Structural Functionalist Theory of Social Stratification

The Structural Functionalist perspective views stratification as an inevitable and functional aspect of social systems. Each position in society fulfills certain necessary functions, and stratification ensures that the most qualified individuals occupy the most important roles. The focus is on integration, stability, and value consensus rather than conflict or exploitation.

1️⃣ Core Foundations of Functionalism

Functionalism originated in the works of Émile Durkheim and later developed by Talcott Parsons. It treats society as a living organism, where each structure (family, economy, education, polity) performs functions that contribute to social equilibrium.

Durkheim’s Contribution

Émile Durkheim provided the foundational logic for functionalism. In Division of Labour in Society (1893), he showed how increasing specialization produces organic solidarity, replacing mechanical solidarity. Stratification, thus, arises from the moral necessity to integrate diverse functions. Inequality is seen as normal if it reflects differences in talent and function.

Talcott Parsons

Parsons extended functionalism through his AGIL Model — Adaptation, Goal Attainment, Integration, Latency. Stratification fits into the Integration function, ensuring social order through value consensus.

2️⃣ Davis and Moore: Functional Theory of Stratification (1945)

In their famous paper “Some Principles of Stratification” (American Sociological Review, 1945), Kingsley Davis and Wilbert Moore provided the most systematic functional explanation of social inequality.

Key Points:

• Some positions are functionally more important.
• Scarce talent requires training, hence higher rewards.
• Inequality motivates effort and performance.
• Meritocratic selection legitimizes hierarchy.

Critiques — Melvin Tumin (1953)

Tumin challenged Davis & Moore in “Some Principles of Stratification: A Critical Analysis” (1953):

• Functional importance is subjective and power-driven.
• Unequal opportunity prevents discovery of talent.
• Stratification may produce resentment and conflict, reducing efficiency.
• Rewards often exceed functional contribution (e.g., celebrities, inheritance).

3️⃣ Later Functionalists and Neo-Functional Views

Parsons and Role Differentiation

Parsons saw stratification as universal but variable in form: all societies rank individuals based on culturally valued criteria (e.g., achievement in modern, kinship in traditional). Stratification patterns correspond to pattern variables (achievement vs. ascription, universalism vs. particularism).

Kingsley Davis (1960s Refinements)

Davis later emphasized that stratification is not only about economic rewards but also prestige and esteem that integrate individuals emotionally into the social system.

Other Functional Thinkers

• R. K. Merton: introduced the idea of manifest and latent functions — stratification may serve latent dysfunctions like hostility and alienation.
• Harold K. Gerth & C. Wright Mills: critiqued functionalism for ignoring power concentration in elite structures.

4️⃣ Functionalism vs. Conflict Perspective — Comparison

5️⃣ Indian Context Application

In India, functionalist logic was applied by some sociologists to interpret caste. For example, G. S. Ghurye viewed caste as a functional division of labour integrated by religion and ritual. Later scholars like Andre Béteille criticized this as ignoring domination and inequality, showing the limits of pure functionalism in stratified societies like India.

UPSC Summary Pointers

• Functionalist theory highlights role allocation, motivation, and stability.
• Key thinkers – Durkheim (Integration), Parsons (AGIL & Value Consensus), Davis–Moore (Functional Necessity), Tumin (Critique).
• In UPSC answers, contrast functionalism with Marxism to show analytical depth.
• Use examples from education and caste for illustration.