssicftl ccOn()~íSb were not wh()Uv unrealhtic in speaking ol' moncy ¡\s i:t mea.~ure ~r value. E\'cn ~iven the high(·r.I~\f1.'l soci~tD.t values and s1il1 higher.leveJ c~¡]lllra! values, lhüt ()f economíc ra­tiollality js authenlíc and gcnuine.2

:'

Für "he socidogis.l.. ¡he criterj()l] of ;\ "~(:nuíne" C'IllnOl be liS "itbsi.)lulent~~:· In soci.!l ~J1d ClíllUr-;¡1

SY¡'lt;xnS, ll!i. we anc!lyze Ihem, ther'C HH1$! be hier;lrchies óf \'niue~, cach oC which mus! 't¡JKe (t l'C'L.Jlívc place. The sY'item g(H'e'fI1cd by ~ :.in.I.:de, uniwry. absolllie value i:-; thc límiling c;¡:.,e which í::: Etcrúlly "Qut of ¡h¡~ ,\'orld." ,

Thc ",ame considcrations apply 10 occupational roles. Sorne of thcse roles .He mH¡olv economlc in fllnclion. l\Jarginal protluctivity 15 tI primary stand~ ard of whclhcr thc service ShOllld be employed­which can roughly he cquated. undcr economícaHy ideal conditions, with that servicc's contribution to tbe. monctary succcss of the organizaliol1 cmplQying it. Such roles ínstitutíonalize economic rationl.tlity as their pril11¿lry vatuc. In other roles, such as most prof<;,ssional ones. ít ¡s a subsidiary v<ilue. In choos­ing bctwcen employments. (he professionuI. olher things cqual. legitirnatcly prefers thc financially more rcrnunerulive job; and the cmploying organi­zation otTcrs more to (hose \vho, fTorn its pOÜlt Qf view, are more dcsirahle personneL But it docs not folJow on either síde that lhe grCíl(Cst financial re­mm or financial contríbution ís the first criterion oí desimbilítv for the collectivítv.

\\'hat i; [rue of economic rationalitv as a differ­emiated funcliollal value-system is aJsó true for lhe other fllnctions. In the polity the value-system cen­ters on coilcctÍvc or organizational effectiveness for th¡;~ s()cÍetal coIlectivity itself or tor :lny legitímate 1!oats Di sllbcolIcctivüies. SlIch effectiveness (or power. in a larger, c.g., "inrcfnationar' system) may be the p~namount functíonal vaJuc oí a \"lhole socíctv, tht.;ujzh lt as such cannot be a societal value­pattcr;¡-that wouJd .necessita(e somc higher basis foc the legltimate pursuit of powcr. Thc r~1nge wíthin \vhich grealer power is vall.led \\,'ill. as jn cconomics, depe.nd on the societal value.system and on consíderatíons of the societv's slructural differ­entimioll ilud sitLlation. Símila;!y, saIne subcollec­tivitie:s wil1 be guidcd within the system by values of poIitical primacy. while in others this componel1t 15 :'iuborJinated. Thus. while a goverm:nenla[ admjn­istrative burcaLl may be ev;lnated prímaríly in poliLic~J terms. a university or íl family cannN be. Values Di political function wiH be insritutíonalizcd at ~ach of thc, sodetv's levels af stmcturaJ hierarchy. ""

Specialized values for the íntcgrative systcm are oriented, withill thc sacictal valuc svstcm. 10 maxi­mum internaI harmony and mutual ~ompíemen6ng iJrnong lIJe units of ¡he system. Such intcgrative values are expres~cd in variolls cOlltexts. There is the gcuend cthic~ü olle of dOlng one's duty to otbcrs: there is the polítical one, stressing the importancc ot' col1cctivc lov;~ltv and individual self-sacrifice~ therc is the legal int~rest in thc equitable seuIemcnt of conflicts; ano there is thc medicaI concern for tbe palienfs welfarc. These di1ferel1t leveIs of expres­sion share the explicit repudíation oi rhe relevance of lI11it-effectiven~s.s. or power, or of economíc SllC­cess ~lS such, as valid critcria.

Talcott P~~rsons: An Outlir:e t)f tile Socia] Systcm 57

DiDel'cl1tiafion betweel1 Pallerll-M ai111enGl1Ce

al1d InJegrative FUllction

\Ve .have discusscd at lcngth both the rclatíons bclween cconomic and politica\ hmctíoo. and social slructure at aH four levels. bccallse in ~ocial science tmditions [hese scem 10 huye becn more adequately anall:'zcd and are bettcr known. The sume b~lSic priD~jples of the rclátíons bclween strllctllrc· and function. betv.'ecn segment::uion, spccification~ ;'{I)d differentialion, apply to thc pauc!lHl1aimenancc and th!:! inlegrative functicms, to ¡he reIations af lile relevant structures to cách other and to the cco­nomic and polílical. \Ve shalJ here confine the dis­cussion lO a verv brief outlinc 01' the principal COn1-

ponents of struC'tural content invol~.'ed in thesc other l-wo functions.

There are two impor1ant consideralions. Firsc societies will dHI'er ln so far as structures: \vüh clcar primacy oflh~s;c functions havc come ro be diITcrc:n­tiatcd from [hose whosc functions ,m: more diffusc. Second, releval11 structures \\.'iIl be Joc:.\led Ul Jíf­ferent levels ()[1 the $calcs of segmentmion and speci­fication, and may thus nOI be direclly comparable wíth each oiher.

\Vhhin l.he framework suggestcd by thc dístinc­tiotl bl.!t\\'cc.n thc rhcorclic~lrproblem5 lnvolved ¡n cquilibrium analysis and in analysb of structural changc of social S)'SlCl1lS, the conccpt oi !)(JI(l'rJ1-

mail!u:I!ClJlce as a funclion~ll calcgory is flol meant to have cmpirícally static cOIlI1otatíons. Analyt­ícally, specializmion 11) bOlh maimcnancc BOJ

change of valucs should be placcd in thb category. Religíon is one of thc arcas of conccrn which bc­

]on(i' nlost lIírecllv b~rc. Religious '\/alll~~ as such sh()~lld be locfttcd in the cultural and not in lh.:! social svsteIl"I. Sf.)cietal valllcs stand k1l i.! lowcr Icvd in the general spcciflc:níon scale (.')f valuc-patlcrns 'han do rcligíollS t'lncs. Bllt in some 5cnsc, ¡lB s(lci~ cIar valucs ;rc hcrc conccivcd ~tr\ílly1icaHy ;'\$ reli­giollsly gmundcd. HO\~'e\Jec t.hc structural implica­lÍons of lhis may vaJ")' grCttr)y, as ~I rUllc1ían of the natun:,' of bolh lhe religion and thc socíal 5}'stcm,

lt has beco pointcd ()ut lhat sL'lmt.!times lhc ovcr­al! socictal colhxlivity is als("> a. religioll:'\ coHcctivity -to guote Durkheim. a "moral community usually caBed a church."::' Oflcn. howcver. ihis is no! lhe case-as in \Vcstcrn Christíanitv gcneraBv (lTid. more par.ícularly, in reccni denomi~¿Hion::il-plural­ism as instltlltiona!1zcd in thc Unilcd Sl:HCS. Thcrc are al1 indeiinite pluralily of churchcs. cach of \vhich ís a vohmtary associnliofl. Thc slalc is no

2). E. Durkhl..!ím. EfemClltaj'Y FrmH.\ of lhe Rdigio".', UJi:'- lnlr<lduction. Lt)ndon: Allco & Unwill. Ud" t9~6.

loo\'1er a r-=lil!iou~ collectivitv. ,mJ ihcr(! i.~ no csfab­lish~d churc~h which <.J~iÍms-' or is ailowet( to daim uni,.ersal religiolls jurisdíc(iVr1 o'ver thc whole sod­clV. ¡'lo\.'·.,'cver. valués dcrivcd from c(lmmon rc­li~iNIS oricntatIOI1S ar~' stíll ü1':.titmiún~lljzed. l\{ore­o~er. 11n lmportant pari oC ¡he l.lOl'mlHÍ"t ~ystem of the society cornpriscs rulc5t governlng behavior in this spherc-ror cxamplc. thc Conslituticma} pro­vlsion::: for th~ :-cpf1r~tíon of church and swt~, and the ins¡iHlljonaliz.~j¡ion of rclígíous fr~~dom (¡nd 101-crancc. ·rllLlS, pJur.alisrn-<H ¡ht:; coHec¡i"ity level (Ir strucwrc, and. í..'ven more, lbé role leve]. whcrc cvcrv indh'ídual c:J.n within ccn;:¡in Iimit":< adhcrc 10

his (~\\-'n bcíich :!orld pracliC'cs---doe~ not imply that t hcre is no ¡ n'ititUl!onnlizatíofl 01" religious (~ríe:n[¡l~ lioos :J1 Lhe norm <lnU Lhe valuc 1evels.-Thís jdC'~ is, a ver)' common míslnlcrpret;Jti()r~ oí the sense in which SLJch n sodety as ¡he Arncr¡c~\n is dcscríbcd n:;. "secubrlzcd.'·

As in:<-.riUHionalizmioo of rdigioLls oriciltation has beC(~mc ,1 more sliec¡~llizcü (1 mI diírl!rcnlüued func­{ion. it h~tS bcen ,Úloc<Hcd lO more divcrse subcollec­líy¡tic~ al ]owcr k\'cls in I.h~ sc'c:bl s.truC'ture's seale (lf segrnt'J1talil1fl and spcciík~lti()n 1 han was ¡he older {:re of universl¡] church_ But .his pr()('css has coincideLl wiíh Lhe dcvch'rme:1i üf MghcT levds of tl¡;ncnl1ilv il1 thc rcHi!íou; requíremcnt" of normal ~ocicl¡)l 'm~mbcrsh¡p~ Für cx:ample, t he sndcull "commo1'l Jenominato{" is c()nsiderahl\.- more !.2;en­eral than wa:-; ¡hnt of medi~\í:'ü Catholi~ism, 1t 11~¡s, as it \\'erc, beco rroved that ~uch ~I nnrro\V ~HHJ de­Lailed reli~ious c~'1ns(:msll'i i, nO[ í! n",;cessarv condí­líon of 51~~blé vaILle-CO!1<,cnsus ~It lnt' soc¡c:~:\l leve!.

A 5l'cood pr¡m~\ry compooC:Clt oi: (he !,atrcrn­nl<"llrucnnn\.:e flH1ctÍf\n is th¡¡t llSl\;.I11v caBed "~l)ciaJi~ 2~\!ioi1:' \Vherea<; (he prirnary fl)CO~ l:\[ rcligíon is in {he clllnm:d $vs!em, th~lt ()f s0cíalíz.:i1jon 1$ ir, the pCTsonality s·Y5!Cm. 'Tbe undcdying conditions ílre thc rcbli\'c shr!r(ne~!l l)f thc individual\ lifc-srnn in comparíson [0 rhe duraIÍon of .-;ocietie:'.. ~md thc rcsulting fUfI-::tiL1nal im ¡~~~n!lr\'e [01' ¡he 'i<)­

delv to ~I."simil~\{f':: :1 continuilh~ strea!11 ()f DC'\\' l1lc;m­hL'r~. prím~!rjly rhrough hinh ;:nd bio!c\gí'::~11 m:·\(Ur;)­tlon. \VithÍn rhi:.; lr,ln1c\.\'ork _ th<: l1Wsl imponant 1rnpcratívcs are ;.¡nchoring the pr(lCCSS ~)f ~0cíLliíz~!­tion in the gc.fi(:(IC scqw:ncc d· lhe d\!\"dIJpmcnt of pc.rsonaHty. cs~cntbHy ,h¡-(\llgh <'UCCL'ss¡vc!y inlcr­nalizing inI.Tt':\:¡in;ly comr¡~' and ddl't:rc\1liated =,vstcms of ~oci:ll obiccts. and (he eorrcsl'lJnding ín­[~['nül¡l.~ltjol1 of iJlcrcu~ingly gcncralil.cd rtancn~~ of e u!turc.

Uni\'.:r,,:dly. :\t krt<¡t onc kinship uO¡(, ah¡"liYs Wilh I.hc nud';¡lf f<lmily'~ pronúnem partidpalion, i" the primary ::oHc-cti\;;; u!:,cnt ,-,r e~rly sncial1z:l1 íon: in most n()í1-h¡er~llC' ;;.nc!etic5. I.he funcriort rcmains cmbcddcd in di¡Tu"c kin:.hip ~tn¡CWr6, ] n n1(llk:0l

58 Gel/cm1 Tntroauctirm

.índustriat sodetíes. howcvcr. tbc nuclear famíly bas bccome a far more dHrcrcntiatcd, though stm highlv 8cgmcnted, ul'lit. ad::.lptcd [() thc functi(~ns of so~h]f­zation and "tcm.imHn;.¡n:lgcmcnt:' In tbe process, its. connections with thc extended ldnsnip ncxus have bccn !!rC¡lt)v nttcl1uatcd; it h~lS hccomc struc­turaHv "isolarcd'~; and most of thc (){her funclions of oÚlcr kinship structllrcs have pa~sed to non­kinship units, notnbly !hose (Jf cconomic produc­líon. Bcc<} use, in this situlltion, Üs primary func­tions cOl1ccrn carly, pre~schooJ socíalízatjon~ the famiiy opctatcs uf vcry low levels of genernlity in the scale of spccification oí: the \'alue~pattcrns which are intcrnalized in the process.

All more hirr,)llv dífTerentin.tcd societies have de­veioped non-kfnship structures centering about the funclions oí formal educatíon in which the higher­l~vel patterns of nonnative culture and systems of ObjCCt5 are internalized in the personality. In i1 few societies. there huve finalIy devcIoped in$titutions of híghe-r education in \~'hich a highly import~lnt fllsion for sub-functíons of pattern-maintenance oc· Cl.1rs: thc combinat1on of the highest level-; oí train­íng with, thruugh seholarship and research, the functions of eodifying and developing ímportant parts of rhe cultura1 tradítion itsclf.

This conecrn with the cultural tradition operatcs ín tbe aspects having to do \vilh value pmtems, and in fields of exístent[()} belief systems-non~empiri­cal, as in reIigious .and philosophy! and crnpiricaI, as ín science, technoJogy, :md idcoJogy-and ex­pressive symholization, as ln the aTlS, It constitl.ltes unother b,\síc foC'us of the sóciety's paUern-main­tcn::lnce systems, \vhich tcnds [O become closelv as­soci¿ücd with the higher ranges oí the socializ~tíon system. Expressive symboljzarion. whích rcaches íts híghest ]evel'S of "universal" signíftcance in the sophísLicated fine arts. inc!uding literatnre, allowcr leve)s of specificatíon involvcs the modes of taste constituting the framework witbin which expres­síve, ¡.c.., otherwise non-functJonal. activities--Ín­clud¡ng whm ¡s ordil1ariJy c<llted recreation-a.rc carded out.

As these fllllctions become Iess imbedded in functionallv ditTuse structures. the smne basic im­p~ratives ollllined for structurcs with econornic or political funetional primacy apply .. A school s)'stern. like a church or a (!OVernment burcau, muS[ h.we institutionalized lcadershíp nnd patterns of :luthOT­ity; it must havc access 10 mobi1e resonrces; and it mus!. regulate the rclations ()f its sel'Víces to its con­sumcrs. This ís true (")f a theatrical enterprise or <In ::trl ínstitule, either requiring the nppropríately specined valucs. norms lcg¡llmiz.ed by [hese valucs. collcctivity organizatiol1, and !n.stitwionalization of di1Terent role typcs. [\1 spíle oi the fl(m-cconorníc or

non-política) primacy of tbeir funetíolls, they can­not escape involvemcnt in thc functional impera.­tivcs ín thcsc arcas-cvcry"~\¡'hcrc the conditions of sl1ccessfl.JJ instinJlionnlizatíon of any function.

.'lime/l/res l-dlh 1l1Jegmlive Prilllt~cy, Jt has becn suggcsted tbat the focus of thc integrative subsys­tem is the legal system; jn a modero \Vestern typc of: $ociety, particulnrly in the functioning of the appe1-late cour(s, and thcir retallon to thc more general­ized aspects oi legjsJ~tion (much actuaJ legislatíon ¡s, consídered fu nctíona Ilv. more concerned with policy decísions thun win\ establishing gcncralized norIOs). The establishment of ¿\ norm is not ~lone functionally adequate. Thc COllrts are concerned wlth fundamental próblem.s: interpretation; deter· mioatíoll of jurisdktional problems~ Le., jn what drcumstanccs a norm applies and to whom: and problcms oí sanctions or enforccment~ Le., deter­mining the consequences 10 lhe actor of compliaocc 01' non-compliance. Tbe central judicial fuoction is interpretation, of which these o[ber twc> are subcnte­eorles. '-' Norros, hO\vever, must be defincd and inter­preled. and aJso implemcntcd. 0Ne are not here concerned primarily with the executive function of enforcement, which is gonl-attainmcnt rathcr than integratíon.) ...

The first imperative of a system of norms is its internal eonsistency. ThÍs is a primary focus of the func[ion of intcrprctation ando in híghly differentí­~lted systcms, is primadly a judicial function; though somet ¡mes codes are preparcd and legisla­tive1y enacted. Secand, however. therc is the specifi­cation of the upplication of higher-order norms to levels wherc thcy ean guide the action of the soci­ety"s Iower-levcl struclural units by defining thc sítuatian for them. This particlllarly involves the collectívity .and role levels ()f stfllcture, and hence the institutiol1tlli1.ation oi the bnsic palterns govern~ ing th~se jn politica1 and economic respects.

Another majar functíonal problem of a norma­tive system concerns the adjustments occurring be­cause a socia1 sys.em is ah\'ays involved in proce~ses of interehange with a changing environment-in­deed. nJwavs is subject to endogenNls sources of change as ';"cll. These n:ltumlIy have repercussions on units' interreJationsnips, whose significance for the intcgration of the system is focussed in the bear­ing oi thesc reJations on the content of (he system of florms. and on the degrees and moti .... ation of conformíl'V with norros.

There séem to be threc bns.ic types of proccsses of :l.djllstment. One coneerns keepíng the regulatory norms. at a sufficient1y high level al gcncralily so that much oí the ad justment can be lefl to Ihe spon­taneous~ Le., unprescribed. acHao of the units lhem-

T· icott ParSOllS: i\n Outlirw nf t11e Social Srstem

selves. A system of norms i c, analogous to a lun­guagc, in thar its rules as su eh ¡Jo .n01 Hs~,y" anything -concrete, but provide a framewark within which very Il1.any different things can be said tind under­stood according to the occasion f()r saying thcm. In certain rcspects-not exc1usively tbc cconomic sensc··,·,·"it is le~itimale to refer to this as lhe area within which ~elf-interest is permitted to operutt!, This "unit-individualisrn"-wúl ra1her than per­sonal. fer much ef it COncerns col1ecrivíties-is not crnandpation from. ~111 control through instilullon­aJizcd norms. Rather. as Durkheím so c1carlv brought out> high leveÍs oí "rcsponsible frccdorn'"' can be all(lined on]y through positivc lnstitutlonaH­zation. throllgh systems of norms and sanc:tions ím­posing the obligtllioll of accepting responsibility and utilizing fr(!edom aYer wide areas. I t may thus be refcrred to as "Ínstitutl0nalized individualism."

Thc second basíc process of intcgrativc adjust­rnent ís alteríng the content of oormative patterns. The great intcgrative problcm ís 10 maKe suco ad.,. justments rncct the varying functíonaJ necds with­out threatening the stabílitv of the bi~h~r-Ievcl SVR­

tero of norms. The dange~s DI a sy$tcm of norins are rigidity, or such fiexibiHty that eithcr adequate detlnition of the situation ís Iost or that what there is js functionaliy ín.appropriatc, This opcrnles at the highcr lcvcls. lhrough 1egísl:uive. judícial, and ad­ministrative rulings and decisÍons. ando at lc>wcr and plivate collectiv¡ties~ through function,llly cogn:ltc mechanisms.

The thírd type of proccss operares, short of major structural change its.elf. in the are,U: ~vhcre tbe other two llre inadequale. The ess~nljal cornmon featurc el' the first tv.:o is the cxpectulíon th .. tt Ihe :1cting unit whose activilies ure lo b~ eontml1ed wll1, propcrly situaled through definition ()f norms and sanctions. act as desired-operating through the síwati(m, witbout attempting 10 change [he interna] structure of lh\! unít, be ít person~in·role or c()HccrivHy. Th~~ processcs of social control, in {he narrOW¡;:f socio­logical sense, operate upo.n th!! "internar' syslem oC the llnit; in the case of the individual·in·rolc. on his motivations or sentimcnts. Thcv fiot on!y faciJitatc 01" hinder hís gening what he ~\'ants. b(¡t (hey re­define wh::l.t he wants. Bchavior subject lo control can be tcchnicallv tcrmeLI deviaot onlv whcn sccn this way." .

A cmnplex socicty has instirUlionalízed a v:uicty Di processes oí social controL \Ve shall not attcmpl" to liSl or clássify them here:. BUl certain aspccts of rcligious ritual cenainly fit-t,bo~c partkularly c()n~ cerned with reinforcing value-commitmcnt wheo deviance develops 01" th;catcns. For tbe (Ivcr-aU so­c1ctnl coUectivity and the dcfinition oí its gonls .. cer­tain aspects of polítical ideology ¿lnd its involvement

ín thc ddJnít.íons of pülítical oricntillion have ihls Lype oí' sígnificance, In implementing norms in re];]­tiona] systems, particubrIy jhose invo)ving C()ntrílct in the socíologica! sense, the prívate praclice of Iaw in [he systel1l of: COllrts í5 such a mechanism 01' social có'nrrol. Fínatlv. wh~n conc..::m i~ focuscd on the índívidual's c¡lpacíty for role-performance. 'he motivatcd aspect of ilIness and iB lhl!r~~py, Le .• ín psychosomati<; ~md mental illne~s, havc a ~ímibr signiíicancc.

SlratijicalirJ/l. A final aspcct of socinl structuTc of prío1Hrily intcg:rativc signiiicance ¡s socÍál slratí­J1cat¡on. Thm is, the ordcring of units Qf thc systcrn in él scale cf relutivc pl'cstigc whic:h, to funet ion in a positivcly intC'gralívc way. must be a gCfluine ex:­pression oí the im;titutionLilizcd sVstcm of values. In other words, prcstíge feneCES ftÍncl.íonaI contribu­tian w the sodety's '-vc.lfare. Perhaps lhe most im­pon¿mt and nccess3ry functional focus 01' posltive inslitutíonaliznlion of ~tmtif¡cat;on ¡~ r.he t~ndencv of socil.':ral dífferenti<nion [O Jcad 10 bases of polar;­zatlOD of conniclinr:: interesrs. The tWQ muSE obvillUS bases of polariz(lt¡(;~ are polüica) power and \\"callh, Le., cornmand of more or Icss generulizl.':d fncíHtlcs. Bere. ¡he [OCl.IS l)f institulionaJized strnüficmion is h'gülmi::}Il,ff. diffl!reotüll power ~Ind \veahh. i¡nd.

more generaH)', acccss io valued objects <lnó stat-uses.

"Social class'- ís the mos! commOl1 b¿ISis. of slra1í~ f1ca¡íon. Tbis term indudes the dífTcrcntíal prcsligc­cvaJuutíon of variolls cmcgoril!s 01 kínship uni!s, dltf..::ren{Í,It..;d hy thcir memben: funcüons in ¡he t'c­daI ~ystcrn. by aecess to po\\'cr and wCElth. iJnd by '"s{yJe,~ of ¡¡fe:' (Le., pancrns of cxpn::ssi\·c s:ymbol­ism assocíalcd \\ith lhdr sl.nndards· of lívingt Kin­ship ís iI1volved bCC.lllSC the ~olidarity of thc kinship unit. inc1uding as it do~s ht,th sc:xes nnd aH 'lgcfi, i::. ,tt SOlTIc ]evel a. centr:ll funcLion:ll lmpcmüve of evcry socicty, cvcn thüugh fll<'ln,V parlíHl social sys~ tems can 0rcratc wÍlhmn ¡L Thert:r(Jj'~. cc.::rlain dí{~ fcrcntinl advnntnQ:cs. like hencr livirw concJiüon" and lhc younc:cr ;en~ralion's access ro ~\rpMrunhy, '" \"".: "- ,/

must he shared by al! m¡;,>mbers of rile l.lnil. rcg¡:If(J~

lcss oí ¡he cxlCnt 10 \\ h¡eh ¡he\' have bc~n "earned" by thc.:: individual. Thus lh(: \\~ifc and c.híhjr~n of a sllcce!'s:ful m:m \\'íll sharc thc rC\"imis of hi~ per­formance· \\'heiher (~r not thev h~\Yc contríbweJ very much to it-thc ql\cstion /..;( the!, contribu!Íoil is irrdcvant lo the ramíhc's status as a unil, Thc'lu!.n c1ass mohílilv is possiblC'íl1 yaryln.!! dc-grccs, no S()~¡­cty h<TS ()VC~ a iong pcriod oí,cr"ákd'"" wj¡hoLH aJiy díJrcT~nlja(ion in class :l,{nlllS. Empiric:dry, tne ex­tcnl {O \\; hich ~\.lch class dilIcrcmi;nion Ío\'olves dass cOIiJ1ict ¡" híghly variable. Thc major function of the ínsiÍtut¡on:¡]ízntÍ('n nf cJil"'S Sl:atm; 1S to mín¡-

60 e C) J cm1 In trod! Ictjon

mizc c1ass cúnflict; but (Iften it is no!" vcry succcss~ fuI.

1{ is unncc..::ssarv to ns:mmc thal ¡here ShOllld aJ· wavs be a sinde u;lcquivocal prestif!.¡:~rankjnQ $calc of kim~híp m.J'{s_ As \Ve will iJrgLlc i'n (bt~ Int';oduc­tion 10 Parl Two, a highly gcncraIízcd prestigc nnd powcr differcntial bctwccn tv,ll) principal classcs Ís a common fcature 01" carly cívilizatÍol1s, in hller, more highlV di trcrcn tiatcd . socictícs, hc)wever, the muliip]i~hi of groups wil,h wíddy v~Hying func­'¡anal si!!nífic:lncc, and ihe C()fTcsoonding dífferen­tiation 01' reward p<\uerns, mean O;nt 0.0 a very broatl and general basis is it posslbk to speak of a single sentc; ovcr considcn1ble ranges, the "upper'­groups in dítrercnt functi()na] catcgories are not diJ'l!ctly comparable, ln contemporury society. c.g" lt is dítlicult [o comp.are the prcstígcs llCld by Jead· ing business filen, physicirtl1s, scit:ntists, ¡¡nd politi· cians rcspectivc]~'. Money inco!11e ir:; far from ::ln exacl m~4.lSUTC" There js, hOW('\;l;T, no question Ihal few farnílíes in íhe UnÍted Sta tes wüh jncomes un­del' ¡ive th()uS~tnd dollars (al ¡he principal income earncr's fulI career maturitv) c()uld be de;scribed as in the highcr presdge group~.

AH thcse integrativc functíons are pcrformed in structurnl scttings which must be analyzed in the same generu] tL~rms ~¡pplled [O the üthe.r Unce ÜI1lC~ tional subs\istems. Thev hwolve their subvalucs al thc requishe levcls df spcclficmion. their o'wn norms, colleclivíties spedulizcd Ü,¡ ihis dírection. arld roles (excepl st rati1kat ÍOn., which cannO! be

on a coUectivíl V or role Thev must mcet tbeir own econo~"nic, political. and .r

tcrn-maintenancc prcrequisíte.s, etc. A wide range oi structural varültion in i~ll ¡hese res.pects exist.

111. THE DYNAMICS OF' SOCJAL

EQ U:I LI B RI U p.:[

Thc forea.oin;r discussion mav serve as t1'ansitíon to the cOl1siden:tion of mulyzíng Iht! dynamic proc­e5.st~S anJ tncchanisJ':l.1s oi socbl systems, firsi) with n.~fer~nce 1.0 thc problem of eClllilíbr.ium within ., given struclura] fn,mework. Technica! conceptuali­zation in lh15 fic1d has {kveloped more slowly than in structural morphology or in fllI1ctJond catcgori­zation. Since, lhcrcforc, ,il is 1ess prominent in the li1eratllre oí the per,10d covC'red by these volum~s, this I ntroduction wil! treat thcsc probl cms lcss fu.1] y rhan others. It is~ ho\.vever, css('nti~tI 10 give it ,some pl:lce. íf 00]; on thc agcndn of Llnfinishcd business of sociological theorV-lh{)u~b more lhan thl'\.t can De done. ~ " ...

The ann!ysis. of dynamic proccss at the cCjuIHbra­tio!l lcvcl must ccnlcr ilround t\\'o catcgorícs of the systcm's cc>mponcnts. Thc fírsl (¡re tbc resources woích_ startil1g [rom outside lhc systcm, go through various phases as tbcy pass through the systcm. ~tnd at ccrtain points are utílízed in system fUllctionlng, Le., consumcd. some "producLS" tben being Iinally put out [O other syslcms. The prúcess can be c()n~ ccived as one combining various resources to pro­duce il ncw phasc. und then recombiníng the results with stíll olhcr factors to producc stiH othcr phases .. The second ca{egory nf componen1 comprises ihe types of mechanisms which mediate thcse processcs of generation and utilizalioll of resources and regu~ late tbeir rates oC l1ow, dircction of 1I~. etc. Moncy and power, as disctlsscU, are the prototypes of thcse mechanisms.

Societal Resouyces: Cafegories of input wld Out­put.~ FirsL something about the reSOUTce problem. Fortun:.nely fer soci<>logy, our slster-discipline. eco­nomics. has developed and refined a theoretícal model of Ihis precess of factor-combinatíofl that Is capuble oí generalizuticlO. This is the thcory con­cC'.rning the combination oC the factors of produc­tion to proJucc commoclitics and shares of inCC)filc.

In tbe version impol'trtnt for our purposcs, there are four factor,.; of production, namely, land, labor, capit'll, and organiz~Ltíon.

The factors of production occupy an intcrme~ diale place in the combinatorial tlow, through the socbl system, from socíaUy ult.imate resources to socially ulthn.ütc outputs. Tbey are fue input-cate­gories into the economy as ane of the four prima.ry functional subsystems Di the socicty_ Thcrc should. thereforc, be cognate input~categorics for cach of the othcr three primary subsvsteros. It s110uld also be possible 10 use the s"ame páttern of dassj[kat,Íon and rmalysis at other Jcvels, especiully for lhe soc.ie~ Lal svstcm as a \Ji/hoJe and for units at lower Jeve(s of speéífication than the priman' functionnl subsvs-temo . ~

Let us attempt to oulline this for thc societv as a systcm. None of {he socially ultimat\! inputs con­sists in eirher 'Ictuat physical objccts or ihe physical behav.ior oí organisms, nor cttn rllly of tbc u!timate outputs be placed in i hese categories. The social systcm lS one of controlling behuvior and the physi­cal cnvironmenc through behavior. Hs ultim<lte re­sources are lhe factors in the sysTcm's ciJpacüy te aHain such control, ami ultinu\te outputs for aspects of the uctual attamment ancJ/or exercise of that capacity. including improvements in prcvious ca-

~'lc~~": ... ~~here pbysicaJ O?jecls and physical behav-

24. FOf convenie.nl referente, " SChem:uic tabll]ation oI the categories lo be discusscd in tlús is íncluded in lbe accompanying tableo

Ta1cott P<u~nn~: :\n Outlinc o{ tru.: S()cial Sy~iTIll 61

Schema;ic T abulotion of

Soc:íetol Inputs and Outputs

Primar" Social Svbsystem Input ond Soul"ce Oulpu' ond Destina;ion

Pottern-Mcintenonee Given lJlruetu.e os ínstitotíonol- McintenClnce of strvcture and

Ized pctierns of 110rmative cul- spec1flcatiol1 of volues jure

(no external source) (no external destinotion)

Inte9ra1ion Plosticíty PoftNn!> fo( purpo~ive response (from behovioroí orgonisrn) (Jo behaviord orgcnism)

Goal·Altainment Copadty for socialized monva- Goaf-9rotificotion t¡oncl commitmenls (from per$onclity1 i to pel'sonality)

_ .. _" ---_ ......... _--Adoptotion Cocles for argo ní2a1 ion of In- Volidotion of Hondords of com-

formotion p~te(jce

(from cultural !iysl'em) (fo cultural ¡;yslem)

ior are involved, il<i thcv alw,ln :nc, the ri!.!hts O{

wavs to control the:!>e eníílícs. ~¡)t lhc en~itic~ lh0fl)­seIves~ are lhc ob jeer of socioI()gic~l1 an;:l}ysis~ Thus. in an cconomic exChan(fe invol~ino' a pln~"ic:::d com-e f.:'_

modilY, wh~u ch~mge5 hands 1S OOl Lhc commodi¡y but propcrty rights in tbe comml')dity. AnalyticaHy. physicul transfer of possession is a '"tcchnologkal" proccss and no( u s()ci,~J syslem process,

Thc Llltím~Hc resources of a socíety (;md of o[her social systems on lhe appropriatc lcvd of spccifica­tíon) shoulJ comprise the ultimnle outpms of tlle ()Iher subsvstcms of the !!eneral svstcm ()f action as these impingc 00 the ¡;o~ia] s'yste~ itself. It is criri­cal. in thc cconomk theory of [he f~lct!.lrs of produc­tion. thnt land is a spccial case n:lative to th~ orhe1' lhree. 1 ( has tWQ spcc:ial properties--it is n(!!thcr consumed in ¡he production procc-ss. nor pn,'lduccd: and in consequcncc. íts tOl~ll quamity in thc systcm is n('~t a function of ils pricc, though, tbrough (he market mechanism, partíclllur uoits of bnd muy he alloc~lted lO particular uses and usen. Fa!' Lhe CCOI1~ omy tú fLmction. land ~lS a physicat rcsourcc must be inc1udeu in this catcgor'\'; so <,Ilso mus( (he imai­tutiOn<l1izcd structure of th~ ~()ciety. so iar as thís is tremed as given for purposes of eco!1omlc <Hl~jl:~is ilnd so far as ü is differe'mially utilb.:ed in produc{Í\'c processcs.

]n the sodetv :lS a sv~tcm. the ~malm~uc ('Ií );md is lhe inSitiwüO'Il<\!ized -normntÍvc cult t~C, ¡,e" thc social structure. which for ¡he svsl(.~m ref~~rcncc <Jnd time perlad unckr consídcrattoñ ís trcnlcd as g¡H:n. , Al ¡he highcst normativc l\!vc1, this c()nsI:.ts in thc

S\''\tern's valuc~~ 'T'ícatinQ vnluc~ a~ analOf!OllS to the quant¡t,v of land {hus b.e'é()mcs ¡rnothcr \\':'~ly l)f stat­ing lht! gcncr:l] mClhod\Jlagícal postuLnc c-nunci­ateo ~ür1jcr: there í:l n sct of thc"()fI!tical problems concerning '{he d)'n.lJ'nics (If equi1ibdllm ::m:)lysis which ~hould 'be dislinguíshcd fmm probklltS in­volved in tho:? ana]y~i~ (lf slructur~¡J dHífl!,!C. So f(ir as anu]y::;is is confincd lO Ü1C e'lu¡libriu~-l(!ilel. 1n­srillltionall2.:d norrnative cl1¡mr~ is not consumed in 1.fJ\: pl'OCCSS hUi Ís nssumcd LO rCfll~ún gi\'cn and stahlc. Thc w.:ry,'" tbcse structurd cC'rnponcnts are utilíZI.'d in :\()cial pfOCCí;~, h()WeVCf, ~uc variable as a funcrion o( ¡hc opcration of lhc Sfimc mCChi.Hli::.rns <¡(rcclina: lÍle ulilizatinn of thc ülhcr reSimrces,

\VhIll are tb .. 's~ othcr rCS()UrcL~<:) t\ccording ro lht'"

logic of OLlf' panld¡gm. lhcrc ~hl.)uld he three: inpms rcSpCCii\'cly from th.:: p,~r~on;,tt¡ty, ¡h~ bch~l ... ior~1l organismo and llH.~ cultunl) S\':\Lcrn. Aoother ínler­csting point ¡.., that 1 he ~¡It]¡llil;n 01 the 5(~ci<Ji s,!'s,terrt i.(~" ir...; gO~IJ~(íHainmcm and üJáprí\'t.! bound,¡rk'f' tak::11 l0f!l'th(~r. cürnpr¡se'i l)W pcrsünali!y [11)(.1 cul,· lUra¡ ,,\\,;\iCms."i'· whkh raH Á¡¡t(\ the:,~ (\.\'(1 catc!.!:()r¡c~

rc~pl~cil\'d:: wlH.'rt'~h rile ¡Illegr:uivc b()und;\r)~~ \\'tth ccrmin ~PC('~¡L!l fCi1llH'e'l. is, rathcr surprt:'oingly. re­lalee! ro the hl.~hn\ iond L1n!.~!n¡~m,

Tt:nwrively. \ré :-;tlgge~1 th~l! llit: .;:awgory of pri-

2.5. h I$< .,m pn"il'k '1 he H':/lkr inio;;l'~:~h;d in i1l!d Smd",(,'L !,,'/1HIlIJ1)' amI pccial1? C!¡:H~lcr 11. .In :h~,! (1 11; I!y'!.b nOl uPI'ltul !{,) til<~ ~n l~lrrD" i!)~ in'icr('h~q'!gl,;~ {Jr' Jcnl'}~ ht.1l unly le; ~ljC: l\rinl~~ry

:-nnpEfy lh¡':-; ~t~!lenh}.nl~ 11 ln!i}l ft:fr:;,;, to P'~~r~()n~

r'r~~l~ ¡J n:::.:" !"'~f.l, c'­h ()'',¡Y-e\ ef! rhe

O);, a '''''bde

62 General Iufr()dw::boH

mar).' input from the pcrsonality syMcm may be calléd :'cnpacity W sociaJilc l1iotivatíon:lI eommít­mcnts/' cxtending llllim'Hc1y t() ro)C-PQrformancc. The input (rom the cultural sy~tcm rnay be called eotlíficd "ínformation," in th:'lt it prov¡des thc cul­tural bas¡s 01' empírical socict~tl prob1cm-soIulion. \Vh(",n this input 1S spcdficu ami madc relevam to motivatíonaI, cvalualivc, and intcgmtivc re.fcrcnccs in the svstcrn, it hecorncs utilizable knowledgc. Knü\' ... 'le(Jgc, 01} lhe soc:ietuJ leveL js lhe b:lsk f;:\ci!ity-c~ltegory. 'Fim¡!ty, the basic input from thc organi~m i~ that p]¡.lstieíly whích, through l.lppro­príatc lcarning proccsscs. can be built ¡nlo patter-?s of purposÍve response. The$e, in turn, can be uLtI­lzcd in inlegn1tecJ social íntc-ruction, The patlerning of the responses in systems, nOl tbe discrcte units of rt~::;:pon~e. 1;5 of: crucial significmlce ín this conneclion.'~i

\Vhat. t,hen. are lhe ouput calcgorics analogolls to the íncomc sh~ues of economic theorv? Genera1ly. thc output corresponding to thc inpJut of instítlI­lÍonalized normatívc culture is the 17lainll:'lIal1CI' of that struclure intact. Only within límitations would an importallt proccss in a cClJnplcx sys1Cm operate for long withoUl jnvolvlne struclUr::d ch::.tnge at some lower l~veJs of specificatié:m, segmentatj()~J and dif­ferentiation in ¡he syst~m. Jn this case, thc essential paHern-mainlcnancc OUlput is thc sf>ecificaliolI ot the higher-order v~\lue-systcm ro lhe ~\pprOpriale leveh für the funclional and situation21 exigcndcs of (he subsystcms involvcd in rhe secondary proc· eSSC5 of structural change ,

Jn interpreting thc ~ean¡ng of the other [hree output cl"ltegoríes, one must remembe.r that the locus of all thc olher threc subsystems is in individ­ual pcrsons-except fol' the emhod.iment of culture in imlOimalc physkal obj~cts, notably written doc­umcnts. Thcrcfore, in eme sense al1 three oC these are of psycho}ogical ~ígllilkancc,

The prlmary output lo lhe personaJíty systcrn, ¿¡n~ alvtícallv speaklng. IS goaI-cratífication (and, of c(~urse, hs negati\~e. deprívatToo). For the equílib­rium of Ihe personality as á system, (his is [he estab­lishment of ;,,¡ swble relation to a SlrllClllra)!y signi­tic:)nt situational objecl or systcm of objects. Role·partners partkipnte in social st met llrc 00 an intcract ¡ve busis through action in n roJe: (he rele­vam objec1 15 s()cíaL ;:¡ roJc-partrler or a coIlectivity. Thi:: output thus matches the input of capacity for s()cialil.ed motivationaJ comrnitments. Onc rnight say thar the promise'of gratífication is the ultim~\{e

26, This SU1:;g,csLlon, whicb rnay !'I:!ern strnnge to roany rt~<tders. 1:; not arbiWtry. h has groWl1 !;ugcly from dis­cí.!s,¡;,¡ons with Dr. hm.:s Old') about t!le ~ipj)liclltion in the ,hcory of uctlon 01' his !'¡ndin~" ah(\llt the pleasure mcchnnislll in reg:u!rlting: beha"'¡or, illCludinf: (h.i~ mechu­nio,m's b~\:-;e in [\'lé at1~lHJI!Ücal slruClUl'I:: 0'1' lhc bruto.

rew.\rd for ;lcccpting tbe Llísciplincs of sochtlizntíon. Thc OLJput te lhe cu}nmll syslcm thal rnalchcs tbc

input ()f information ís lhe vaJidation, by c()mpc~ tcnt performance. of thc cultural stanuard of com· pctcnce. This is csscnlÜ111y Lhe instüutionalizatíon ()f insLrumcntalIy signiík3nt culture (~lS uistin­gujshcd from normalivc and exprcssive). This in­stÍtulÍonaHzation in t1lrn compriscs opcrative units of thc socicty-u1thnatcly, indiviulIa] persons in roles-hencc íts specification [o rhe functtons. ~Itu­ations, and ulsks requlrcd by social syslcm opera­tion, This suggests that such ínslitut1on,¡lízatioll and spccification. whic.h nre faccors in restructuring tbc cuhuml tradj[ion, are products, Le., ouputs. of lhc soda1 system. The proccss is rhat of adapting knowledge to social uses, anu validating j{ by erIce­live use.

The output to thc bchavioral organism tbat cor­responds to the: inpm of purposivc response is thc patterning of responses al thc Jevcl of bchavior. as distinguished frorn peTSon~Jíty psychology. At least one of lhe rnc:míngs oE plcasurc is assocíated wIth Ihis as a reward.2"i' For [he population, a primary function of the social system is to crente optimum situatiúns for patternecl regulatioll of behaviClral processcs. throogh mechanisms likc p)easllre. This ¡neludes both giving pleasure and imposing the nec­essary controls on ir. since evidence indic3les that the ple.asure mechanism, like money. casily gets out oC hand. As regu]atof, it a)so requircs regulation.':S

ResollrCe-Pr()ussillg witltin (he Sysrem. Let llS

proceed tc,) a brief outline of the dynamics of '(re­source-processing" within the social systcrn; thar ¡s, of what happens bcrwecn ultimate input and u]ti­mate OUlput. The process may be dividcd ¡nto (hree major phases: U) the generation of milizable factors 01" internaI reS(1Urces: (2) (he aHoc:Hion. of thcse re­sources: and (3) lheir ulitiz1Hion. Thc first and third may be subdivided. Al each phase and significant subphase there is a combinatíon of [he calcgories of reSOllrces ernerging from the preceding phase. re­su]ting in (} set of modificatkms preparing them for the nexl phase.

An Example: Tite SocialiZa1iOlI Di AJot;votional

27. Thc!'íe Sugf!'cs:tions-ubove aH, tbat plc:1sure. as a genemlized rnethanism of control of bch~tvior) nm Ihe spedtic input neceSS:lry for mctabo¡ic C(luilibrium (c.g., food). i's the focus oC the phenomcna ;¡nd signJfiC4H1CC ol reward-arc bascd primarily on tbe work oí Dr. Olds, See Olds, "SeIf-Stimul:nion of tlle Braín." Sc:iellce, Feb. 14. 1958.

7.8. T mjght rem!lrk. parenthetically. that the nn¡llytical !lislinction bétWecn );oal griH1ticiltion :md plcasure or, more geneflllly, rewnrd, is a fund,I01cntal one whí.ch much psy~ cllOlogy has Hmdcd to ignore. le underlies, in my opiní(,)l1, the m.ljor :~:üs oí Freud's theory. the disLÍnct¡on between thc "pleasure principie" and lhe "renlity princip[e," Sce P'lrson.~. "Social Structure f:Hld the T,)c\'e!opmcllt of Per­<;on"lity," P.\V}'clliatl'Y, NO\'cmber. 1958,

TaJcott Parsons; An Olltline oÍ l'hc Social Syst'Clll ~.,

O,)

Capacily. MoCivatío1'l. as. a rCS(lurc~ provides a good muslr~~ti()n. aS a fairly \VeH analy<,"ed cas~. Al the soc1etal level, motivatian originales a:-:. ;m input from the personalíty syslt.'m. Thc major phasc of gener:Jtiol1 may be dividcd into three principal sub­phases. The firsf is the one known to p~ychoanaiytic thcorv as the oral phasc. In thís, through ídcntiílca­t ion (\.j th th~ primnrv ~l ~cn t of care'" (usual1 v the mothcr). the indlvid~.lal '-builds up a svstc;n of '·socializcd" morívation whereby bis nuínlaining the atlachment to thís agcnt bccomes the paramount goal of the emerging personal1ry systcm.

The next phase exrcnds from Lhe rCi\o1utíon ()f tnc oral attachment Lo that oí thc Ocdípus complexo Then differentlation of thc original in[ern.ili2e-d ora]-matern~il object occurs. y¡eI~Ííng a pcrsonality systcm consisting of four primary moüvmi¡)nal sub­systcms or need-dispositions-adcql1<lcy, sccuríty. conformity, ~md nllrtllrance.:. ... Thc balance among these differs in diffcrent personnlÍücs: in particular, one majar bctor of ditfcrentiaL balance is estab­lished through sex:~role ídentjftcntion. whose foun­dations are laid io this pcriod. But the- rckvancE' of ihis braad slructural pattcrn may be !reakd as a conslllnt.

Thcse processes of djfferenliatiDn, and hcncC' in­crcasíng capacíry to cope Wilh motívatinnaI proh­lems, are dearlv not a function simplv of the unaideu ll1aturalíon of motivnlional c:Jp~city; lhe socialization of this cap~cily is dcpcndcnt on lhe combination of original cap3cíty ""ilh thrcc othcr components. 30t the propC'r levcls oí spccilicarion. The first component is one (,if valuc~pat[t~rn ínter­nalizcd, by thc time of tht! Oedipal rC50!lüion, !O

form the primary basis of tbl;! sl\p~r-eg(). The s~cond 151l component oí ~ocíaljzed in[ormalion which bc­comes t,he basis of {he cbihfs enrly cogníljve dc­velopment. The third 15 a componcnt of propcdy measurcd :lnd specified pleasufc-rewards, to which the orgl1nísm responds ~md which is espccially im­pottJ:mt 10 motor skills. In relevancc lO socializ'ltiün. the pdrnary type, a11east, are lhe reward:\ as:;"ociatcd wüh prc-Ocdípal croticism, which FrcwJ hn$ madc famous. The strcngih anu, possibly, ccrtain othcr qWilit~Hive variations of original motÍvatioll. <:mo variaríons ín corresponding inpms of vnluc-Ixlttcrn~ oi information, amI of the plc.:lsul'e-rcward deprj-

29. Thtsc vie.ws are- dcrivcd frar!) Frt'ud n¡¡d 11. A. l\1Ul'rHY, My own lI"e:1!mcnt is s.trlte-tl most 1'1.111:;: In F"!lIt/y. S,iciali:;:(¡/io/¡ amZ J nll!nlctiOJl l'roC(;!>'S, Frl'l' J're~~. t 955. CI'I<\PlcJ' 11, ~mL witb some l1loJ¡OC;Ü¡QH and c:\rcnsi,)l1, in . 'Social StrLlclure ,md 1hc Dcvetopnw!lt of l'cfSOn;líi¡y:' P.r,l'chiatry. Nov .. 1958, Though ímp'lrl;ml ,-'!\'Jj1lrk¡-d qLl:¡\j~ [¡caliorls need to be made for \'[tli:llion" in Ihe ~o.;i;¡l st1ll\.'lUfc5 01' dilr~rent sOclc[ies, (he rClc\':,flCC of 1hc gen· ernl p¡m,tdigm 01' [hre!! m;;ljor phn.scs, marked by ¡he 0.('<11. Oedí¡-ml. anu :ldole~cC'n! n~\lt~rns ís ,: const;¡nl \\'hkh tr~m· scend:s C'ulttmll relati\'l(y, .

v:ltion b:.:dance, explain vari:lt¡ons in outcome 1'or the post-Oedin::d persona lit y s.lruc1t1TC.

EV('l1 apa;'[ lrom v;:¡rfations in maturatíol131 llmmtil:.:ttive fo.ct()rs, the motívntíon:Jl cap<'tciry' of the immediately post-Oedípn) ch¡ld is nCH yei t!!iliz,­ílblc for roJe-pcrformance in c()mpkx SOCií-i! :;.ys-­Icrns. becaw;e íl ¡s too I.lnóiffercntÍ<I(éd to perform lhe rnull ¡p]c roks r~411¡red of lh:: atlulL Thc rri­m:uy tiiJícn.::ntblíon Ic:.:tding up (O !hi ... ordcr of cí:!pncíty for I1mltLpt¡; r0rc-commirments occur~ Ín the: I<.\T!!111 arld lldole:;ccnt f\crious, Tbc¡c ~m~ furthcr input::;, from other 5uhsy~lcms. íoto lhe "socí.díza­tíor¡" suhsv::.tI.~m ol' Ihl.~ SOciC1V-V<l]l1C~CMnDonc.:nll.). informa {j()n, and rka$l.1re-r~wards-bllt <{t dfjJa­eJ)f Icvcls of specitk~11 ion and -lJualítarivc d¡ffcrt,!n{í<.i~ rion [ron) thc prc-Ocdipul pha.:-.cs. lt is $(riking ¡haL ín mil' type of s()cjety. thc ínf(ll"[Tlatiomll ínrut ís predornín:lI'ltly ¡H the highcr levcls ol' rC'-luircd a lifumí! culture.

A pcr:.on:t1ity structure resuhs "\-hich. \-rith vnry­ing cmpha.:-cs in each ('lf thr: primanr role cHtC!!OrlCS,

:;;hQuld b~ cap-.:tblc of pbyio?,! tf:iJcre'Himc(.! roles :-,imultnncously: in a famíly. procrC"ation I.hrotlgh marriage ~Hld pucnthood; in n functíN~:llJy speci:d­¡zcd coilc-ctivity. thmugh occupaiion: in ti ~ctting of cornrntmity rcsponsihility (e"pecialIy in polílica! tenns): and in :1 scttíng conc(~rned with tile valw::­stability of {he syslcm, cspcclalJy rhr()ugh rc\ig!on,

The ()Ihcr thrc-e typcs of input undcrgo corrcs­ponding kinds o( "proce~sing," For vúlm~::;. thc point oí input is zhe "alue :<,y<;(tm>~ brghcst c;()ci~dly relevnnt Icvc1 of !~cncra!irv: rOl' in(ormalidfL it i:i. thr.: C"{lllrllllv C. 'dfrit"d bod~; of know}cd'-!e- ;)vaih¡blc j n the socic[~y; fol" the pur¡~)(,b.ivc J'l::\pon;c f.:1ctor II i::. lhe ·'pb~tic pÚlcnr¡"Iíly" of the consrítllL'nl ur­~an¡sms, Tbcsc tour fach1rs ha,'(' an ob\'~rs~' n:1.l-7i,)!1!]¡'ip in thc ~ociC:lal SC'llr.! oí ~r~C¡í!c~lüon. -rhc valtlc"paUcnl and thc ¡nforrn;1lí,~n:tl cOl'nl'0ncnLi ~!rc itHrüduccd ¡)! chc hi~hc~¡ leve! ()f !!1.;!H.'r,¡Ji¡,· S0

far ~lS tbcir re}cVancc ({) Sücí~JI " ftln.;:th~n i:::.

C(~11e-~rncd. 'whcrcas tlle lJlOth';:¡tÍon,11 ,\fki purp():,.i\'(: rCflponsc c()mp()n~ms are (he- mo:.! in krm..; of sücial !l,VSlCm funclÍon. 1 n 011;; SCHSC, C!.)¡1CCfnl..~d \\ ith Ihe ;\,stt::m-rden:ncc of l:hdr bOlJrCC~, lh;.'::i,c faclors abo are imrOUll(,:ed in rorrll. nnti mus¡ bt~ n:-ddined on 1c\'C'.i~ ~o~' t,hcir l:lSí.! i.n ~hc sociai :;y:::;r~m. ,onir culIccov!ty- and rPii.~-IC\·d \':.du..:':. are üpcrail\'dy J'~;:llíl.¡lbk. and only rok·]c\-d ¡nf(lrm;)Li~~n 1':> "pEJe-1 ícaL" C(}iT.:~p()ndíngiy. Nlly rClh::.kvd T1101 ¡\';~lion í,¡ func¡ion~d ('.l1h¡; ~llL'¡:d :-.y:-.tCnL Th(' oid quc,Sliol1, "\Vbat ll:--I.' IS ~1 h~lhy'!" i~ fck':./anl.

Tlu? A 1I0C(1!iOlI /Jj [ú'\"ow"Ccs 10 O!'l't'CifÚ'{) r 'iÚíS.

(n tc-mp(,n¡\ ~Ci.!u(;nc-('. ¡he ~¿;lícrat¡(H1 l)[ inlcrn:i.l rCs,ollrcCs mU9 !)!'ccede lh~¡!: :lilocaliüll. AllíJL:;Hit)l{

64 GerJeral In trod I.lction

15 made to ()permiiJ{~ Imil.\' of the syslem, lO which rcS()llrCeS ~m:: cornmiUed rOl' use.

ECül\omics again provid(.~s us with a prowtype of thc anoc~~ting rncchantSIll, nameJy. (he markel. The OlHplll of Lhc gencration phasc which thc cconornist can.s. l:.Jbar ~\S a "factor of prodllcüon" m;:¡y be de-1'1ned as capacity tor functional performance in occupa tionaI roles. I t is t he prodllct of rhe soc ¡al iza­!ion proccss, in "developcu" :;,ocieties focu~ing, in its termínal phase. at (he paint of the individual'os emergente from formal education, An important Cllrrent c()ncept of the 5uI'ply of potential oecura­lÍonnl ~ervíces IS thnt of the Jahor jorce. The econo­mist tre~HS this concept oí supply as relevanl; and it is paral!cl te thc conccpt of "effective demand.'· lvlany pcrsons with skills ami othcr usable capací­ties. are oot in [he labor fmce, beca use they are not accessiblc to o(fers of employmenl-perktps rhe Iargesi group compriscs. hous~wives, A member of 1he labor force is eÍlher employed or seekíng em­ployment-presumably with real chance oí success.

The labor market ís the mechanísm by which employing organizations and persons seekíng em­nlovment are brou2hr together. At ¡he market leve], thc'J)rimary directly opc;atíng. factor !s comparative mt)netary rcmuneration. The operatíon of the mar­k,ct mechanism makes possible a rclatívcly "fune­tionaJ" :Jllocation, without tlle need oí ccntr:Jlized tldln i ní stra ti ve decísion,

Jt follows irom the aboye account of rhe genera­don process of occupational capacity th:l1. oot nn undifIerc:miated stream. but a híghlv differenciaIed s~t of substrc:Jl11s. are fed ¡oto the~ labor tnarkct. Therc is nor one completely integratcd labor mar­ket, but man)', partially integrated with each olher. There are two main bases. of differcntÍating these fram each other. Thc ftrst concerus level of C3-

pacity. from unskilled lahor lO the high qualHica­tions requircd for ~pecjalized functlons Or responsi­hi1itie~. The seLond concerns cluaJitatíve rofe-once one is comrniHed lO medicíne (Ir scicnce, he is un­Iikcly to ~eck ~\ role in governrnental adminjstration. Above al1, gualitative diíferentiation concerns dif­fercnt tvpes of cornbinatíon, in the nhase of [he &odHlíz~~ti()n proee~$ ca1Jcd .. training, n af more generntízed performance capadty with Olhcr fac" ton; ~cmtríbuting ro traíncd cap<lcity-functionat values, information, and types of rc\\'ard in the bchavioralsense.

Thc~ dosest possiblc approach to the cconomist's

30. M:!fkcl5 in th~ pre:>enl sense appcur oolj' 00 ce!'­lain le.'els of tne g-eneral úifferemintioll of !>odal !'>lruclure. On k5S (1iffcn::nti:.Hcd icveIs, the fundion;;)! equiyalents oí these :'!Hl)Ca(¡\'~~ p.l'úce~e.'\ are embedJed in fllnctioneUy dill'1l5C slruc[ures, The: utilizl.ltion of the resourccs il' likely t~) b,~ much less Huid, much ll10re strictly llscríbed 1.0 par~ lktl!ar cL'llJec!i'.e ünit::",.

"perfect market," whcre labor is lhe resource in­volved. is in thc ficld of Iow-level rclativclv undif­ferentiated capacities, whcre the interchangc~lbilÍly of units is prominent. As capacitics hccomc more rare and more differcntiated. othcr factors Ínter­vene to "skcw" the cJassical m:lrkct pattcrn---e,g., the market for profc8sional scrviccs is substantiaUy differcnt fram thc c()mpctllive modeJ.

\Vhcre soc:icttes are hie.hlv cnough difIercntiated politlcally therc 3re allo;advc pro~e~scs, governed bv the PQwer mechanism. that rlfC ;malogous to n;arkets. Leadership capacity ig the resollr~e allo­catcd through this typc of cbannel-inc1uding the organizational patterning whích makes it cffcc:tive, if this is not ascriptlvely ñxed, One of the best analyzed cases of leadership capacity is that of organization as a factor of production, which as a mobile resource has in particlIlar peeo ana)yzed as "entrepreneurship" Ín Schurnpeter's sense, or "organizational responsibilíty" in thc scnse Bal'nard employs.~l

In executive roles in specific-function col1ec­tivities. personalized leadership capacity is <lcquired through a special type of labor market. In this con­nection. componenrs of this internal rcsource are fused with the pcrfoTmance-capacity resource. In ()tber connections. this is not the case. For example. in Ihe allocation of political leadership through the e-]cctoral process, voting is an exercíse of power through the a~ency of which those to assume actual operative responsrbility are selected from a pool of aspírants to leadership. In the American govern­mental system, e.g., this onerat~s bNh in the execu­tive and -the Ic~úsJát¡ve br~nches, and at [he federal. state. and local Jcvcls. Comparable processes oper~ ate in countless democratic assodations.

In modern [O(alitarian regimes (and in t:.ome sub· associations in democratic societies). effectivc e.n~ franchisemem is made impossible by the onc~pnrty system. Nevertheless, that party is ceaselessly con­cerned \Vith legitimizing, tbrough propaganda • .md agilatkl1l, íts selection for leadcrship in t.he eyes of rhe pubJic and, as recently in Hungary, when its claims are not validated a majar crisis mal' develop.

The essentia! point is [hat lcadcrship capacity is I:!enerated within rhe s(xiety, through the sociaJiza­tion of indivíduals aml thr~llgh the -deve!opment of múbile and adaptable potentialities of organizHtion. Then. whcre ihis resource is nol ascribed to a par~ ticular use. (here must be sorne mechanism far aUocaíing it to operalive units which can utilize it.

There are comparable prúcesses of aIlocating the

3 L Chestcr I. Barnanl. 111e Pune/iDus o/ ihl! B,'(tC'u­¡ire. Harvard Univershy Pl'ess, Cambridge. MllSS •• 1938. J. A. Schumpeter, TlIe l"heory 01 Ecot.olllic; De-... ·elop" //lent.

TakoU Pa.rsons: ..:\11 Outlinc oí the Social System 65 othcr catcgories of interna) socielnl rcsourcc, one deríving Irom the value-syslcm through proccs..<>es of spccificut!ol1. and the other deriving 1'rol11 [he intcgrative cxigcncies oi the syslem: thesc ;He uhi­malely concerned with the relatíün oí purposive response nnd reward. Thc formeI' concerns alJocat­ing legitímíltion to nevO" and ¿¡Hcrc:d collecrivity strUC[lIfCS ami functions-an importanl process in a rapidly dcveloping society. The latter concerns lhe sochü-control function. discussed aboye, and {he problcm of instilmíonal commitment to conf()rmíty with generalized norms. This J:uter is ·'motiVc.I­{ianal> bLlt ir opemtes al a variety oí Jeve)s. There is in this, as in the mhcr cases. a varicty of proccsscs ana]ogous lo ¡hose of [.he mnrket.

The Uti!i:;aliOlc 01 Re.wJJtrces. The srae,e in thc naturnl hístorv 01' :l resourcc-unit that folJows its allocation is útilízation. Likc generatjon, (his may be subdivídcd inlo thrcc phJscs- Fint. Ihe usual ímmediate recipient of a rcs(lurc~-l.mH lhrough societal alIoc:Hion is H collectivity, Independcnt occupaliom\l roles~ likc thosc of the pri vate proCesA sional practirioner or thc independcnt anísan. should be trcated as limiting cases, constitutíng rhe {lne-mun colleetivilv. This bccomcs more signifkant as íesourccs hccon~c more mobile and br1;cr pro­portions of thcm are utilized in specific-function pmcesscs. ~rhen tbereis a fundamental struclllral difference between th~ field of the ~tllocative process, e.g., a m'lrkct. nnd the agency of utilil.a­tion. e.g" a firmo From one point oí vic~\.v. che differ­ene e is one oí' degree of stringcncy of control. In the aHocative process, the utílization unit. is in loe posi­tion el: bidding for resomces whkh ()ther units also "vant. Once allocated. however, the resource-unit is controlled by lts rccipient-sometimes t() the rornt of complete consumption. Such complete consump­tion occurs most obviously with physicnl corrmlOd­ities-whicb are not ns slIch, units of socíaI-svstcm resource, hut are facilities controlled in the ¡¿terest of social-sysrem process.

UlÍlizatiol1 is cssentíalJy u process of successiv0Iy more parilcl1larized decisíon-nmking: adion-oppor­tunities. facilities. and responsir.ílities are allocntcd more spccjfic~lHy Ht CHl:h step. Tlle mest hroadly defined s(a~es are the allocation lO tlle colJectivitv, to thc rolc,'"ilnd to the task. The functin!1 of thc ct{l­lectivily is to dellnc what is to be done; that of ¡,JIo­cation to role. to define who ís tú do it: and rhal oC thc té.\sk leveL how it is lO he done.

As in the gencrntion of rcsources. in thc pmcess of utilization, célch step (i ncIuding [he suhsteps within it) invo)ves combíníng thc rcsourcc-unlis in qucslion Wilh othcr uníts. The organization crn­plovs labor units throu.(!h the !alIor market. It sup~plies an organjzati~naJ framcwork wilhín

which tbese unit~ can ÍI.metion efl\!cd·\.'el"V.~"~ h sun­plíes fací1ities essenliiil for this. $uch a~') physi<.:"al facilíties whose procmement was hcyond (he work­er'$ controJ-e.g .. oHke, laboniTorv. amI IíbnHv­thOll('h sorne (ltlhese mal¡' he dClCY'míncd by nt.!20-e ~ _ , .. tiatiol1. The organiz<1Iion mav sLlrplv funds whích. within certain ~ule$, he nu.l.y -'use lO ¡.)fOCUre Nl uip·' meot and émploy service_

Therc 15. in Lile opernlÍon of lhe ;:;oc:ial system, a temrimlS lid ql/I'IH of (he proccss. Le" the ultim;!lc "ccomplishmcnt ()f tasks. This rn.ay he ddincd ,\5

lhe poim at \\/hich no furthc:l' commitrncn! of socíelfd rCSOllrces is rC4uircd as "re~IS()rHlble" in that panicular task-cont\!.\t. Fo!' é\amplc. maim:1[ning an elderl y person is an iniítitutionalizcd social obl i­gation. On hís death, h(nvc.·\'~r. (he oh!igatíon M maintenancc ís lCTmínated amI (he ('iSI\..., of rc!ntívc::.. 'he.alth-care pCI'!\ooncL etí! .. involvcd are c"(lmpl~tcd, cxcept for the functions of funeral ob;;¡ervancc. seto tlcmcnr: oC a possible cstat~. etc:. ·Thc rcsourccs prc­viously c0mmittcd to this task nrc. if still l.tnton­

sumcd. freed for another. The specific content. of the C'conomíc paradigm

uSed in this disCllssií.)o as an analytíclil nH)cI~1 can­not he gcneralil.~d lo apply to aJI esscntial s()cíal proce~scs, hut its logicll! sfmCltlr/:" enn be so gel1cral­ized. OilTercncc;\ arisc from two sourccs. Onc is Ihe leve( of spccifl.c;.Hion of resources in thl!ir prog­ress through the systcm: thc most dirccl relevancc of [he economíc paradigrn is al thc marKct leve! of mosl general allo(;¡jtíon, Thc sccond is thc (lualita~ tive difTerenthllion of Lypcs of rcsour(~c~. The only resources which tit thí:~ ccon<müc pflmdigm cJosely are: monctary funds and ins(nlrnC"nls. Finely divi8ihle. not ver)' pcrishnblc. ano hjghly s.tandardized ~~ommoditk:s come n~XL An\' 1',)¡-m or labor scrvicc is a rmhcr bLH.! third: and ()r~aniz<.tl íon as n factor b prohnhly much farrher ,\\\'-:lY frOl'n the pnradígm of the pcrfcct markCL

Valuc spccifi.:.:nl¡on (l~gÍ(im¡¡lí()n). ins(itL1tional~

ized rcrmis~i\'encs~ in proce~~cs 01" sncí¡!! c()n(r~)L

;¡nd thc liké. cannot he hou!!ht. tho\!!!h in :i ~~ns.:: lhcy lllllst be paid fOL The >c;lliti(\t1 of'·¡his apparcnt par:)uox li~tí in ¡:ht.! inJ0pendcnt )eí ¡nt~rpcncir;H¡ng subsyslems oE a ~ocjal system in ~\)th dynarnic and slructur:,¡ rcspcclS_ Thll$ ¡he dcocision \,) cmplo)' a

32. Om;- cx,lmplc i.~ {he fr:lln~,;w~)rk c"l:'!btí,hing [he m~;¡n rebtiün !O :;WtlCnl!- oí lh{" co!ic!!-c o, un¡" .. ~:r:-,ít;. iC(i;;:Ílé:L rn a m or,) en¡ ::\m:iclJ'. lt wouhJ DI.;' difliclilt f,;,r ,be (~¡Sl, for cxamplc. ju,.,t to '·h.:m¡.\ ,'lit h¡~ "h¡n~k" húp¡; lo ;¡Hr",c( (<1nd make ;: lí\'ing flom) comp(:f~n¡ ~l¡lI.lcrlL~ :m!!, in lurn. 10 gj"í~ lhcm pfU~PCC(S ()f 1\<:lT¡H,d:'d(:! f¡¡H·.r(~ employmeni as pi·()fc"é>](.lnal~,

:n. o; COllr .. <:. rh¡~ dol'S rl()¡ rneal1 T.h;~1 !h~' L!Cl !Íli:J.( lh~ panicu):lr pcr:HHl 11:!:, ¡¡ved anJ di,'d j¡;lS no íUlth~1 50cid c(.lJ¡~cquence$.

3":. See Pal":wn~ and Smtlser, op. cíE., pp_ i56 íL

66 General Introductjan

particular professiooaJ scrvice invoJv<?s cmploycr .Ule! cmployc~ in a spccial kind of markc! which involves OHmetary transactions. ¡1n10ng ()(her things. But ríghts ami ()blígations of privilcgcd com· murücation mal{ be concomiwnts of the cstablíshcd rclatiomihip. a¿d may no( thcn be commctcd away M waíved-as. e.g.. jn the rela.tionship. bctwecn 3tt('IrnCV and clienL This is precise)"i.' whm Dllrk­heim n;cant bV üne oí the '<non-c~nLractual ele­ments of cOfll;act,'··l, \Vithin tbis sphcrc, lhe rela­tÍonship ís protcctcd from both mor¡et.lry and polili­cal ini:crvention: the non-cconomk resomcc of pcr­rnissivcncss is utíJizcd tú solvc the C]ienfs prob1ems, A kin(J ()f contractual frecdom f:"XiSlS: thc clicnt roav choosc what confidenlinl informalion. he rc­ve¿is to hís attorncv: and the latter mav choosc ho\v he rcacls to these (f¡sc1osl1re~ or to \vh~( be suspects thc cJient of ,"víthholding, Hence thc ínterchange, though stnu::tuf::llIy orla!ogous to a market, ís, in content and in funclíon~11 signficancc in the systern, fundament(~lIy dHferent from aily mark~L

Al echan iSlH.S e 011t rol / i 11 g R e,.\Ollrce-Proces,)'lllg

For present purposes, lhis :lccount of ~hc proccss­íng of resources lhrough thc system wiII hé1\'C to suflicc, supplementt~d only by ,( brief discussíon of lbc mcchanisms most immedíately controlling ¡hese proce~scs. A somcwhat flltlcr pic-turL~ M the .... nature of Jynamic proccss can be.' prescnted ()nJy by dis~ cllssing thc proces~es of rcsourcc-tlmv in relation 10 thc controllin2: mech:lnlsrns.

¡l1()lJcy. Ag'áin. the bcst-:.:maJyzed control mecha­ni;;,m is cC'onornic, nlUl1c!v. moncv. Jt has becn nored that money is not ;1 com~nlodit)\-btlt il\ essentialIy a spcdalizcd mode of communication mcdiatin!! in the circulatíon of t!xpectations and bindlng com;nil­ments of ccnain types. As such~ money has the charactcristic two-lcvel structurc foun.d in aH bn­guagf's: .1 sy;;recn of ca!cgorizing mcaníng, and oi opera.tivc utrer:mccs. In tbe JanguHgc of the classi­cal cconom¡sts~ moncv is simultaneouslv both n mcasurc of value and -a medium of cxchange. In {he former scnse jt providcs thc criteriü of eco;;omic v;.:¡Iuation bY spccificmion of the ocneral v~llue pat­tan to lhe~ leve! O[ economic f~nction. lt is' the eu)ltomic commOil denominator of manv com­modiúes and servíces considcrcd ;:tS borh p"roducts and factors of procJuction: l.hl1s it servc.';i furthcr as a Slan(J~trd for ec()nomicaJly ralionaI .tllocation of reSOL1I'ces. In this capacity, "ho\.\Jcver. [he use of

35, j)jvíshm o/ LaÍJor in So('fe¡y. free Pre~!>, [h)ok 1. Cll<!p_ VII.

mOnCLCll'V sumdards does nor imply that anything changcs hands,

\.Vhcn moncv functloIlS as a. real rncdium of ex­change, howc\'~r-whcn real doUars and not units of account ¡¡re involvcd-thc spending unit is relínquishing, the rcccíving unít flcquíring, somc­thíng of valuc, Bul: (hat somcrhing cannot be tech­nologicaHy utllizcd cr c0l1s11mcd; it can be uscd on]y to cON/rol the aJlocatíng of what economists can '-rcaP resources amI producls, Toe significant poirn is lhal posscssíng money lnvolvcs a power or cilp,'tcily to gel. lhings done, while ilvoidillg specific commitrnenls at thc momcnt-i.e" about specific channels oí cxpenditurc in ferms of object or al sOllrce of supp]y, about time of purchase, and about price. The comblnation of cffecLivencss (purchasing p()wer) and freedom fram commitmcnt makes money such 'Hl. importam mcchanism. Spending moncy is like speakjng: the lItterancc~ once made, has consegucnces; but the speaker \vho commands a bngu~gc :lnd has certain knowledge he can for· mulatc ín Íts l.erms rctaíns his freedom to sav what he likcs unli] he 15 committed througb acts of utter­:.mcc.

As a medium of exchange. money can functioTl in eíther of two gcnernlizcd ways. námelv, as a facil­it\'. 01' as 3. rc\vard. As a facilitv. it is toé ~ener~lJízed c~paCÍty t() comm:::lnd more spccific facilities; as a rcward, ít ís a gencraJízed meaSUfC: of the value of a performance or oE a variety of pcrformanccs; and aJso the :ransmitting of something of va]ue.:;¡¡

lnvolvlng money. the paradigm (lf suppJy and demando as ~ specification of (be natufe of market process. is ímportant [O (lIt social syslcm process. As thc parndigm is used by economists, supply func­tions are always stated in terms oí "real" asscts, e.go, commoditics, scrvices. products, or factors of pro­dllction~ whcreas dernand functions are stated in monctary terms. This 111.!1V validlv be identificd with thc pcrfol'rnance~sanctio~ paradigm of the general analysjs of actíün, in th,lt suppJy-demand is a case of pcrformanCe-S3.rlction. Tlle monetarv mccha­nis~l, as a mechanism of controL stands °higher on tbc genemJization-specificatioll scale than does lhe resourcc which it controls; this is generaIly truc oE thc perfOm1<HlCC-sanction rclationship.

Moncy is only one of several anl.l(ogous me:cha­nisms controHíng resouree combinaríon and <:lJIoca­tion in social syslems; bur the Jogical para(ligm out­lined tor its case ShOllld be applicabJe to the orhcrs -c,g .. to politlcal powcr.

"Rcal C()mmiJm~¡nls:? Econo01ists h~LVe gener-

36. Olds's work intl¡c:\les. lhat, in behaviofal psyebology, (he rel;,¡tÍon oí g()~d"gra[iflc~H¡on to plem;ure is thcorelicaJly pn.r(¡lkl lo the reh¡líon bctween acquirjr¡g posse¡:¡sion {)f a f.'hysíC~ll cornmodily élnd mone;,. l'lt!üsure and mOI1cy, no! food i..Iod commod¡ües, <¡re lhe priJ'Jl~lry reWanl c:Jlegories.

Taleatt P,lrsons: /\.n Ourlinc- ot tbc Social Sr::.tem 67

ally spokcn as if rnarket trade werc in physici.ll com­moditíes and scrvices. This. concept ís dlip{ical~ it does no! refer to lhe factor or rigJm; 01 dispo.ml over goods aod services that constitutcs anothcr mecha­nism t)f control ayer resourCC$ standing lower in thc con1:rol and speeificaüon scale Hum l1~oncy. The economist's <'real" resources and income must not be directlv idcntified witb this lcvcl. In thc case oi services, {be employment contrac-t establíshcs cer­rain mutual rights ami obligations hetween em­p)oyer (typicaUy, nn organízalion) tim:l employec (typically, an individual nssuming a role). But a series of dccisions oi specitkatiol1 mus! he made be­fare ultimate utílizatíon oi the labor resource as a factor in produclion. Pcr se. thc act oC employment cxc1udes units other th:1I1 the employing one from encroaching on the rights oí thc empIoying unít; it also defines both the obligntions llssumed by the employec wi(hin the orgm:,iz,iltion. and the oblí,ga­(ions assumcd by the cmploying mganlzation far remuneratíon, type of work expectcd) rimes., ctc.

Operative work is performed in a LCchnical sub­system oí the employing organizution. Employ. ment is neither the process o( work flOr specific commitmcnt to it; il is crossing the boundarv into membersh~p in tbe employing' org¿loization: P.!r­ticular steps ruay be compressc!d~ bllt cach must be analytically recognir.cd. Por physícnl [~j(:ilítics, the analogy to employmenl is the !lcquisiIion af prop­erty figh ts.

The institutíons of occupation and propcrty are thus strucwraJly ana)ogoLls. to money. At the insli~ lutiana] level they &re generalizcd norms govcrning the aHocation and utilizatlon 01' rcsources. HUi as "jobs" and possessive rights oVer ph)'sícal \')hjccts, thcir charactcr is ana1c)~ous to that of !Donev as a medium of exchangc. IlighlS to jobs and to" com­modíties thus change h:.Illds, just n$ mone)' changes hands_ A job commits its incurnbcnt 10 tt ~crics of performances which are still rclativcly unspcciticd.

Moreover~ llHl.rkets and Jl1t'lney are impossible whilc the alloc:ltlon oí economicanv sígoificunl rr.;­sOllrccs is suíTleiently cmbeddcd ¡n~ a&~dptive sys­lems of rights and obligations. The~e s1ructurcs' difTuseness is associated with [he dispersal oE prüp­erty-rights and work-oblígntiol1s. Their combína­don into owneTship and occupatíon is (he prercqui­site of the resourcc-mobíJity lleCCSS<lry fN cxtcnsivc control of al1ocntion through mt)rkets. This ¡s a complex hicrarchy. Mone)' c~m COnll'ol only ccnain slcps in the pn.)ccss-Lc .. (he L111ocation of rC:SOllfces

to units, but no( their effectlvé; milízatioll within units.

Thc mcchanisnl mosl closc]y analogoLls lo monev is thc utilization of real cam[;iílmenc~. ThC$C con;. mitments opcratc by manipulating both propcrty I

rights ayer physictll posscssions and occupatiomll rights over employed persons ln thdr organízntional roles. In thc lattcr case, the aUlhority of the organ­ization's; man<lgement 01' t)dministratian ove!" its pcrsonnel is. t.'l~lalogous lO property righrs ('Ver physical objects. Ir b an institmlonalízeú mecba­nisrn. which. given the committncJ)t t() ~mployl11ent~ cnabJes managcrnent 10 m~lke r~a1í$tíc furtheT ue­clsions oí: spcc:itic~ltion obout utilizing I.he [e!lauree. At the tiT.l1C oí" c-olllmitmen( to employmcnL thc content ol' thcse spccifications need no! be known by or ugreed lo by cither pan:. Thercf'ore, thc same fundamental freedoffi from oet;Jilcu advancc COIn­

milments opcratc:í. in thc case of organiz.ltion~l authority a$ in that of properI}. Autbo;ity Ís thu~ a generalizcll rncüium undcrlying powcr in the Slamc SCDSC that propcrt'y undcrHes moncy.

]n economrc parlance. these capaclliC'~ Ú.li' utílil.a.­(ion. of whích pl'Opcrty and nccupatíonal mJc are prot()t~'rcs, may be calkd real commlLlncnt.-s. in Ihe cconornist's s.cnse of "real" as contrastcd \vith rnonctary. The al1ocation of real commilmcms in this sensé is controlh:d by ,he mone1.:1.rv mechani;;,rn, \\.'hHe tbesc commítme~ll~ constiwIc- mech.mism.'\ güvcrning thc processcs of funhcr spccitkatjoo o[ lhe: utíliz.aiion oí Tcsources. Al kast ()ne lntcrrnedi­~ltt' stcp is neccssary to so}vc 1he problCl11 01' 11m .... specific:ation of: ¡he physical opcralions. of the bc­havioru! proces:; lS b·rougbt abOlir.

POIVcr. Ld us nú\V considcr thc slcp abovc money in thc hicmfchv of mcchanísms of control. Thi~ brings. lJS b~lck te. the problcm of p'.lwcr, \',,'bose IDOS!

imp()rtant pojnts \ve wíH discuss in tcrms 01' thcir relevane..: t() [he prcscrn cont~·:\.L \Ve rn¡~y bcgin with the f:1ct ¡hat in complc.x soc!ctíc:\. ::;(ructm:a!1y. thcrc is a !!ilD nc[wccn thc functional impcratíves (lf

co~ord¡nat¡ng coBccti,-'itícs rclative to thelr co1!ec,· tivc aoals ;~l1d thc :;¡rucLUrnHv im(ítutjoJ1alizcd oh1ig~~titm of unhs. m (he r.::quísítc lcvds of"l'l'citl­cntion. Thi~ gap ¡s comparable to thc onc crc:¡ted by ¡he division of labor hc:twccn murkN$ [or products <lmJ markcts for labor sCf\'iccs. lf ascriptivc ublig~l­tions do n(){ cíO$C thc g:lp, Ihell P:lrtlcUbrizcd "dcals" may OCCllL bCL\\"ccn uni:::. wYth kadctship rC$ponsíbiJítics and un¡ts on whosc c(HlpC'r~ni(l1'I they OlU:st dcpcml. ahollt the lcrms t)f (!lis ~~¡)-Orcr~\­tion--thc:;;c dca's ~Ir(! analogous lo cconomic b¡¡n~~r. Bm Ilcxiblc oricntalíon to- ch~li1gin.g "illl;;tk'ns on thj~ ha~¡s i~ cx(rcrn('Iv 'firnio:d. '~Ií~hcí 1kxihmlV. and hcnc(.~ dícctlvenéss. ut.!pcnJ.;,; ~In ,he íl1'idt~­tion'lliz:.ltíon of n gcncrn.lizcl..l mcch:mism fol' ~rruc­ll1ring fl.lhi h;güirn:Hing: cxpcet~Hions on both sídcs wi¡hout too Lldlnitc ad\!:lnc\:~ ~p~cijlcafion oí: ..:!t;­l<lIlcd rit;hts <lml ohlígali~)l1:<'. In the ~m,dVlicanv dc­i1ne:d polítiC¡¡J [lelo, s~ch a !11CCh;i.nisrn is powcr: For lhl:: ]cadcrship funcljon, it ís lhe kgí¡imiled c':lpacil y

6S General 1 ntroductjon

to claim lüy.ü co-operation. within instjrutionalizcd limils. willwIIl prior specijic(I(hm oj Ihe eotllen! 01 lhe expec/ed f1crjorl1uuu::es. Jn lhc polirical fieltl Ihis tnkes thl.' forro of lhe righls 10 muke bindíng de­cisions-ril!hl's whic'h are instílUtionalized as lead~ ership, íltnhoríty. and regub:UÍon at lhc appropri¡ne kve]s of spécíiki:,1ion.

For "'foll(l\.vership." anulyrically consídered, essentfal1y thc ~ame consid!!rations apply. NCgll. tivcly. thc instirutJonalization of powC'r protects status positions againsl interfcrcnce and, ji ínter­ferencc is lhrcatened. aCLS a!!uinsr thc threal in such a Wl1Y thnt (hose in aUlhodiv must lisIen. One ex­ampre ¡s. the insttttIÜonaliz.<llf()n of civil rights, with acccss lo Lhe C()lIrts, 10 legislators. and tO executive otlkink Positjvelv. jr is the institutionalization of expcclalions [hat~ w]thin Hmits, [he public's de­mands will be gÍven íl serious hearing-e.g.\ Illost formally in thc electoral process.

A "powcr system" in this sensc, as in tbe case of a rnarkcl, is il mechanísm for adjusting in­eviwblv c()néHcting imerests oVer considerable areas. ~vhere ¡he p~'wer held on eaC'h side must be considered f'lv [he mhef. and where relativelv stable "rules of lh~ game" h(~ld confiicts withín bounds. The units invoh'ed m~ly he iclentified ,"vith rhose rilan)' políticaI scicl1tist~ can "inlerest groups.'· Frorn one poinc oí víew. rhe outcome is Cllways s.omc son of '·compromise." Thís situation js paral­lel to t he market. where the seller by definition has a [,ilonet~lry intercst in a highcr pricc 41nd tbe buyer in á I()wer one, so thal an agrced pricc js ;:¡ compro­rnise (eXccpI at a lirníting extreme).

Tbc mcasure of valuc in 1he case of power is the conCePI of thc publJc interest. lnterest groups) in­ctuding govcrnment¡;d incumbents, are neVer con­ten! tú üpenm: in terms oí ··naked power." bU[ ::t!ways attempt te legitimize theÍr c1aims in terms of ine Pllblic interest. HoweVer imperfect the integr'l­tion achieved ¡nay be, thís conccpfs weight is fur [rom neglígiblc ín a motlcratc1y stabl<:: polüical s:ys­temo At toe le\'el of mcdíum. t.here Is no instituríon­,t1i"z.cd unít whích is gcneralJy comparable tú ¡he monetary unit, Ihough in one crucial sectOr of tbe pm,,-er systcIll [he vote is a very prccisely defined uníL Thc vote- js (he followership's instrument of toe exch,mge process ()f powcr, rhollgh it docs Dol stand ~t1one; (here are H varietv of other mc¡¡ns tí.) exert rolítica] influenc:c. Leadel~shíp must earn votes by CSl;:lbli~hing, among groups of vQ[ers, the expec. tarion thar in flllure conlingencies the leaders wiII He! ín wavs relarivelv acceptable 10 ,he group Ín que~[ion""'::"btl( llOt iI~ lerms of speciticd '"cornmít­ments. wouId rCd1.1Ce the svstem lO f)olttica] bartcr; an economic cql..\lvnJent ~f fcequent occur·

rencc is the employer's spccit1c contractual pro­viSÍan of family living quarlers lo employees.

Políticul powcr stanos higher in the hierarchy of societal control rncchanísms tlw.n mone\'. The...,. are intcrrelatcd, in that monev funos can be· a means of acquiring politicaI power,· while [he holder of politi· cal power is in n. favored positíon for uCCJuiring money. But thcse relationships should nol. obscure thc fundamental hicrarchícal arder, as is shown by, e.g., the governmcntal control of lhc monetar)' ."yslem as a system-a control necessary beca use ín a differentiated, yc1. integrated. socicly' there .can be only one paramount collcctivity and system of ]e~al norms. Another indicmlon of their htcrarchal di~creteness ls lhe fact that the functioning of a marker system depcnds on basic normative '"'condi­¡ions controlled more by a governmenlal systcm than by the varioüs Hpdvate" Ínlerest groups ¡n­volved in market trnnsaclÍons.

llllcgrmil'e CommunicatiDiI. To complete the pie­ture, a sug~estioll mav be made aboUl still anolher c1ass of rñ~chan¡sms,' thes!: al the tap af the hier­archy oi control. This c1ass ¡s íntcgratJve cornmuni­catíon. and is rclated to the functkms oí sodal COIl­

trol in lhe narrow le..::hnical sens.e dJscussed above in a structl1ral-fLlnction~\l connection. Thc Onera­lional focus of ihis type of mcchanism í~ the motjvational commitment oí units of the svstcm lO

tbe fulñlment of ínslÍlutionaIized expecul1j(;n~. Thc hicrarchv lhus far reviewed mav be SUffi­

marÍzed as fol{ows: real commitmcnls'" form the institulionalízed basis iúr regulating the processes of fulfillíng the contractual ob]jgatJons assumed by units in the social systcm. They define generalized expectations within which, through authorÍly (in the operative subsystem. not al the societal level). negotiation. crc .• lhe specíficution of perform~mce oblígations, its rcwards, ClC., can be worked out. In the miljar allocative contcxts, the opcrati\ie col­lective unit typicully acquires onIy thc real commit- . rnents to thc use oi Í1s essemia1 reSOLlrces, leavíng further sl'ecification to be made as new sjtuations del/clop.

Thc proxímate mechanism of allocating real cornmitments is the monct¡lry m.echanism-quaH­ncd, us neCeSSí.\ry ""hen one generalizcs sodologi­cally rlhout market processes. Operative control of the uses LO whic.h these cammitmenLs are [O be pur is not relevan! Lo the monetarv mechunísm; their contractual avaílability tor use, ·and the generalized conditions 00 which thís works Ollt~····"particulm!y in compclition wilh other utílising l.mlts-arc rclevam LO tbc monctary mechanism. \Ve mUSl Slill cl)ns¡der both thc legitimadon of ihe goaIs of operadng L1nils al the rcquisite level oE specincation, ,md a variety oi questions ubout structuring the situation in which

Takott Parsons~ /\11 Outlillc 01 thc $ocíaI System 69

they may <.'lperatc. The function of the polítical process 15 cne fundamcIHaJ level of this spccifica­tino of goals and condith:ms. By slrucHIntl fusion, politicaI ¡;tuthority m •• y, Ín certnin fields, undertakc specitic alIocation bclow [he rnon~(ary leve], or operHtion, or bot.h. For example, this Ís univcrsally the Cllse for the funct!ons of military <.lerense: in él

sOcllllist society. it comprises a much broadcr rlcld. In all three vf these types oí procesE. thc "interp

ests" of the units in question can be taken for granted; given the situation~ includíng normative prescriptions Hnd thc sanctions attached to thc1l1, units 1:now what they \vanl and can be expccted to act in accord with their interests. At, a stiU highcr level of the pToblem of control. thís assumption is suspended and the qucstíon arises oí mechanísms for hrin~jng the individual or coHective unit to accepl liie instilutionalized dcfiniti<:m of [he s.itua­tion."" It. ís prohablc th:!t appIying direc[ negative sanetion will rcinforce dcvíant tcndencics; if con­form!']' is lo be motivatcd one mwa go behind rationaJ O1cchanisms and modify the underlyíng structurc dctcrmining thc Ut~i(s orientation. One typÍcnI case is the mechanÍsm of therapy operatíng with reference to thc motív¡ued components ()f iH­ncss. whcn the objcct is lhe indívidual's pc·rsonalíty. In other cases. bOWCVCT. the objcct may be a collcc­tivity, Jikc a dclíOLlllt:mt gang: anclo in alhers. a re­(aliona! systcm not formally organizcd as a collcc­t.ivity-us in the prnc[ice ~)f civil bw. \\,:here (he typic¿tI systcm lS dcfincd as comprislf.lg two opposed parties, their attorncys. and tbe normatíve sy!\Iem reprcscntcd through a comt: whether or n01 [hefe 15 actual rcsor( to court. Ibe presencc of the courts is of fundamental significance. Sorne aspects of lhe functioning (lf partisan politics. of reiígiolls r¡tm\l, and of other phenomcna :lIso helong in this cate­gory.

The mechanísms of control in such C~\SCS must operate in situatíons insulatcd from the prcssures of n()rmaJ sanction svs.tcms. Onc such institu¡ion is privil~ged communfc,¡tion. AnothC!r cxamplc is found ín rclí!!iúlls ritual. whcrc the situation is de­fincd as exc'épt¡onul-e.g .• the treatment of bc­ren.véd persons, sct apart as sacred. PCi'missivcnes!\

. provides ~n opportunity for gíving an order of sur­port to which the unit would not mherwise be eu­titlcd. Le., in spj{e of aUitlldes or C'ondllct whích othcrwise would be Hpunishcd" whh neg~ltive sancp

tions. \Vilhin this protcctcd spherc. a spcciul process

37. In C~lSCS. f,IWn!! under ¡he pr('~n1 hC'2ding, dc\'iJnl at\íludcs toward institutionalh:cd cxpcC'ttllions ¡]r~ nmbi\'­alenL Thm is, tlle problcm <,f inSllllHionnli7ing tWIV ex­pecta'lo!is mus! he trenLt"d as o.n<Jly¡ically dislincl f,(H)1 th¿'ll o[ imp!ememing expc-c!a(Íml~ alr(!udy jm;tiLu!kH\Ll1ized. See Tire SOL'lal 5)'s/t'lIl, P¡trSOIlS, Free Pn:oss, 1951, Chal" ler VII.

oí" conditional sanct.íoning ()f bcba.vior can operate unti1 a pattern consistem wiLh tbe general lnstitu~ Üonal expeclations is so glrongly establíshcd lhat thc specíal permíss.ivencss and SUPP0ft are l..iIlnCCCS~ sarv.

"[his set of mechanisms h~lS [he :-;amc formal sm.lcture as the others which h¿lVC bcen rcvie'\\"ed, So faf as the mechanisms operalc effectívciy. per­missívcncss and sUppOri. do n(H imply ah::¡ndon­meot ~1f thc inSÜIUii()nalíl,l.~d cxpecralíons: they are justiHcd by spedal circumSlanC¡;;S making ít d¡1Ti:::ult or impossihlc Cm the unit iO fuHil rh~hc C\PCCr::I­tions-····e'3" bcc,ausc ¡In lndividll;¡J lS ~íck:. or a p~\ír of conHicüng units cannot know thcír lcQai oblic.a.­[ions untH tllcsc h(\ve bccn worked out \,'ith Ih::ir altornevs {)r through court dccision, Thus. the mcasl1re 01' valUé is. 'Ver] much í!lvolvcd, FuciHríc5. in lhe {mm of information, c.g .. as ín¡CrrrCLa1ion:-i. and rcw~mls. e,g .. eV8luali\'c sanctíor..s, r<.,pcci¡)lIy approval. dctlnitcly círculate. t\ lorcovef. ¡hese are scarcc medí,); ~ny gO(ld psychi:llr¡~t or ,\¡'pcll.:uc jlldge knows lhal ínlCrprcl::r.t í.ms I11I.1SI no( he {Oo luvishl\' otTercd. ".1 tlsl "rhinkíng oul lüud" \'\'ithout cllrefully considering the imp'lcf of what is. "aid on the pnticrlt or on the pm.)1 01' potcnlial lítig~U1IS w.:mld not be good thcrapy or jurlsprl.ldcnce.

Tbis set of mechanisms ranks flr-:;t in ¡he hícr­~lrchv. Reson is m;.,de tú thcm (mi\' \\hcn t"llhcrs havé failed l() opcr.at~: indccd. sllch "f;dlllre !~ :t djP

rect critcrÍon ~)f the necu for !henL Thu~ thc di..;abil­ity aspect of iHncss is the prímary crilcríon oC (he need for thCntpcLHÍc he1p. Furthi.'rrnorc, on diCNcti­cal grounds this catcgorv of mcchanÍsms. Íl;. aL ll1c top ~)f lh~ whole hicr7ifchícal scrie:f..-g(}ing L1T(h~r brings emc to lile problcm of strucmral ch<!I1~e as such. which has hccl1 dct1ncd a::; a diticrcnL ordcr 01: problem. h lifts lhe rCS1TTction Lh;¡[ the $(fUcrmC of the systCtn. ¡,c., thc ins(Íluüon:llizcd nmnuili\'e CUltllI:C. must be t rca(cd as givcn.

Summar}' (>j Ihe Equilif,rafing PrOéT.u, Thc: e(lld~ 1ihrillm rrocessc.s of a social sy~icm Hr~: ¡n!crmesh­íng proccsses involving t\Vo SC(S ()f ch,mgcabIc t:lC­

ton>, each de!lne-d in terms of lhe svslem's :o.truclurc. Thc tirst sct compríscs {he calcgórie$ cf rC~0urcc~ which, at cach SlilgC of hcing pro':f:ssc-d [hrüugh ¡he systcm, are comblncd v.,lth thc appr('prhrc comple­mentar)" rcsourccs, The prog.ress 01' c:lch n'..:;ourcc through lhc system is ~'I. procC':\5 01' 'ipl~cíik:HÍ(\n thwus.:h dccisío(1-ma.kíng aboua di'1po.;;¡¡¡on 1 hrQu;:h alIoc;¡ion ~nd ¡)h~'ut p;oporticms of comhin¡Hí(~n. Thc ::.econd sct of dJ:'~ng.c:\ble í:Jcto]'~ compri<;i::s t he rncch.:mismt:: jusi discus.scd. Res()urces are ditl.;rcn­tbtcd from Tl1cch,mísrns in lh31 rcsourcc!\. frc;m ¡he point of vícw of tlle systcm, ;m:.:. at any gh'cn ~t;)gc. cOl1sumcd (wilh thc cxccplion 01 \\ruc¡:urC', i!,g" lamt); whcreas mecha n is Jll 5', <18, media of con-

70 GCIlcr .. l1 IJJtroductioll

IroL are. frol11 lhe point of vicw oí the unir, spcnr QnJ acquirclÍ, while, from that of (he syslem. (hey cirClll;llc (rorn one un!l lo another hm urc not con-5ulTIC'd. For ínscancc. moneY CílnJlO( he cOl1sumetl, hut (InJ". lransf(;rrcd from {)~C !JQSScssor (o anolher. \-Ve llave de,~críbcd Jww [he same is tfue o[ renl c(lnllnitlncnt~_ of pO\\.cr, :Jl'hJ 01' integn¡tive com­munrcittíoll. Thc conmonent of slruclurc in whjch thcsc changcahlcs aré b~,sed is ncilhcr consumed nOícircubtcl1.

TbT;,.'! genera] significance of ¡he lücmrchicaI intcr­relations of lhc!'\c comroncn{:~ índicntcs thi.lt the $C'tciai $\stcm as a \\-hole und iti> internal proccsscs should: in rcgard 10 behavior, be considcrcd as a compkx sct of cybcmctic cOBtrolling me-chanisms -not jUSl one govcrnoL bllt il comp]cx series oí thcll1. In thís brCl~ld senSt:. lhe problcm 01' lhe dy­namics or sodal sysu:~m$ is not so much a problem of thc mmsformation oí energ)' as of the proc~ss¡ng 01' informMion.

The <.ma1Y$ís oí these processes ís now ln an elc­mentary stage. Sorne fundamental deñni¡ions and cbssificf.ltions are 110W being fonnltlrned. as are SOOlI.! imporl~nt sequcnccs, sllch as specific.:ttion of the broad combinalÍons nceded al each slagc. llnd lbe bmao quantitativc differences made by grossly dilTerent prop()rtio(ls. Furthcrmorc. in an interde· pendcTH sy~tem, evcry lor.lg sequence of process­stí"lge. LO b.:: :tI::curately ~lJ1ülyzcd, mUSL ~pecífical1y ¡¡ccount for thc cn'CCt oE rcpcrcu$sions through tbe rest cf thc system and fo1' lhe rcsuWng fecdbtlck on thc original points 1'01' ~~nalysís,

For ail aspects of tbis problcm,important rOÍnls oí rcferencc-e.g .• lhe cmnbim\tion proCeSSCS of economic theorv ~Ind r..heir rclatlon ro thc monctarv me<:h¡)njsm~ lb; soc:iaJiza1Íon proccss in rc]aüon 1~) soci~l1 SlTUcturc; certain saJ¡ent m,p'~cts of power svsrcmf;: recent ,~:ork on decisi()n-m:.\kín~ in collcc~ tfvítles: ~lnd kno\!":Jcdge of thC'-fapeutics: But (hese Me stiU fn.lgmcnts. al besL partiaHy W(lven into the fabríc of a gcnuincly systematíc ¡)nalys¡~. Thc con­cepc of sy~rem i(sclf is (he mOSl imporlant guidc 1() dc\'cl0pÁng &uch analysis.

'Thc problem of systcmatizíng the O1orphology of Hvíng··· .. --Lc., híologic:ilL psychologicaL social. and Ct¡}luml-&v~(cms 15 intrinsicallv easierto soIve lh:!n that of thcif dynamic$ Ín (he p~esem sensc. Th¡s is the rC:.¡SOn that (he firsl major sectÍon oC ihis essay ir:; longcr than thc second and tha1, in tbc foHowíng se le e ti .. ) m , thcre IS more documcnta{Íon in the hc]d (Ir structural anaívsís than in (~nah;sis of Llvnamic process. Dynarníc' 'lnalysis musí. h~ our the~rl!ricaI scheme, be rcfcrrcd tú morphoJogÍcal prcmÍf:ic!:¡. Or

cIsc t>e stlh jeC1 to complete loss of oricntation_ Thc smtemt:nt th3l evcrything empírica] is subjcct () cbange 11'Wy be mctuphysicalIy corrcct; bm rhis ís

oftcn tnmslated ¡neo (he sCTcntitlcallv untenable doctrine condcmning as Ínvalid a heuristic assllmp­tíO/1 th~lt !.iny rcfcrcnce point is structurnlly given. on thc grollnds that SlIch an assumption would com­fl1Ü {he invcstíg"tor to dcny the flllidíty oC ultimatc realíty. Science is not a photogl'uphic I'cproduction of rClllity, bu( is él hi~hly sclcc[íve mode of organiz­ing ma.n'~ oricnwtioñ tó reJlity-howcver pbiloso­phcrs define (he laHer. Thc scicntlfic'llly spedfic compol1ent oi chis organizotion dCpCllds on abiJíty to cstablish rcfcrence·points srruc(urally stnble cnough to juslify thc Jimplificau'on of dynamíc problcms prcrequisite to IogícalIy n1anagcable anal­ysis, Empirical1y, thcse refcrence-poinls are rc]ative and may be expected ro changc as the scicnce de­velops. Thc catcgorícaJ nssertion tha! any Bssump­tions about struclure are scientijkallv inadmissible. becausc in the last anaIysis evcrything is in nux, denies thc legülmacv oí science. In anv science, ami in socíology'-in particular, the concept oi cbange is mcaningful ooly in terms of a dcfinablc ,wmething, Le._ sorncthing whkh can be described Ín structural tcrms,

IV. THE PROBLEM OF

STRUCTURAL CHANGE

Accordit1g w the program Jaid out abo\'c, the )ast major problem area ís the analysis oC proccsses of strllcWruI ch:mge in social systems. The proccss of structural chan!!.e mnv be considered the obverse Di equilíbraling p~oces;; the dislinction is made in tcrms of bDundarY-l'naintenancc. Boundary implics both [hat tbcrc is él di1Terence of state betwt:en phe­nOmena interna] :.md externa! to the svstem; and that ¡he type (lf process lenuing lO maintáin that dif­ference oí statc ís dilTerent irom the typc lending ro break it down. (n applying tbis conccpt to social svstems, one l11usr remcmbcr that thcir cssential boundnries are (hose vis-a-vis personaJitics, organ­ísms. and cuHural svstems, ~md not thosc dírectlv vls·a"v¡s (he physicafenvíronment. ..

A boundarv is thus conccivcd as a kind of water· shcd, Thc co~trol resourccs of the system are ade­quatc for its maill1cnancc up lO a well-deJ1ned scl of points in one dírcction: bcyond that sct of points, there is a terH.1ency for a cumulalive process of cbangc to bcgin. producing states progressively fartber from the lnstitutionalized patterns. Thc met­apIlor of the w~tcrshcd, however, fails to demon· stralc the comp1cxily of lhe series oí control leveb and, henee, of the boundaries of subsystems within larger systcms. The.- mcch~misms díséusscd eürlier

Tn1cott PaJ'$ons: A.ll Outlil1e 01 tl1E! Social System 71

are involvcd in the dynamic aspects of such a hicr­nrchical seríes of suhboundaries: if a subboundMV is brokcn. rcsources witnin the larger svs[em couñ­teract the ímplicit tendency tú struct~r:.,¡l change. This ís m()~t dramatically shown in thc ctJpacíty of socüll control mechanisms, in a narro\\' scnsc. LO revcrse cumulative processes of deviancc. Thc con­cepti<..m of the nature of lhe difference bCfWCcn proc­csses of equitibralion and processes oC Slructurai change seems inhcrent in the conception of a social s\{stem m .. a cvbcrnctic svstcm of c()ntroI ovcr be· havior. '" •

As übscrved. structllraJ chan~e in subsv~tcms is an inevitable pnrt of equilíbratit~íg proccss-¡n larger systems. The indíviduars life-span is so shúrt that concrete role-unlts in anv social svstem of socictal $Cope musL through soc1alizmion~ contínuulIy un­dergo Mfuctuml change. Closcly bound 10 this í~ a low-order collcctíviry like the nuclear f~lmily, ThouS!h the ínstitutional norm::; deflninz "the f;:\m­ilvn iI~ a socícry OT a social sector mav re'-maín slablc o~cr long periods, fhe jami/y lS neve~ a colfcctivity: and real f~milie$ are continua])y bcing cstablished by rnarri,lgcs, p,~ssing through the "family cycle," and. eventually. dísappearing, with the parents' dcath and the chiidren's dispersion. Similar consid~ crations apply to other types ()f sOclctal subsy,~tcms.,

\Vithin this frame of rcfercncc. thc prob!cm of struclural change can he con~idered under thrce headings, as follow:-;: (1) the sources of tendencÍes toward change; (2) the ímpact of these tcnLlcncies on the <lffCcled :'::lrucmral compoI1cnts. and (he pos­sihle conscql1cnC'cs: and (3) pos:;jhle generaliza! ions nbour {rends and pnttcrns oC charlge.

The SOllrces 01 Strucltlral Chl1uge

The potentinl sources of slructura] change are ex.ogenous and endogcnous-usually in combina­tíon. The forcgoing di~cussion has strcs.scd thc in­stability of the rclations between any system of (lC­

ti<'1fl and irs situation, bccausc this is ímportant for dctiniJlg the. cOli.cepts of goal and ¡he politic~tl func­(ion. \Vc were emphasizing N/atiOJl, and .1 rdation '.~ inrernal sources of instabilit v muv derive from cx-ti!mal tcndendcs 10 changc . ., J

E:rog .. ~IJ()lI.\· Sources oi CIUlnge, The exogcnolls sourccs of stlCial stfucrural changc coo:list in en· dogenous tendencícs to change in the ()rganism.~, personaliti(!s~ and cultural systems articulatcd with {he social systcms in qucstion. Arnong slIcn r,ourcC's are thosc operating through gcnctic change:-; In ¡he­constituent human organismo:; and ch<lnf!c~ in ¡he distribution of gcnctic'- components wirhin poplJla­tions. whích have an impact on bchavior ,'ií. il afl'ects social }"olc-perform:mce. inciuding thc $OCI"J sys-

tem'¡; cap:\cítics fOf ,lOocíaliz:.ltion. Changes in [he phy.\dcal cnvif!.)nmcnI are mcdiatcd most dírectly eÍlher throll~h the ori!,<lní$.Tl1--e,g., lhnlugh pcrccr­tion-or rhrough apf')wpriatc (~~p:.!cts (~f lhe cul­tural system-e,g,~ technologic~{l kn(~\\leuge.

One particulnrly importanr. SOtJfCC of CXl)gcnous chance is ti chan~c orhúnating in o[hcr $ocial S\'$­

tems~ For the poI~icalli organiz.cú ~{)c¡ety. the most imponnnt ,:\re moer polilic:llly org:mizcd socictíes. To considcr changc in Ihís contcxt it ¡s cs .... cnlÍ¿ll lo trea( [he socictv ;)f r~f~rcnce :l:', í.1 unit in a morl? inclusive social SV~(ém. Even whcn the s\'~tcm'::.: leve! oC intcgrntión is rclatívcly lo\\" ami ~hronic contlicts bct'\'·ecn íts subunits. continu;¡l1v thrcütcn to break ínto , .. 'nr. .\'OlfJe elemcnt of m(~rc or lcs~ institu¡jon:.:dlzed orucr ahvi.ll,.'s !!,ovems thcir íntcr­rclations--o!hcr""í;'..;, a con~cp~ likc "díplomacy" would hl: meaninglcs5. Of coursc. exügct)()US cul~ tUt.i! borro\dng a;'d ¡Jiffu$.torl are mediarcd [br~)ll!.:h intcrrelat¡l1rl& a'rl1ong ;;,ocieties. '-,

Ent!ogel!()us S(>tl~Tes: "S'crains," The mos[ gc.n­~r:1L commonly u-::cd rCfm for an cndogcnou~ t~ncJ­enc\' 10 ch::tngé i::. "str;lí n:' SfraiH hcr~ rcfers t( .• <1

con'dítiol1 ín rhe relation hetwccn 1 W(l or more ,¡ n.lc­tured units (i.eh :iubsvstcrns of the !-i VSlcm) that comtitutcs. a tcndency ~")r prc'i'iure t()\\::.1~tl changíng th~J.t. rclatíon to one incomp¡}tíblc \vith thc cquílih­rium of the relcvant pnrt (lf the s.ystcm. 1 f [he $train becorncs greilt cnough. the mcch;:mi'iiliS of control \vill not be ublc to maintain that conformitl.' lO rdc­vant n()fm~H¡Ve e,'\pcctarjons occcssarv [() ,~vt,,)íd lhc brcakuown oí the s.tructure, .A $tr;lin'ís ;:\ wndl.'!"\cv to díscquílibríum in rh" input-output b:!lüncc hc~ twccn !Wl"> or more lInits of the s\'slCl'l1.

Slraíns can be rclieved in várious wavs, Fol' ¡he system \ st.ahility. ¡he ideal way is resol~licm-i.('," rcstodng full conformity wilh normati .... e cxpec:­tnt¡()n~. us ín complete reco\'cry from mútiv.lleu i¡¡­Dess, i\ <¡ccond reIlcvine. nlecht.wism is. ~I rrC~uail)!1 or ¡"obtíon-fuI1 conü;rmitv is n()t rcswf(>c!. but sorne acc(lmm('Idation ¡s ma~Jc bv whkh les;.; th~ln normal performance by :.he í.kllcíem uni[~ is ;')~~­ccpfcd, und (,)lh~r unit~ cMry the rcsuhíng hurdcn, Ho\\c\.'cr. it m~I\' be ~xtr~mciv ditHcult ¡ü dc¡ccl ;¡

unif:;; faiILJt'~ LO ,;uain full pot;nti:dícy. :~" 1n lhe ca,,~ of hantlicap contraslf"d \\:ith ¡llnes>,. Complc!cly c1iminating the unít from !-'(Ki.:1 funcciot\ j;, the limitin!;! case hc're,

Strui~ m¡i~' abo he rdicvcu lw Chi1O.flC in [he structurc itsélL SincC' Wi.' han:: t::,;nph;¡,,¡;cd str:lin in thc I','lmi()/ls of units (in:.UlbíHI \" internal t0 thc unit itsdf \~(luld he anah;¡.cd ;11 thc !le\.! 10\\ cr kv!?I of SV-Slcm refcrénc<..'l. ~u:uctl!ral Ch~UH!~~ nHJ~¡ be dc­finL~~¡ á<; Dhcrmh:m i~ the normati\'c c;;!tur~ tklinlng (he cxpectatíoll:\. ~o\'crnjng ,hal rd¡!ii()!1 .... · .. ·thw.;, ~H

Lhc "ystcmíc lev~t. cOiupri:"ling .dl Ull¡t~ ~(;!nding

72 GCllcml IlIlrodlldiOll

in strained rclations. The total clllpiricLd proccl's may ali:>o involvc ch:Hlge in ¡he slructurc oi typic;:¡l unÚ.s; blI~ the cssential refcrcncc is tú fl.:.'!atimwJ {'<wem. For cxnmpic, chronic ínstabílily in a typi­cal kind 01' markN might lend to a change in thc nonns govcrning that rnarkct: but if bargaining lIJ1rts changc thcír tactics ín ¡he Jírection oC con­fonning with the old norms, this would (iot consti­tuw SiJ;lctl/raJ changc of t/¡is ¡;;ystcm. In line with thc general concc:pts ol' ínerlia nnd of lhc hí~ran:hy ()f controls, we muy say that cndogenous change occurs onlv when the lowcr~ordcr mechanisrlis of control faiÍ to conlain lhe fáctors of strain.

Fliclors i~l CJumge. In introducing our díscussion of thc f,lctors in 5tructllral chango, we mus! estab­lísh thc C'.I.,scnlial po,int Ihat the conc~plion of a sys­[cm of imerdcpcndcnt variables! on the one hand, llnd of units or parls, on the other, by its niltllrc im­plies tha! there )g no nece.:.sarv order of le¡eoJo~ical ~ígJ1iticallce in the sources oi change, This applies pnrticuhlr[y ta such oId controvers.ies as economic or ínterest cxplannLions l'eT,HH' explcmations in terms of ídea~ or values. This problem is logíc,dly parallel to the problem af the reJat¡ons between heredity and envíronmenL Of a set of "f~\ctors:" (mv 01' al! ma)' he SO liras oj c)¡tlJlR(!, v,,'hose nüt.ure wil(dcpend ()n the v.:~lyS an inítial ímpetus ís propagateJ through the system by the types of dynarníc proccss 3naJyL.ed under subhe¿ld 111. aboye,

To l:\void implying a formless eclectícism we must add two othcr poillts, Fírs[, careful tht'OrcLical idcntíficalions must be m'lde of the nature of the f,lctúrs lo ,-,,:hích an in1petus tú Slructur:ll change is imputed. Many factors prominent in (he history of social thought are, accorJing to thc thcory of social syslems, exogcI1ous-including f:lctor$ of geo­graphícal envÍronment and biologic.l] hcredity, and outstílnding per$onalíties, as "grent IHcn." who are never conceived of simply as products of their socj~ eties. This category of exogcnous factors aIsú ín~ eludes cultural expbmníoos) as those in lerms of religiou$ ideas. Fl1rthermorc) these diffcrent exog­enou~ sOtlrces are no[ alikc in (he nature of their impact on the social systern.

Among these exogenous sources of change ís the size of the popuJatíon oi: "my social system. Perhaps the fl)ost ímportam relevant discussion of this W:lS

Durkheím's, in the Divisioll 01 Labor, where he spcaks of the reIatíons betwe~n "matería!" and "dy­namic" densíty. PopuliHíons are partially resultants of tIJe processes oí social systems. but thcir size ís in tmn a detcrminant:¡¡¡

38, We h~l;.·e recently beel\ remindcd by Schnore o[ lhe impon,mee (lf this aspr.c! of Durkheim's analysis. Sce Leo $chnore. "Social Morpholosy and H.un1l.ln E.:o]ogy:' Amel'icu/I '/mmu]! o} Soci%:,r;-, Ma;:, 19Sti, pp. 610-34.

Thc sL'cond. rdah~tJ poine conccrns thc implica. ttans of thc hicrarchy of control in socia1 systems. U may be ditlicult to define magnítudc oC impact: hOWCV(!f, gtVCIl approxímatc equatíty of magnítude. the probabi lit y af producing struclUral change is grcater in proportíon to the position in thc order of control nt which the impact oi its principal Llíslurb­ing inl1uencc oecurs. This principle is busco nn Lhc as.sumptíon thm stable systems have mcchanisms which elln ahsorb considerable internal straíns. Hnd thus entlogcnous or exogcnous varíabilirics imping­ing al lowcr ¡cvels in the hierarchy of control Illay be neutralizcJ before extending structural changes to highcr levd'i. It fo[Je)'.vs that the cruci~l focus of the I:~roblem of chnnge ljcs in thc stabílity of the vn1ue system,

Thc anaJytical problcrns in this [lrca are hy no means simple. Di1fkuHics aríse because of the com­pIe x ways in which sDcieties are composed of in­terpenetrnting subsystems, and beC:lU~e of the Wí:IVS

in which the exogenous factors impínge somehów on every role, calIectivity norm, and subvalue. Thu~ lhc colIectivity companent of social struclllre has, bCén placed, in general analyticaJ terms, only third in the general control hierarchy. Yet every society must be orgrlnized as a whole on the collectivítv leve!. integ;ating goal-attainment, integmtive. and patlern-maintenance [ullctions. Hence un impar­tant change in the leadership compositíon of the aVer-aH societal coHcctivity may have a ú'lr greater impact on the nOTms and values of thc society gen­eral1y than Wl1uld ti value changc in Iower-order subsysterns. Hence a nalvc use oí tIle formula, the higher in, the control híerarchv the greater the im-p:;ct. ís llor recommended. • -

The lmpact oi t/w Forces 01 Change

Our approach to the problem of impact has al­readv becn [orcshndowed. DistLuh<:ll1Ce rnav resuIt fron) Jeficíent or .;xcel:isívc input at a gjvc~ paint in the svstem, The general¡zation 3bOllt the disturb­ing effccts of exces; is a direct coraHary of the con­.:epl 01' equiJibrium; it scems cOnlrary (jflen to com­mOTI sense. but it has been c1carlv validated for m~lnV Cilses ín social imeractíon. Óne oi the best kl1o~:n cases ls the Keynesian point about the relation betwccn ovcrsa ving and unempJoymcnt: another i5 Durkheim'5 gcneralization a bout lhe posilivc celatian between jncreasing economic pros­perity nnd rates of suicide: a thírd would be the patb­ogcnic cffecl of miltcrnnl overprotection on a de­veloping chHd. The point ís crucial for prescnt pur­poses, becnuse~ in any .important boundary relatíon of a society. tht: iWlbility of bOlh systems Ís a fune­tíon of a b(11a!l(:in~ of fates of input anó output

Talcott 'Pal'sons: i\.Il Olltlille oí tlIe Soctal SyMcm 73

which go bot/! wnys. This consideration also c1carly applies lo both exogenous ~mLl endogenous sources of change.

Impact \\'ill vary as a f unction of al least fivc ranges of varbtíon in the nature of the impínging process ... 5 Liesc:ribed be 10\'.' ; (I) the magni(lJoe ol' the disturbancc'--.. not an absolute quan1ity. but magnitude oC change from prcv¡ous customary in­put-output rates, which havc becc\me accommo­dated to the systenú condition::; of cquilibrium. (2) The proportion 01: unir., in lhe system at thc rclcvant levels that are ntrected. (3) The stwlegic character oi the unjt"s functional contribution t~ tbc sy':>[cm -e.g., the sudden dealh of 50 per cent 01" the un­skillcd work:ers \""ould not have the same írnpact as thc dcath of 50 per cent of the highe5l 10 per ccnt of po1ítical leaders. (4) Thc inciden ce of the dis­turbance on analytically distinguishable compo­nents of the svstem '5 slructurc. Gívcn rhc: strate,dc sígnificancc 01 a structural unit, roles are most re~d­i Iy replaceable or repara ble, su bcollect i vit íes less so, norms even less so, and valt1e~comJllitments leasL Thc revcrse order holds ter exposurc to thc impact of change; toe condítions .of individun.ls' roJe­performances are most e.x.posed und thcrefore most likely to "give:' whereas value-commitments are least exposed becausC! they are neithcr functíon- nor situation-specific. Fínally, (5) the:re ís the degrec oí rcsistance by the rele:vant parts 01' the svstem to thc impact Di' forces of chang~-i.e" the le~'el of e/Ice­tiveness of the mechanísms of control. A r<.~Jativclv large disturbance may not )cad to rnajor change ¡;1 a very stable system; a flluch smaller distur[l,mce may lC~ld to drastic chan~c in an unsta¡}Je S\'S(Cn1.

Stabilíty is variable bolh .... Ljuantitativdy .md ~ L{uoli­tativclv.

Empirícally, [orces making for changc sc.ldom operate ncat1y a.ccording to discrctc nnalytical cate­goríes; thcir impact l~ diffu~cd_ Thus the Cold \Var's im pact on American society operares pri­marily on two levels. One ís Iw íts ('ffcct on n¡)[ional security-primarily a po[itic~l problem. Since thc United Srates can no longer rely on a stable Euro­pean pO\\'cr system for its securilV. as it úid through thc nin'~tcenth centucv. thc C~ld \Var IS thc immcdiate cause far maintai~ing a brge military establishment and aucmptíng Lo foster the mpid de­vclopmcl1t of military t\!chnology-with uH thc repercussions that this csscntíalIy new pcacctime situ:J.tíon has throl1choUI the socictv. The ColcJ \V;u also has .tn importa-nt impact at thc"'!cvd of cammit­mcnts to valucs .md the mo.st gcncralizcd leve! of norms. \\'ithout [his "chal1engc- of cornmtlni~m'·-­not jusi thc challcngc of a strong milit.ar." powec btH a challenge to the legitinwc)' of thc "Americ¡tn

way"·-···the current situation \\'ould be f~tr Icss dis­turl,¡ng.

Thcse [\Vo cornponents are cmpirícally associ­aled. But thev áre ::l nal v ticall v dist in guishab le. J.nd their proportionáte importar;cc may vary, in the s~tlnc case over time :1S \\'cll ílS in di1Terent cases, A C'omparably seriOlls rnilitary threat to natiorl.::tl S~­curity, l1naccompan¡~d by the itle-ologica 1 factor. \'.!ould be muen Icss disturbln!:! a1 prcscnt te th~ Unitcd Stares, ~ccause int~rn~ll'" char;gc), in Amcri­c¡\ n soc; etv ha ve produceci factors o r i nst a bi lit\' a t ín1.l'"grativé Ievels ihat werc !1ot previously S(J ~lC~llt~. OUT problem in rcan)' accC[Hlng our lIn¡\'ers~¡¡stic valucs, for c;-.;ump!e, is cJearly sho\\ n in the prcscnt seg:regation-descgrt!gation i~SllC. A nlaíor dcvclop­rilen! oC sociew! poJiric¡!l rc~ponsjh¡lity. :.lS ::l tune­tion of bolh intcm:ll dCvt'lopment .1nd charlgcd in­ternational pos¡tion, is ncccssarv. \Vithout SiJccíJ I scnsitivities lO [he symboiic revcrb~rations ot ':COn.1-

munism··-independcnI of ;'re::dis.tic" dangcrs-a phenomenon likc l\'1cCarlhyisOl wOllld he incDm~ prehcnsibl¡;,

Analyticd discriminatioo ()[ fa\=tofs "\.vlchin lhe fr::ime\\ ()rk of empírical variat;on makes more pre­cision about mattcrs of imp<lct possiblc. 'Thus tcc:b­nologlcal procc5ses concern¡ng {he rhyskal en· vironment have (luile a diHcrcnt ~¡gnítk'Clm'c from probicms of thc mOli\';}lion,ll conunitments (jf in­dividu;:tls and collcctive sununíts lO fUIlC¡i¡)rw I ncr­formancc in the syslern. For cxamplc, in AmC".~íca there has al1cgedl.v been a nw jor shíft reccntly ín this rcspc~t-ín RíesJT~an ';-; 1Crms. frcm "lnncr­dírectcd"' lo '·other-d¡rectcd"': in K luc'khohr:s, ,') ··decline oí' t.he Prot<,'stanl Ethic. ",~ Bo(h imcrpfcta~ licns suggest ::¡ rC{fcat from occupational COI1! dbu­(¡om; inw the .sphere or priva.tc P¡\!()ccup~llions.

Though dlsct1~sions oí" ~llch prohkms are üÜ<.:n cOllched i n lht~ {Cfm i no!ogy o f val U¿<;, th í~ pn.)h km belongs more ar the level oí mot¡v~ti(\n w func­tionn.l conl.ribution. \Vhethcr (lf not ,\ chang~ in (he soc:ietal valuc-svstcm underlies lhis ar a hiélcr leve! of control ís añ' J.T1:llytic¡tlly distinguishablc par! of {he empirícn! problems.~o

By pr~sen[ definition, a changc in the s(fllclurc ()[ a social system 15 a chal1ge ín its norrnatlvc culture. At the m~):;( gcnen!l leve]: it 1$ íJ .:hange in (he pari\­Illount valuc systcm. From thís lew] through lb.::

:<9. S<':C' D~"jd Rie"rn~~ll, TiHr l.o/rt+;: Crll)<"(i; CJy(k KJuckhohn. "HllYC Thcrc Bt'l':n O¡~.::er\l¡bk Sh,b in Amcd­.:ail V;,iue~ dH;';¡¡¡.~ ¡he P:¡~T Gl~iKr;;!iol"l':" in l-:¡li!l)i: ,\1~~r­rl!\jJn (ed.). '[1;1' AIIi,'J"icm! Sr,d¡,> l?-.i(!w YNl~ \Lrrcr. 195R) pp, 1~5·--::!li.

~(), ¡ h:\\'e ancrnplcd !<.l ~k;¡1 m,,)l"C i'ully \\'¡Ih ¡his prob­lem in "Thl" 1 il1k ¡'C1W(,i.':il Ch:\r;lcl~(' ~l.n<i SociCl;::" (\Y'i\ h WinsLOn \V\¡ile), in LiJ'.'i¡;t ancl Lo',' en! h~l 1.(:;,10.,). Cui.r¡¡r" ami _\'ocir;! Cfla m u('/"; Tíw l! 'ork o/ D,,,'¡d R.¡I>WldJ: Rc­vic\\'('d (Gkni2De: The Free l'ress, í 961.).

74 CeHera.l Tntroduction

series oi dífIcrentiatíon, scgmeotation, ami spccifi­calinl1, it ¡nvolves ch;,¡ngcs in tnc norm.ttivc culture al' sub:,;ystcJ1lS, of progressívely lawer arder, that ,lre incrcasingJy spccífic with rcfcrencc t() fllnction in thc larger sy:->lt:::m and to situation. Throllgh spí'cífl­cafion wc 'Irrivc cvcntunHy 3t the role Icvcl and, Wilh this, al the psychological motivation of thc jndiviuual. 1t is my thcsís lhat (my majar drsturb­ancc wj)j occasion wídcspread disturbances in índi­vidu:lls' mottvations at the role leve), :md under the requisii.e conditions wHl lead 10 structural changes at least there. B\(t it does Bot follow either from the presencc oC widcspre:l..d symptoms of d¡sturbance~ or from ímportt,ot structuraI changes ín such motí­vational pauerning_ that the strucmre oi the systern at :.:t11 leveIs-especíaBy in the paramount value sys­tcm-has changed.

lo considerit;g the general problem of impact, we must remember that evcry structurally distinguished subsystcm of a society ts both compl!!x ~md never fulIy integrared. Moreover, the structural compo­oenls llre interlarded in all the difi\:rent subsystems; :ret evcn minimal integration requires some measure of consislcncv betwcen values ami norms both at {he higher a~d lower Jevels of spccification aod acros!> lhe Hnes of fUl1ctiooaI differentiation. Such considerations hclp .lccount for the facts that rnany processes of change occur stmtlltl.l.nc()us!y 3t severa] 1cvds, and that infiuences are propagated through th~ Jevels of control in the svslem from Qne to an-other. .

An ¡mportaot C'xarnple is prescnted by llnderde­vdoped societies at the present time. If we u¡ke eco­nornic dcvelopment, in tile SeIlse of industrializa­tion~ as the focal conlent oi [he process. the two primary foei of the ímpact of inptlts ~lre l')olitical and cultural, in thc value-scnsc: they ,lre nOl, in the usun} analytical sense, ecoliomic. Both focus pri­marily on lhe rc1ations. of LlOderdeve]oped socíet.íes to eco[)omicaUy advnnced socíetÍes.

Thc great slirring which has becn going on fo­cuses first on nalional independence and power, ns evidenced bv the acute sensitivlrv ro the ne~utive symbol of '·{mperi.:¡Jism:' Thjs paÍitical prcoc'Cupa­tion's effect thcJ1 scems to be propag:ltcu in tW'a di­rections: to economk development as illSlrllmetllal to po\iticnj power (ami ns a syn¡bal of coHective ach1evcmenl); and to the funcliol1al valu~-svstems assodated wíth politícnl power nnd economic pro­ductivity. Thc highest-level \falues wiII stjJl be carf!­fuJ1y cOn/ras/t.'d with those of the socicties serving ~s !l"lotlels of politic:l) ,md economic devclopment. Another important symbolic expression of this is {he CCHlln¡e)ll irnputatíon oí materiaHsrn to \Vestern societies, whcrcas it is allcged that India, fOI ex­Ztmple, can somehow have aH the advantages of high

índust,.laljzation wHhout bcing ínfcctcd with the matcrialístic vntues of thc \Vcstern world. }:'urthcr -COnln.lry lo tbe expticit con ten! o( Marxían ide­ology-it is oftcn alleged that comrnunism, because collectivistic, is Icss matcrialistic thao l)o-calIed 'Lcapítalism," though communist societies h~lve been marked by ti. far more exclusive dedícation to eco­nomic develapmcnt than any capitalistk society. 'rhe esscntial point hcre is thc temlency to m::.lintain. the highcst-lc.",eI values. while permiuing major changcs in thc next leve! oí vulue-speciñcatioIl, Le., that of the primary functional subsystem,'U

It is difficult to scc how, in the longer run, this can fail to engeoder majar strajos; howevcr, there is a twofokl proximate jdeological defense, Damely, the instrumental character of political and eco" nomic dcvclopment, and the brídging of the implicil, conftict by symbols like "socialism." The important point analvticalIv is [bat, without al teMt two dif­ferent ord~rs of input beyond normal levels. impe~ tus for major change is unlikely to occur. One order is the /'t?I.ll polítical jllferiority, symbolized as "colo­nial dependcIlcy," oi the disturbed socíety. The other is tbe existence. in the social env;rooment, of 3. múd~l oE instrumt!otal1y appropriate reorganiza­tion, whose part.ial functional values can be adopted, initiaJ1y aIlegedly without dislurbing the highest­level v~Jues of the system.~~

Types oi Process of Structural Change

FinaHy, we nllJst LlHempt to determine whether any ímportant genemlizations can be made aboUl the types of process of chaoge found at t-he struc­turra) levet Thc pheoomena of the instítutionaliza­fion of normative culture hllply ínternalization in the personalíty structllres of constituent pcrsonali­Hes, which io turn implies that institutíonalízation is embcddcd in the non-Talional lavers oC moliv~ltional organizatían. U is nol accessibíe' to change simply (hrough the presentation, to ao actor. of rationul ad­vantages ín the external definition of the situation.

ln SOciéll stmcture, the relation of normative cul­ture, to pers(mality ís expressed by lhc fundamental

~L Ftlnher amtlysi~ of tbese problcms i:. c:ont;¡lned in lhe p~pef "Sorne Reflections ÓI1 thl~ Sodologictll Frame­work of Economií:: Dcvelopment," Slmcnue ami PrlX'ess ¡n A10l1t'rIl Soc/elies (Glcncoe, IIl.: Free Press, 1959). Chapter IlI.

42. Natur¡:¡lIy ir! Ihe tata] picture, speciflcally ec(momic füctors of produclion. are aho neceSSi\rY inputs, from otht.'t' societieS or from otner "s.ystems" operaling in the ler­rital)' oC lhe socicty, like motivatlon, cnl)il~tl, elC. Hut because of lhe rehul0n lo lhe hierarchíctll structure el social Syslems, 1he ínputs of rlolitical urgency :md func­lional value-commitmenL are Íi.\r more critic~1 in ..... hat Raslow c:¡Jls the "take-eff" pnenomenon th:m i8 lhe ov.ail­ubílity ai ade'ltltllc factor!> of prodl.l.ction in the slric1.ly economk s~nse.

TakoH Parwns: An Outlinc ot tlJC Süóal Sy;;te.m 7> dístinc[íon betwecn t\loolO typcs of intcgrative Tnech­anísm in the social system-thosC' allocative rncch­<lnisms, opcrating through medir: !ike moncy and po\\'er, that affec[ the balance of ndv~mtage:"i .. nd disadvanlages in the situntíon of an i'lctine unit; :.lntl [hose which, likc intc&rrative communiZation, op­era te through afIecting (he motivational state of the unit, concerning the dcfinitícm oi what he wants ami not how he can cet it.

OnIy whcn strai; impinges 00 and ínvolvl!s this level of the s'y'stem of behavioral control can struc­tural change 'ín thc presem sense hccorlle possit"lc. Once it has occLlrred, the qucstion ¡s whcther tbc impetus to changc goes "over thc \vatcrsbc(r or, under the cOLlntervailing impact of the mechaflí:::;ms of social control, fa1ls back again.

In either case, strain at this level is maniícsted bv n series of symptoms of disturbance showing thc psychologícal marks o( irrationalitv. Thcse will he organized along thc major axcs of l{opc llnd fe~'l.r~ oC "\',.'lshful thinking'~ and "anxietv" showin Cf unreal­istic trends in borh respccts. P~ychologic~ny, this gocs back lo lhe ambivalent structure 01' motív~Hion to devíance alrcndv mentioned.

The directIons óf (his positive-ncgativc pob.lríz;:(· tion are detlned in terms of thc stru~tural possíbíli­ties of devíance-'~ Thc most important v;lfíahJcs are the poJarizatíons belwe~n activity and p:l~sjvity, bc­twccn compu]s;vc alicmltíon .md compulslve con­formity, that yie!d the types of rebel1iowmcss, wilh­drawaL "ritualism:~ and compulsÍve performance, In othcr words. thcre wíll be fantasies oC u/epian ideal future states. 01' ide,dízed past stntes. of secur­ity in a status guo from \vhich sources of dlsturb­ance could cOl1ven¡cntlv he baníshctl, tlnd <.'Ir elim­inating sources oC dístúrbance dírectlv within !he fr:lme~\,'ork of the old structurc. Thcré will be cor­responding foeí of anxiety.

These motivational components are cornmOrl to aH symptoms ot disturbance in lbe ínstitutíonatiza­tion of social ~tructLlrcs. The svmhols lo wbich thcv become attached will t1cpcnll on tnc ti prr()pfiat'~ systcm referenccs and :;ít\Jation~. Al [he ~ocietal level, it '$ 110t dií1kult 10 dctcct (he utof1Jan dcrncnl in "communísm:' in thc scnsc of an nllci!cd aclual lype of socicty; OT, on the otber side, <1'" complete "free enterprisc" systcm. The socially rcgrcssivc idealizatíon of :ln unrcaJistica \ly conccivcd past ap­pean in such symboJs ~\S thc simple, unspoilcd "Americanisnf' of the McCanhvitcs, or in (he Volbgemeinsclrafl Di Gerrntm RO;·I1.mtícs (rarcjcl!~ b1'ly in its n10st extreme versioll, Naz¡¡~m). SlIch

4.1. Se~- l\.lerlon, "S(lci~ll StruclUH' nnd t\l1mtlíe." So­cial Tlu;,orr altd Sodal SmlclwfZ, rcvísetÍ i¡nd eX1cndcd cdilion. l~.ree 1~I<:s~. j 957; ;LDd Pmsons. Tlw SOl:ÍdJ S.nír:'m, FH~C" IJrc~s, 1951, Chapo VIL

symbois as "ímpcfÍí:díSnl;" "capitnlísm:- ::lno '-com­mUni$[\1-' are foci of trralíon:J1 anxíety :l.nd aggres­sion.

Another svmbolic contcnt is. found whcre che fo­tus of disturh::mcc is a diffcrcnt arder of :;;ocial ~V:\A tcm. "Allthoritarfanism" JnJ "conformíty" :m:: gooJ examp(cs oE anxicty-bdcn symbols \·I."idely currcnt in our socíel.Y, SOi11C of (he irrntionul sym­hols in Ihi¡.¡ context. havo functioo\O in soc¡~lI s~·~tcms annlogotJs fo lhose of (he persona1ily's. mcch~m¡sms of <.lcfense. The cqtJivalcnts oí dispJ;:lccmcnt Hnd pmjection are fOllnd in the imputation 01' ¡he SOlJrce~ of dísturh~\ncc tú cxoc,cnous svstc-ms-par­ticularly simjJ~lr systcn1$-wh~n mudí 01' lhe nioLí­v:Hion rcallv -;::riscs from internal slraio. lndecd, di,,­placcrncnt .;nu/or projcction on pers(JJw!itíes of lhe products 01' strain ín social ~ystcms cause mucb ()f lhc :Htributing of íiI-wíll to) e'f!-- "ruling círclcs.:'

Symptoms 01' uísturbancc, with lhe k ¡nd of slruc­ture jusI sketchcd. are cornrnon to proces!;e-;, whích do and eJo not result in strucwral chan!!c, \Vho.!ther or nut the chzmgc (.)ccurs depcnds on lhe-halallce hc­t\\'Cl~n (he strength of the dísUlrhing [oTces amI the kinus 01' reccption they meet,,··_·í.c.> thc bahmcc hc~ l\\'l!cn ucts mOljv~Hcd by Tcspom-c lo disturbnncc and ¡he ;.;.anctions lh;lt thcy sllmularc in both cmi,,)gcnotlS :lnd CXO(!QIlOU~ <H!.C ncí cs. Thi" statcmcnt i:-:. not ~1 wutolog)' if thes~ conccplions are gívcn contcnt through Jctiniticm of the naturc of the pt.;rform­anc:::s and sfinctíons. and nf the stratcgk ~ign¡11-canee of conlenr for the cquilihrimn o( t~hc sy~tcrn,

Structural change ~s ross.iblc only \~'hen a ccrtain level 01' strain on instiHHíor¡alízeJ structllr~ i, rcachcu. Such s[mio may he rropag:llcd from tech­l1ological. economic, nnd polít1c:,1I Icve/:.:: hut thc' fac[ [hm a systcm ¡'i faccd whh scvcrc pwhlcms cm [hose levels is nc\'cr by ¡'.re! í a sutTicÍI.::nt cxplaniJ.­tíon of ::trucwfül chan~('. lt ií¡ ncccssan' ro trace the rcpcrctl:;.sion~ DE lhese ~train!) 011 th~ hi~hcr IcvcI!i ()( lhe control S\J$lcm.

Evcn \\'bcn tb~ in~titLIt¡on.ll leve! is rc-:iched. SCycrity M straín í~ nevcr ;:Llone an cxp1a~ n~lt¡on~ oí' ch::m!!c. Structmal on(v iJ!k'

pmsihlc ol1tcon;c oí" flmún, Othcr rC:-lulr::. ~l;'e Ihe rcsolution of the :;tnlin. thr0ueh me(:hanism~ of control. rh~lT Icaves ¡he old struct!;re int~)c:t: and ¡h<.: ¡sob.tíon 01" disturbing forc~s, at thc Cl1St of ~en,(' Irnpairlllcnt of che.... functioning--:¡nd. oí" cnnfSC. radical dís~o!ut¡on of thé s,,~tCDl.

BcsjJ,,~ the c;cncral¡7..cd strcng¡h"\\'c;rknc':\s bal­ance oí" (he dj!\l~.¡rbanccs ,1m! (.'Cli;lrob n::-.pcctl\"\.dy, thc most impnrtant factors f~!,"()ril\g srruct\lr:d changc are the foHowing: (J) AdC"(It.l;HC rm::cha­nisll'l)\ for o\'(~rc(lrnin!! the- ¡nc\'itnhk n;~h,ta[lc('~ of instiwtion=dizcd '\lru~tLJnd p;.lUcros l\'l,,:,tcd íDtCr­cst~) to ~¡b~lmlnrU)](',nt. O\.L'fwhclming force ü[ f'oiit-

76 Ceneral lntroductiolI

ícal coercíon may lmpo5C very sevcrc stnlins, but. in thc abscnce of such mccha.nisl11s) [hey Icad only lo active or passivc rcsistacH;c, cven lhough lhe re· sístance is realísticall y hopelc'fts." Endogenously, lhe balance between positive .rnd ncgativc compú­ncnt$ in the syrnptoms of distllrb~tncc is thc prímary fHelor. For examplc, if che ncgatívc side otltweighs thc positivc, anxiely and aggression will block new institutionalization. (2) Among thc positivc reac­lions, there must be combinatiorls with ~ldequate constrlt('~ive possibilities. The componcnt of aliena­tion mw:¡t be !;ifong cliough to motj1,late dctnchmcnt from thc olucr p~Ht'i!rns, but not so closely conncctcd wírh othcr Ilcgative components that it motÍvatcs on1y dcstructive behavior. On the orher hand. too grc~H pr.:ssi\'ity would motivate only withdrawaL (3) A model, from exogenous sources or endoge~ nously produccd. of the pattern to b~ newly insdtu­tíoqalized is necessary . .In socialízing the child j the parents. oldcr peers, teachers, and othcrs serve as "l'ole·models" whosc persona1íties and actions em· body the patterns ol' vaJue .wd norms which the child i;;¡ expected to internalize; withoLlt such ade­guate models. the ínternalizatien wellld be irnpos­sible. (4) The pattcrn of sanctions cvoked by behav­lor in thc transitiol1al phases must selectively re­ward action conformini! with the new model (and must not reward action in tcrms of the old pattern), ilnd musí be sufficiently consístenl ove! a period te hring ahollt the coinciding of the values of units and their self-intcrest that is the hallmark of ínstituUon­alízation.

The ~oci¿lliz .. uíon 01' [he chlld ~lctl1aHy constitutes a process of structur411 change in one set o:f struc­tural cúmponents of sodal !Jy~tcms, nn.me1y, the rolc-patterns of [he individual-indced, n1llch of the h'lreg{)ing paradigm has beco derived from this source. J5 These consíderations mm.' then be extended to the ncxt level: the coroll3.ry ór t.he propositíon that ihe child internalizes new roles in the process (Jf sociaHzatíon is that the sodal s.."stems in which this proCCS5 oecurs.. é.g .. the mother-child system and the ntlc1.ear famíly, O1ust llndergo processcs of structural chungc. Thus, the nuclear famiJy \'vitb one infant is, structl.lrally ~peaking> not thc same syslem as that with two adolcscent childrcn and one

44. In (!er[~lÍn re:'ipeCIS, the HLlngari:m .::risis of 1956 i>eems Jo fii this pilltern, so fur (;<l insljllrljon~.¡lization (){ the new pall¡:rnii of StaHnÍsl C(~mmllfi¡.sm is concemed. The sodal sys\em equivalen!J'\ of the lherapeutic mecha~ nísm;; centering on permi:i:iivent!ss. and supporL scem par· tíc:ularly crucial in this cOlmec(Íon.

45. This {ls,..,ump¡ion ¡s based largely 00 Freud's work. SE".c P<lr~Qns und Olds., Chl1pLer IV oí Pnrsoos and Bale;;, FafliiJ.v, Socializa/foll tlf!d Jweracfirm Prócess, Free Press, 1935 and ParSOfl!'l. "Sodal StrllCtllre llf!d (be Oevelop. men! (If Per-s.oIUlJity: Freud's COlHdbulion lO the lme­g¡<iLíOI1 of ['sycho!ogy lind Sociology:' PSJ'cMUJr)', N,)~ ~embl'r, J 95~.

Jatency-pcriod chitd, though in another pcrspcctivc it muy slill be the sanie family.

For a. more general s(.)cio]ogícal a.nu]ysis. how­ever. it may be bcttcr to illustratc by two tYrc~ of proccss of structur:ll changc c)osc to thc socíctnl levcl, in one of which thc "model" is prcdominnntly endogenous to thc system, in the other, exogenous. The first is the case usual1v refcrred 10 as '"structurnl diífe.rentiation" affecling the level of primary fune­tíonal subsystems; the sccond. t,hc case ínvolvíng chanc..e in the value-svstem al lhe socictallevcL

TI¡e Dil1eremilltio;1 (Ji OCcIIP(¡fional from Kin.­.rhip Ro/e,L In the aho\/c d¡SCLIss;on, reference has oftcn been made to the relative "functional diffuse­ncss" of rnany social strucwr\!$. The process of functiona) diífercntiarien ís one of the fundamental types oí' social change, and has evolutionary aspects ano implications. In its bearing on the type of sys­tcm, it ¡uvolves more than increasing complexity­e,g" thc fnet that tlcxible disposabilíty of resources dcpcnos on such differentiatíon. This dependence requircs. higher·order mcchanísms of intcgration, subslituring lhe more spccialíz,ed processes of con­trol associated with markels. power systems, etc., tor control through embeddedness in diffuse struc­tures.

Perhaps. the best example is the dHIerentiation of occupatiomll roles. in the ideal sense already uis~ clJssed. from embeddedness in ldnship structures which havc enjoyed ascribed c1aims to the func­tional equíy~~lents ef such services. On the ro)e­structurc leve1, [he change me:ms that whnt has been ene role of an indívidual in a single kinship collee­tivíty (which may. howevcr, be internalIy differen­tíated) becomes differcntiated into two roles in t\\'o distínct collcctivities. thc kiDShíp grOllp and the em­ploying organ iz~\tion. le

The first prerequisilC of change is dísengagement from thc preceding pattem.47 In othcr words, sorne order of relative deprívation becomes attached 10 following the old way. The impingement of the deprivation is on the individual ano on the kinship collectivity. The impingemcnt may take such forms as deteri<')T¡ltion of prt!violls1y .assllmed mnrket con­ditioas, or ()f lhe availability Di new opportunitíes which canDot be utilized within the old structural framework. Such s.evere and prolonged relative dep­rjvation would eventual1y give rise to symptorns of disturbancc of the so[[ discusscd.

46. The operaIion oí lhis process al the "working da.IiS" le\'el has, tO rny know]edge been mos! thOíoUgbly nnalyzed in Neil J, Smelser, SOcí(l' CJwllge OJ' Ihe lmhlSfrial Re\'()lu­t10//) U. of Ch¡C~lgO }lress, 1959.

47. The general par:ldigrn of ¡he process oí differentin· tion somewha¡ ellíplic'llly foHowed here WílS set forlh in Par~ons and Smelser. ECOíWJJ!,I' tmd SOdel», Free Press, 1956, Chapo V, :.lnd much more eXTensive)y deveJoped and ílpplied in Sme)ser, op. cit.

Ta1coU P~1f~O])S~ An Olltline ot toe Social SyRtem 7i

In ceder to prevent the overwhclmíng consolida­tion of the ncgatívc components of the rcactíons to disturhance, there musí be un adequatc rangc of !n­s.tituticmalizcd permissivcness ano support, in ~Idd¡­don lo the imposition of dcprivations for foIlowing the old patlern. There should not be too gr~út im­mediute prcssure for abandoning the old ways pre­cipit3[cly ano totally. In the lndmtrial RevQlution in EngIand. this institutionalized p~rn)issi\'encss, as Sme1ser shows. comprised considerable rernainíng realistic opportunity in the old dorneslíc pallcrn of industria.l orga.niza1Í')O, compromíse organiz:Hion .. l pattems whcreby whole familit!$ \\'~rc hired by the cotton milis as units, and con:¡idcrable "romilntic" ideological support for the valuc oí" thc 0]<.1 w~rys.

A positive moJel for the new patti.!ming of \\ork contribution must be demonslrated. firr.¡t (,)1') thc im­mcdiatcly relevant organízational level--c.g .. fac­taries are organizcd and jobs madc Clvajlablc wbich affcr advanl3ges, i.c .• V¿lrtOUS compone.nls 01' rc~

ward, including out not confincd to monev wage", to the warker and his bousehold. BUl OTl~ cnl~i~ll problem concerns the W¡]ys ín which this nc\v model can be maue legi[imme in terrns uf (he reIc­vant va]ues.

As Smelser shows, it Wf\S vcry import:mt in the British case that the structl.lf:.ll chan!!es in thc ro1c­orgarlizatíon oí the labor force ()f thc'-late eightccnth century \Vere preceded, and for saIne time aCCOTn­

panied, by a marked revival, in precisel)! th~~ gco­graphical section and population groups involved, of the Puritan reH!!iol1. According to the famol.ls \Veber hypothesis, Purítanism h:1s -legítimizcd bmh profit-nulking and more broadly dfectívc contrihu~ rían to instrumental functíon in societv. :\f<m.~ im­medialely, the maín jU51ification 01' lh[;" factory sys­lcm \Vas. jts greater produC'tive etTcctivcnes:;. In thc typicaJ \'.lorkíng-c!;:¡ss household, Ihefe \Vas prornise of hoth rcalistic opportllnity W org:1nize work in :1 new way, i1nd lcgitimation of thnt W,lY in tcrms 01' n !1rmIv institulíonalizcd re1¡r.iollS tradilíoCl. A stcacJv patlc~n of sanctions ope~ated to ceinforce th~ change, whosc most tangible aspect \litas the steady lncrense of real \'.'riges, largc1y dcrivc:d from the pro­ductjvity of the nc\\!' industry.~~ -·;¡8.-"A"t~ngic case of the misliril1g of such II changc, iIIuslr~uing the importm1C'C' clf Ihe bjilatwc fnC'lOrS, W<l1> ,he c:\se 01' lbe h;)mi·¡oom \'·C~J',·ej'5. Th~ orig:ín;J/ impeuls íar grt~¡llJy ín.:;:rcasi.'d prodw:lÍ',!i!y C;.JnW in spínnÍng.. Tht' resulüng grcnlly im:re:l;;ct! "IlPP!Y ('Ií y:lfn pul prí.'~SHrC 00 thl' wellving. hr:~nd'L Bul In 11l{' absencc of usablc ílwt'-'Tllións.-wílk;b ellOW ln({.'l'--¡md d olher aspccts or reorg.aniztttÍlm in thís {iele!. thf.~ IlHlin re­sul! wns :m cnormous quanlit31Ívc exp:msíll(1 (lf .. h(> v,ca\· ing traúe 011 lh~ old b¡'sis of social ~\rII.:tur~. WIWll (li~ pt)wcr h>om took over, lhe lIIlH:S!ructtt!l'd w~,I"'¡!lg lr;.¡dc \',las lefl hi;;h ;lnd <.lry. Jt i .. nol ¡;lIfpI'í~il\g th;lt lh¡~ !!.lOUp W~\S the l11;Jin ccntcr of ctÍsturl,;mcc in North Engh!nd in ll'ta¡ pc-:'iod, Smdser, op. dI., Irc.~!ts Ihí" .:ust in ~(lmc dell1il.

Thc outcome of the proces.s was ¡he incorpora­líen of a vcry large nc\" group of the working-cl:lsS lí.lb<.lr force ioto the factory ~ys.tem, in fully dirrct­cnriated occupational roles. \víth thc concomitant los.l> of most of the function ot familv t::'e:onomic productíon. \Vorkíng in factor)' prcm\ses, fO!' l.in índi ",¡dual \\'~Igt! ¡) no Ullder factory rathcr Ü1Ml kin­ship d¡'ciplíne. \v;:¡s :J. maln suuclural featurc of the o'Jtc()rrtc, Smclscr makc.s it clcar that this W;'\5 rlOt a símpl(! m,locr oí' Hltf(¡Clln~ w()rkers bv bet(cr wagcs than cnurd be ofTercd e!5~wherc-Íl ~va<; ooly p'Os­sihle thro\1 ¡zh a n1é.l jor rC$tructuríng 01' 1 hé jn~htu­ü\)I1,d structl.lrc of tÍ1C \\orking-cla$s- kíns,hip

Fer the larger !i.ystcm. thc pan pln:'éd the endugf!lwu,\' sourccs of lhe model compnncnts or the process wus p;.lfticularly important. It IS not nece'í~ary to quc~t¡on [he common bdicf th¡!t rhe immcdi;.ue jmpelu~ came fmm U1echal1ic .. ~1 invcn­tíons. Imp1cmcntlng lhis ímpdus at levcls hcaríng on ¡he ~tn.Jcture of oc~upatí()nal roles. hovi:evcr. wa::; mainly the \vork of -cmrcpn~ncurs-::.,omc of \vhom. likc Arkwriuht. were ;liso ¡he: Íf'¡\'cnwrs. But Ihe icgitinu¡tino Q(·ih~ néW opportunities coold ce dcr¡v~d hy spi.'cificlflioH. in thc tighl of lhc ne'" 0['­portunitics. of an ~dready firmly io)titutlonniizcd vuIUc-sysLem, The esscntial poim is thar ~~nh;\llccJ cc<momic produC'tivily \.Vas dcnneJ as goüd. in a way justifying 1he major dist'urhancc::; of in;;{iltl­tíonal slructureS at lüw"r leve::.; nc.::<..::ssan: for eddJ'1!! advHntage of thc grci.¡ter opporamitíc,,: ~rhc Ie!!itr:. mation (;f proftt-m;¡king is only pmt of n largcr com­pie:.:. ",hose foen, i'i on tile valum.ion of pwuuc­d .... itv,

The (li~tinc!jon het.wee.n the rr()cc..;~ oi :-;tn.!ctund ditl'..::r(!ntiari(ln ~lOd tha1 j[wolvíng the- nlu<>'iy:,tem of a ,OciCT\' is rel~\tive. In compre.\. ~OCiclíc". 'proc­cs..,('~ of di[fcrentiatío!1 are cl,)ntinu"ll\' r.ojr)(~ OH ac rcl;uivcly lo\\' lcvcb of sr\.~cíllc;Híon andhigll lc\'d<> of "trudur~l1 <;c!~mcnt:ltion. The differ.::nti:ltíoll al' occupationa! roTes 1'[,ol'n cmheddcdness ir; kinsh¡p should, howc ..... cr, he phlced nmong th..: v(;ry impor­tan! procc~~s havíng rcpercu~~ions in !he sOi:icty eXIC:lHlíng far bc\'ond thcrr jmn,(:lJíarc k1c:"ttfon<;, 1t ii' c1carlv""' a functíon of great ex[cnsl()o in thc divi­~jon of J hber ando C(Hl~qlH.::ntly. in .he extcnt 01' nwrkcts. li Il:akcs saiícnl a \\'hoie ,,/;;''í¡C!; of nc\\" prohlcms with rcspcc! ro thc ¡!l~tillltion ,){ ('ünir:\('t

and thc cOIH.lition.I.; 01' C'mpioYnl...:ot-tndudlllg tb~ hcginning:;. of I,m!c-sc~¡lc LIn¡~)!l orü;anlz;j(¡(\f} ami CQikcliv~ bm(!':"l.ini'n(!. and V~¡r¡llus (:';tha apout lh.:: 'StillW; o( thc workin::.: c!;t;-;:.,cs. proCC:'iS OCCttrS or the mngnittH.k~ ()f tite rise 01' rhe colton tc~tiIl'~ inau."tn' llntil ahoul i S-1-0--nwgnt­me/e nol ¿lh,\o)utc¡\· hUI in tcrms oC lb Dbre in the 'tot:ll eccmonw of Ón::~\t Bnwin··-ii. (:O¡;o.[¡¡UIC:-.

"t mnj()r chünge i~\ (,hc ::.trLlctllrc l~í thc ~')Cidy. Il íb

78 General 1 ntrnductiolJ

nOI smprísing that the dislurbances associatcd with it Íncludcd much ngitati()11 in oi1(ional politicsand n()clccahlc "C(fcrvesccnce t1 in reJigíoll. Al the same time. (he challge did not invelve hltroducing a ocw valuc sYS{cll1 al the national lcvel-Le., lhe funda­mentals 01' I>uritan OriCnliltion a.nd its place in Brít­Ish national vatues haLl been scttlcd in the sixtcenth llnd scvcnteenth centl.lries.

Clwl1ge in lhe SOde1111 Value SyJtem. Al the high­c~t normative level. [Wo main types of stmcwntl change l11:iy be distínguished. The first~ alrcady de­scribed. ¡5 thc ene wherc thc principal molle) com­ponent comes from olltside the society. This has becll true of [he contempornry underdeveloped arellS. :lS oUlliI1ed. To somc degrec. ir was truc of all rhe po)).r-British cases of industrialízation. h~c)uding the American.

The Arncrícan case went f.u1hest in accepting the British mOllel of free enterprise, though with some importanr qualiücatíons. 'rhis can be attributed first to the raer ¡hnt the value systcm deríving main]y from rhe ethic of ascctic Protestantism had beco strongly inst itution¡llizecl in this. country by the early ninetccnth ccmury: funhcrmorc, the basic stIlIctunil posJtion of reUg:ion had becn settled by the adoption 01' lhe C0l1süwüolla1 separation or church and stntc that pavcd the \I/ay for dcnomina­tional pluralism, The British model, therefore, poscd no seríous problem of value-orientation~ the Amerícan C~tse was considernbJy cJoser to a pUTe culture of rhe asC'ctic branch úf Protcst:lntism most irtvolved in indl1strializntion [han was the British. The problem in our case was primarily thc process of structural differentialion. MOlny relíglous move­ments, especial1y .rel.'jvalíst ones) played an ímpor­tant part on the t:ringes of the spread oC indllstriali­zation. These have becn essentlillly similar tú Meth­odism in thc north of England in the later eighteemh century.

Thís is probabIy one oí the major causes oí the rcJatively ~m&ll r(Jle of polítical agency in the Amer­ican case. though political <tgency playeJ a greater pan in such fic1ds as th~ subsidizing of railway­building in America than in Brimin. Essentially, (hcre W::JS no very serÍolls problcm of gaining gcn­~ral acccptancc oC the funcLional valucs necessary for industríalizalion. as there was in underdcvcl­apea arcas or i:!ven in lnost Continental E~lrOpe<ln countrics. It ís probably not entirc]y tortuitous that both J,lpan and the Soviet Union, although very diíTerent, hecame .indllstrialized undcr vcry heavv govcrnmentnl prcssure; in both cases) lhe i~Je()logr­ca) jtlstíficatio!.i of t he re:quisítc vaJue-commitmems played a partícularly ímportant parí. In hpan, the natIon:1listlc connot¡üions 01' aspects of the Shinto

rcligious tradítion wcre part¡c::ularly impMtunt.41 In the SOViCf case, the revolutíonary force ()f thc Com­munist movemcnl was graftcd onto a Russian soch\l structurc th,)t had alwñys cmphasizcd thc priority ü¡' the state ovcr prívate intcrcSls-far more srrong]y than in most Wcstcrn countries, The J)artv fune­tioncd as the prímnry agency of ideologica1 indoc­trination whích, under the utopian conccption of communism~ has inculcated the values ncccssary for high commitment to economic productívity­values which seem to have becn rclativelv wcak in pre-Revolutionary Russiu. .

The combinat¡on of practical urgency and the absence 01' the function'i)·leve] vaIue commítment constitules a majtlr reason that. for the undcrrlevel­opcd COlmtrics t governmental agency and the im­portallce of thc ideological symbol 01' "socblism" play such an important role in industrializatíon. Even lhe rigid i'iuthoritariunism oí Communisl or­ganizatjonal practlces occasions Car Jess resistance in these circumstances, since thcre is both the factor of urgency, lo al} extelll which we do not fcel, and. pcrhaps even more important, the necessity of coun­terbaJancing, in the inevitable ilmbivalent structurc. the profoun"'d resistuflce to value change.'.(l ,

The second rl1ain type oí s~)cietal value-change is that occurring when the cultural model cannot be supplieJ frOl;l <1 socialIy exogenous source. but l'I1usL so far ~\S the social svstcm referencc is con­cerned. be evolved from within the societv. This is the sÍluation to which Max \Vebcr's fam~ous cate­gory of ch.¡rismatic innovation applies. The focus of the change must be in the cultural system"s re­ligiollS aspects. lr must concern alterations in the definition of {he meaning of lhe life of the indj4 vidual in socíety .and of the chara.cter of the socicty itself.

Jn the proccss of development, a cultural change which coukl chllngc valucs at a socictaJ level would ariseJ through some cmnplex process involving toe interactioLl ~nd ioterdepcndencc of socia1 and cul­tural systems. Consídenltions such as those re· viewed-bv \Vebcr in the selection on dasses. status groups ~mJ religion (see end oí Scc!ioll B in

49. On the politic;:¡l primíJcy of Japanc-se society and XIS role in indusJrialization. as well :.JS i1s rclaJkm !o ¡he r~ligioLls background, :;ee R. N. BéHah. l'okugawa Re­ligíO'l (G!encoe, 111.: FreePress, 1957).

50. 'fhe !Il()Sl C'onsj)lcllouS exampJe oí II faílure to o\·cr· come lhis re5i.stanc~. vcry prob.ably because or lhc failure tú pravíde the uecessarj permisí'ivcness ~n'!d supporr tú

. eüse lhe process of reHnql.lishn:)enl of úld valucs, 18 pl'ob­i1b]y the case of lhe Russian pe¿ts::mtry. Agriculturc is clearly the mllin sore spot oi Soviet prod_llctívity, :lnd lhis. seem~ 10 go back. to the vlolently coercive proct'<!ure.s tldopte.d in lbc co]]eCljvization programo See Baner, In­keles, and Klllckhohn, Hol<' tlt(J Soviet Sj'Síem Work.\". II:.¡rv~lCd Press, 1957.

Talcott Parsons: An Outll1lc ot thc Social Systcrn

Part Four) would be highlv relev~mt in so far as tbcy COl1cern society ..... The \vhole systern of aClion, aud thc action-cxogenous en\'ironm~n1 im­pinging Ilpon it, is abo rele~ant to thís prob!em. The speciaJ role 01' ¡he charismatic personaliry may in­volve prohlcms spccitic 10 pcrsonalíty thcory ano nol reducible either to sociological or cultural terms.

v. CONCLUSrON

- Thc obverse is tbc proccs~ of institutionalizlng new religious valucs. The firsl question arising con­cerns thc specification of the values from the cul­tural lo the social system leve!, that is, definíng of the implicarions of the cultural prcl11ises for lhe kiJ/d 01 .\'oG'iery considcred dcsirable. 'fhe second basic problcm conccrns the processcs by \\'hich, once slIch a sct oC soeteral Vlltucs ís availn,ble, the strategicllly 11105t irnportant clements ín lhe population n~ay be moti vationa 11 y COI1lD1 i tted 10 them, In other 'I.vó'rds, thesc c!cl11cnts must be socíalil.ed in the new dcfini­tion of thc situation íf the}' are to exert thc lc ..... eragc ncccssary for extending th~ imritulionalization of [he valucs lO al! the important levels 01' speciflcation nnd arcas of dífTcrcntiatcd function in the socicty.

A few points may b~ mentioncd Ihat ilre perÜ­nent. Thc bcarers of the nev.' valucs mUSí somehow bccome cstabJí~hed in such a \V,IV that thev cannor be reabsorbed in the older syst'em: Rcligiolls oc semi­religious movements, churches, elC., n;lJst be struc­turaIty independcnt oí lhe \nramount politícallv organize<.l collectívity. Once consolidated. howevc{, the institutionalization of ncw vall1es in the t:\~cl1lar society is possible only when tbese bearers can acquirc a fllndamental inJluence ove!" lhe kadership elements ofthe paramounl política! systCfll. through convers¡oo of [hese elcments, rhrough infiltratíon, or through revolutíon. In carly medieval Europc) the Church was the main locus oC thc valucs \vhích laLer un<.lcrJay the üctivisrn of modcrn \Vestern SO~ cicty. The relígious orden; werc the maín lOCllS 01'

(he v.1lucs' growth and consolidation. If the Church and its orders had mercly becn a part of {he po1í[ical organization. this would not h~!ve occurred. In thc great pajod from Gregory V Il LO 1 n nocent Il I, the Chl.lrch was able to imposc rnuch more of its values on a rcluctant political Lüry [han ir otherwise could havc. Thís did not happcn v.'ithout a good dcal or direct inkrpenetr:Hion o[ political und rcligiom Icadcrshíp; but [he basíc principie of dilTercntimion of churcb and sta te, thongh lIndcr consíJ~[¿!hle strain, W;1:; not ~\b¡),ndoned.

A variety of other considerarions übolJt this proccss could be ti i~cIlssed. bllt pcrha ps I hesc a re enough to show the gcncr~l naturc of thc pwccss of chunge involve-d in (he. institutionalizat ion of TlC\\;"

values ~,t "he societal leve1.

Although il rnay sCC'nl long. rej2.1in~ to the task the abo"e oUlHnc is obviously just a sketch, anJ a very tentative onc. It Ís '-i slátémcnt oC whot seems to 011(.' partíCU[LLf author .n o)Je panicular time tq be the mosl u::Idul ,,,,ay of organlzing his view af ·the cornp[cx problcms and máterjals \\'hich musr some­h()w enler into the analysi::; 01' social systems. \Ve have cmphasizcd, throuc.hout the inln.)ductorv m¡¡­terials of this Anthology, tha! in our opínion"' soci­o]ogy, as a thcoretical as well as <ln empirÍLa! sci­¡;;nc~. is in an early stage of developmenL \Ve- bold, t~ereforeJ thot olly statement mude in our g~nera-1Ion. even in outline, is ln the naturc of the case destin~tl lO be superscdcd, ilnd re!ntivcly quick!y. Anv other vic\.\' W~)ldd contradict the eSI~\bl¡shed

fact that science is an inheret71lv cvolvín o thinn: jf il ~ ;:,::.

should stop dcvc10ping ami bccolllí! fix::tted on ány particulnr sct of '·doctrines,'" il would ip.w ftJC1~') ccaSé [O be science,

This is the stalement 01' our fundamental con­víction. lt does nol impJy. as is som~LÍme:s suggcsted, thLlt. in [he Ihcory of sociology ,1S in other sc-icnccs, th~re is an indelinite pluralitv of cquallv legitimare positíons on all qucstions, a~l cClcclic¡;m ':;:--hich, 15 the counterpart. for rhe sociology of sciencc. oí radical culturál relutivism in a bro~\dcr c:ontex1. Such :Hl implication would directly c(Jntr~hfíct our cqual1y fundamental clmviction th;t there has bccn n dctinitc emerging structure of problcms in om field. :Hld a ClIfllU];:Hivc deve[(¡pmcnt oí ana [vtical thinking re!¡¡tlve to lnem. "

\VC f~.:lve conscicnliollSly tr¡~d to avole] thc ScvHa of dogmatism in prcscnting J the,)retical vicw which is inc"itably se1ccti-"ie and ínc()mplet~" bLll is thc bcst >H" can do at this 1 ¡me. \Ve think il equaily nccessary to avoid tbc Charvbdis ol' thnt formless eclec¡jcism. common at ka$t~by implication in Cl)U­

ti!lnporary discussions. acconling to \\'hkh in om fidd ··J.nything goes." or "'you rays )'our J110ney and VOH takes vour choice·': ilcCordíng 10 \\'hich 1 htrc ;l.re tlHcgc:J' lo be JlO sl~riol1s profes~ional critcrí:1 (,r lhe()rcti~al e\,cclk:ncc on :Jny gcncr:.r[Ized Ic\"(~L"'

51. It is perhars penincnt lO n(1te (J~rnU:Hy, 196!) ¡lKli \his [,l[rnl!udíon '.\'U!'. \\'ri111:."11 in lhe hte ~tll11l11l'f .!IHl ("MIl' (~III of 1958, $ 11l1iéÍcnl ti ~vdopm~~l\! s ha ve l;¡kw ph\~·L· ín Ihe inlcrim >:'0 lhat had il been wn'ttc!I [\\'0 yea¡-s b 1I:: 1", í! \\'l)tl!Ú llave bc~n .~amcwh~l diiicttn! ~Ind \\'t'" hupe- bella. Jt \\'-:lS !'lO!. hnwe\"l:f. !'os~ibk W ul1denake e,l..kn!'lvc re· \'i,,¡~'n~ ;j[ lh:'tl time. FnI· lhe ;nlcn";{cd rL!:JüL!r ¡!len:: are lw(\ pl'lce~ whc;c súme ni" trl¡; pcnincnt lunhcr l¡H"Of~'lic~:t dc­vck'pme-nlS :ln! '4vail;\bk, narndy "P(I.[((-rn \':xd;\bh:~ !{n'¡~ilcJ: ¡\ Response t() Pfüfes~m Dilbia." Allierié-(i1J Soc/ologic()/ Re 1'i"lI' , AllgU.~l. ! 960: ~\rld "Thc I'nil)t of Vi ¡;:w

of ¡he Alllhür," lht.' finn.l ch;)p,~r in ~'<1..\ Black (e11,), r;ic.' So<Í~11 1'I1(.'oriC"s {!j Tu¡cotr PursO/¡s. N cw ~'orI.., I'tl:nllct'­H:tll, J96L