Are individuals a problem for British structural-functionalist anthropology?
Abstract
In this paper, I consider the objection to British structural-functionalism that it is unable to deal with the significance of individuals. There are various ways in which individuals may pose a problem for it. I identify four ways, one of which is novel. This way is when someone does not appear to meet the official role requirements in an organization, which gives rise to the question of whether the anthropologist should posit an alternative structure of roles for the organization.
Downloads
References
Jarvie, I.C. 1967 (revised edition). The Revolution in Anthropology. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.
Malinowski, B. 1960 (originally 1944). A Scientific Theory of Culture And Other Essays. New York: Oxford University Press.
Radcliffe-Brown, A.R. 1952. Structure and Function in Primitive Society. Glencoe, Illinois: The Free Press.
Strathern, M. 1990. Review of Renato Rosaldo, Culture and Truth: The Remaking of Social Analysis. History of the Human Sciences 3: 310-313.
Copyright (c) 2023 IJRDO - Journal of Social Science and Humanities Research
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Author(s) and co-author(s) jointly and severally represent and warrant that the Article is original with the author(s) and does not infringe any copyright or violate any other right of any third parties, and that the Article has not been published elsewhere. Author(s) agree to the terms that the IJRDO Journal will have the full right to remove the published article on any misconduct found in the published article.
