4.4 Functional analysis
4.4.3 Value of functional analysis
123
124 are smaller than others but they are formed by large numbers of people. It refers also to the social relationships defined by cultural boundaries. Thus this becomes a ―system of structured social relationships that connect people according to a shared culture‖ (Giddens 2001: 699). Social equilibrium and consensus that are privileged by functionalists would be achieved if the population, through institutions or social systems, mirrors their views.
Briefly, the functionalist theory that Merton developed builds its experience on the Hopi ceremonial rain. This is a primitive folk practice that is ‗designed to produce abundant rainfall‘
(1968: 118). In the context of sociology, the interest is not the relevance of this ritual but the
―analysis of the actual role of this behaviour in the life of the group‖ (Merton 1967:118). This cultural practice is shared in a way that it created a system of meaning which unites a society (Giddens 2001: 22). Due to this, ―the rationality of social ceremonies rooted in the culture cannot be simply responding to the expected function. They may be irrational but still they play the roles of reinforcing the group identity. They do this by providing a periodic occasion on which the scattered members of a group assemble to engage in a common activity‖ (Merton 1968: 118- 119). Hence, Merton explains the prominent framework of functionalist theory and in pairing function and dysfunction, manifest and latent function, he focuses on the functional role of each part of a social system.
Various parts of a system are interconnected like integrated units that work together to produce stability, cohesion and consensus of a group or a society (Merton 1967: 73-138). He states that:
Functions are those observed consequences which make for the adaptation or adjustment of a given system; and dysfunctions, those observed consequences which lessen the adaptation or adjustment of the system. There is also the empirical possibility of non- functional consequences which are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration‖ […]. Manifest functions are those consequences contributing to the adjustment or adaptation of the system which are intended and recognized by participants in the system;
Latent functions, correlatively, being those which are neither intended nor recognized (Merton 1968: 105).
125 In the above quotation, Merton details functionalism by including features such as: (i) manifest functions, (ii) latent functions, (iii) dysfunctional consequences and (4) non-functional consequences. These four concepts that are central to Merton are discussed in depth.
4.4.3.1 Manifest functions
Manifest refers to something that is not hidden but is exposed to the sight of everybody. People know or see through the practical use of the senses; bearing, seeing, touching and so on. When people use common sense, the manifest functions of a structure become functions that are clearly observable. Those functions are firstly known by the organization which defines them. Secondly, they should be known by the environmental area of the organization because they are manifest.
Functions are structural results or impacts in society. If they are manifest functions, their impacts should be evident. If this is not the case, when the population reads something different and which is not manifest, there is now a problem of defining the contribution of social organization.
Either there is a misunderstanding between the structure and the environment where it is located, or the population is reading that structure through different coloured glasses. This is now different from the proposed objectives of the organization. Indeed, this may mean that the social organization has vague objectives where everyone can fit whatever they feel compelled to. Such a challenge is detailed as a constraint of manifest functions.
Manifest functions are expected consequences and predetermined objectives to be achieved.
They are the pillars of the existence of the social organization that are easily managed, since they are planned effects. They explain the contribution of a social system to the entire society because they are known outcomes. Obviously promoted, those manifest effects play an important role in influencing people. This is observable when we consider social structure, even though this reads in a different way.
126 The organization of a social system proposes objectives to achieve. Those predefined objectives would deliver a positive contribution to the whole society but may fail to achieve while structural evaluation relies on them. Then there will be a socialization of societal needs through different convincing objectives that are idealistic in comparison to what the results should be. There is a projected understanding that the formulated objectives are going to satisfy the needs of the population. In this case, people‘s interest seems to hinder the collectivization of interests.
Obviously this is not measured.
The community reaction to the existence of the social organization may defy its manifest functions. If there is no population‘s appropriateness for the intended contributions, there is a limitation to that structure‘s objectives. Illustrating this reality in the case of Rwanda, the physical presence of genocide memorials in Rwanda is defined by the government and an official paper, describing the role they are expected to play (CNLG 2009: 7-8). Although their manifest functions are defined, the way the people relate to the intended consequences is an issue that requires discussion with the population. This can help to analyze to what extent the messages of the symbols are interpreted.
Therefore, a social organization is deliberately conceived with a purpose. In other words, the objectives to be achieved are manifest functions. There is a consciousness of what might be the contribution of a social organization as its objectives. The challenge is to know in which way the partaker who did not participate in elaborating those objectives can accommodate them as manifest functions that rely on her or his interest.
4.4.3.2 Constraints of manifest function
The experiences and the expectations of a group or an individual enable the manifest functions of an organization to be understood. It may be interpreted differently by different groups, which means that harmony or consensus is not guaranteed. In considering some social sensations that are found in shared culture, reading their expected function is easy. The fact is that all the actors
127 have the same method of interpreting its consequences; they are also the product of a shared cultural understanding such as the example used by Merton (1996: 91) to detail functionalism, namely the Hopi rain ceremony.
Other social phenomena are the product of conflict within the same society. In fact, their manifest functions would be perceived differently, even though they are expected. The reason for this is that actors are not sharing the same experiences and considerations. Although genocide memorials have elements of cultural representation, they still include a burial place for those killed during the genocide. This makes people discover a contradiction between the expected and the experienced consequences of the community symbols.
In view of the above, we can say that different experiences cause different expectations. Manifest functions are undermined by these differences. Positive contributions for some would be dysfunctions for others within the same community. The consensus concerning the contribution of the social system which deteriorated into a conflict situation would be undermined by diversities of interpretations. The value of consensus ―forms the fundamental integrating principle in society‖ (Haralambos, Holborn and Heald 2004: 940). This integration of principles is a platform for social equilibrium.
The manifest functions are predetermined by the social organization. At the beginning there is a clear vision of its impact as there is a predefinition of its results. Factors that are able to generate change are ignored, because they can obstruct the normal process of the social organization to impact the community. It is likely to affirm that there is no way of missing its objectives. This inflexibility does not exist in social sciences, particularly in sociology. Human behaviour is uncertain that flexibility is taken into account when the analyst is dealing with something that can influence the human environment. Individuals‘ interests, uncertain objectives and socio- political changes are barriers to observing the manifest consequences of the social organization.
128 Those factors lessen the manifest functions of the social organization because they bring irregularity to the interpretation of intended functions.
4.4.3.4 Postulate of latent functions
The concept ‗latent‘ means a thing out of sight or an idea that is not yet known. Similarly, the idea is covered to the sight of individuals; but although under cover, it exists. A definition of something that is in the process of being is not possible. The only way of learning its meaning is to wait for its consequences. From there, the analyst can motivate some elements of its reality.
Latent function overwhelms the social organization as it cannot be predicted. Those functions cannot be known by the organization which defined the social phenomenon.
Latent functions are neither recognized nor expected. But it is true that they contribute to maintaining the social organization. They play a positive role in the meaning of the social system that the actors express. The way actors respond to the presence of a social system includes the way the population owns that institution and uses it to satisfy their desires. Unexpected consequences and their meanings are unlikely to be pre-defined. The effects that would be observed by the actor are latent functions that can enlarge the functional aspect of a social system in the community.
According to Parsons (1967: 261), latent functions are maintenance patterns and cultural- motivational systems. Social organizations have social obligations within their functions as an orientation choice. They also perform a specific function in a specific situation (Parsons 1951:
99). Although individuals are influenced by the social, political and economic environment, their interests and personal identity do not disappear completely into social collectivism. This contributes to further definitions of a given social place that may differ from the public definition.
129 Manifest functions do not conflict with latent functions, because both are functional. The only difference is that manifest functions are intended but latent ones are not, because they occur in last position. They are likely to be defined as the ramification of the expected consequences of a social system since they come second to manifest functions. The active actors in the social system own and use it to satisfy their aspirations.
Coming back to the Hopi ceremony, it was performed to resolve rain crises and has also been used to ―fulfil the latent function of reinforcing the group identity by providing a periodic occasion on which the scattered members of a group assemble to engage in a common activity‖ (Merton 1996: 91). Despite the fact that the meaning of the ceremony is related to the manifest functions, it has an undisclosed significance (Kaplan and Manners 1972:58). Congruent with Merton 1968:105), latent functions are neither intended nor recognized, as they cannot be observed or predictable. They emerge from the environment of the manifest functions since they are the extent of expected functions.
Behind the public use of a social system that represents the manifest functions, there are always latent functions. Although these latent functions cannot be predictable in the first definitions, they play an important role in the maintenance of the social system. This applies to genocide memorials that are symbols of remembrance. Official guidelines cannot be sure of how the community would make use of these places. One of the surprising latent functions of the genocide memorials is to represent places which materialize a home in which to meet with survivors‘ relatives as living family and the living dead. This is peculiar to genocide memorials that are in the former killing fields.
In fact, in the words of Muzungu (1975), genocide memorials are social monuments that represent a personal heritage. People come here to perform rituals related to death. Some of these people do more; they bring drinks to these places that are reserved for tombs, to celebrate the presence of their relatives in a ceremonial dressing (Muzungu 1975: 27). The presence of these behaviours means that the cohesion between people and the living dead is maintained.
130 This social cohesion is a cultural practice that conveys the presence of the community in those genocide memorials, which means that the continuity of the living family is certain (Byanafashe 2004: 31). Apart from their public role which includes being tombs for the people who were killed during genocide, and as a reminder of what happened to ensure vigilance in the future, they represent a religious place where people can practise their different beliefs, related to the relational aspect between the living dead and the living family as a latent function. The attitudes that are expressed within genocide memorials are ‗latent functions‘. They attract the curiosity of the researcher to understand how the community makes use of these places of remembrance. The postulate of latent function would help the research to deepen all of that particular appropriateness of those places ordinary citizens.
Although there is a socio-cultural attachment to the burial place as an expected behaviour (Bigirumwami 2004: 190), going this far in using memorials for religious rituals is an unexpected action. The people who have their loved ones buried in these places regard them as places in which they talk earnestly about their stories and talk to their loved ones. They thus maintain their identity as a group which has common stories. Other people who are curious ask about their stories and relate their own (Chaumont 2002: 36). During the mourning period in Rwanda – in April every year - mourners always highlight that the memorials are places offering release. They state that they are in the same place and their life after being killed innocently is recognized. One can observe that the mourners are happy and return home satisfied – by the simple reason of having mourned for their beloved ones. Actually, this is a place which brings hope within its latent function. Latent functions have the potential to modify or add more functional value to the social system.
The materialization of the place includes an emotional aspect which retains everybody‘s attention. The functional aspect of each system has, in itself, the latent function that is worthy enough to influence the community‘s analysis of its consequences (Merton 1967: 122). The latent functions that are related to the Hopi rain ceremonies stipulate that the closeness of the people who are involved in the rituals is the ―basic source of group unity‖ (1968:119). The place
131 and time of performing this folkloric ritual has become an opportunity for the group to communicate and strengthen their identity as a latent function.
4.4.3.5 Dysfunctional consequences
The use of the word ‗dysfunction‘ relates to an irregularity, which is a function impairment.
There is an expected function as a result of a phenomenon. Dysfunction is meaningless if there is no definition of function. Through the analysis of the expected contribution of an organization to the cohesion of the society, some prejudice indicates the presence of dysfunctional aspects. From the views of Merton, dysfunctional consequences are negative effects which lessen the positive contribution of the structure to the entire society. Effects are unfortunate and inopportune to the functional analysis (Merton 1996: 71), which makes them harmful to the society. Although they cannot be predetermined, they exist within each social structure. They affect the realization of manifest functions because they are in contradiction with the functional consequences.
Social organizations are suspected to hold uncertain messages. The latter are viewed differently by the community, to integrate dysfunctions such as genocide memorial symbols within those diversities. The way these effects are managed is undermined by their undisclosed occurrence.
The dysfunctional aspect of a social system takes roots in its primary functional definition.
Functions are observed consequences which adapt or adjust a given system. Conversely, dysfunctions are observed consequences that lessen the adaptation or adjustment of the system (Merton 1968: 105).
Negative consequences oppose the functional aspect of a social system and they may be dysfunctional for the entire community, or for a group (Merton 1996: 14). This means that social consequences would include both functional and dysfunctional sides, depending on the actors. In the mind of Merton (1996: 96), ―a social dysfunction is any progress that undermines the stability or survival of a social system. The presence of this concept in sociology curbs any tendency towards adopting the doctrine that everything in society works for the harmony and the
132 good‖. The dysfunction aspect disrupts the social system because it disorients its expected functions, whose persistence undermines the functional aspect of the social system.
Merton and Nisbet (1971: 839) emphasize that ―social dysfunction refers to a designated set of consequences of a designated pattern of behaviour, belief or organization that interfere with a designated functional requirement of a designated social system‖. A social organization would not be fully analyzed using functionalism without considering negative impacts. This is because they are always there and a social system cannot be uniformly dysfunctional for the entire society. This means that dysfunctional consequences are always linked to functional ones.
Merton (1996: 97) agrees that the differentiation in ―the same social pattern can be dysfunctional for some segments of social system and functional for others‖.
Merton‘s statement clarifies the specific character of social consequences over different individuals who have different interests or expectations. In other words, ―social dysfunction is not equivalent to immorality, unethical practice or social disrepute‖ (Merton 1996:99). However, the connections - good or bad, desirable and undesirable - cannot apply to the sociological analysis. The latter seeks that which could help the society to function as a unit, which reflects an ideal definition of social system that looks for ‗consensus‘ (Merton 1996: 96-97).
The different groups that exist inside the same society have various expectations that sometimes conflict. Because of this, one group or an individual‘s functional social consequences may be the social dysfunctional consequences of the other group or individuals. In this, dysfunctional consequences are subject to different interpretations. The truth is that this depends on the side of the social system the individual wants to analyze. Inside one social organization ―some elements are functional for the entire system but carry certain dysfunctional side-effects‖ (Merton 1996:
14).
133 This situation influences the interpretations of the community members in one way or another. In fact, the environment in which the functionalism theory is used as a tool to analyze genocide memorials is a complex situation inside the Rwandan community. Families are still struggling with the genocide‘s consequences. Some survivors are widows or orphans who have suffered many physical and mental handicaps. The relatives of many others are in exile, in prison or doing Common Development Labor [TIG: Travauxd‟InteretGénéral, which means work for the public interest]. Therefore, in this research, the dysfunctional aspects of genocide memorials come from such a complexity (Merton 1996:99). However, although social dysfunctional consequences are defined as lessening expected functions, they create ―strong and insistent pressure for change‖, since they attempt to adjust the consequences (Elster 1990: 132).
4.4.3.6 Non-functional consequences
The non-functional concept does not imply a specific impact, either positive or negative, and it does not engage any functional role. The social structure exists but it does not impact on the community in the way it defines its objective. Normally, the contribution of a social organization has multidimensional consequences in society. The contribution of the social system cannot be coined only within its expected functions, because this discloses a way of welcoming unanticipated functions. The dynamic relations between the organization, the actor and the environment generate non-functional consequences which are simply irrelevant to the system under consideration (Merton 1968: 105). Therefore it seems possible to use it for other purposes due to its complexity.
4.5 Nature of functionalism