Talcott Parsons (1902–1979), a 20th-century sociology, best known for developing Structural Functionalism.
His “Social System Theory” attempts to provide a unified conceptual framework that explains how all parts of a society work together to maintain stability and order.
To Parsons, a society is not just a collection of individuals; it is a complex, self-regulating system of interrelated parts.
Definition
Parsons defined a social system as a “plurality of individual actors interacting with each other in a situation.”
These interactions are not random; they are governed by shared norms and values.
The basic terms of this system are,
- Status: A position in the social structure (e.g., “teacher”).
- Role: Behavior expected in that status (e.g., “teaching students”).
AGIL Paradigm
The most famous part of Parsons’ theory is AGIL model.
He argued that for any social system to survive and remain in equilibrium, it must meet four “functional prerequisites”:
| Function | Name | Description | Key Institution |
| A | Adaptation | System must secure resources from environment and distribute them. | Economy |
| G | Goal Attainment | System must define its objectives and mobilize resources to achieve them. | Political System |
| I | Integration | System must coordinate its parts and prevent conflict. | Legal System / Religion |
| L | Latency | Also called “Pattern Maintenance,” it ensures individuals are socialized to follow the system’s values. | Family / Education |
Four Subsystems of Action
Parsons viewed social system as one layer “General Action System.”
These layers work in a hierarchy of control:
- Cultural System: Provides values and symbols
- Social System: Coordinates the roles and norms
- Personality System: The individual’s motivations and needs (Actor)
- Behavioral Organism: The biological person and their physical environment
In Parsons’ view, Cultural System is most powerful because it provides template that other systems must follow.
Pattern Variables
Parsons identified five “Pattern Variables”—dichotomies that describe choices actors make in different social systems.
For example, he contrasted traditional societies with modern industrial ones:
- Affectivity vs. Affective Neutrality: Do you act based on emotion (family) or remains neutral (boss)?
- Ascription vs. Achievement: Are you judged by who you are (born into royalty) or what you do (earning a degree)?
- Particularism vs. Universalism: Do you treat people based on personal ties or apply the same rules to everyone?
- Diffuseness vs. Specificity: Is the relationship broad (parent-child) or narrow and focused (clerk-customer)?
- Collectivity-orientation vs. Self-orientation: Do you act for the group or yourself?
Equilibrium and Social Change
Parsons’ theory is often criticized for being “static,” but he did account for change. He believed systems naturally gravitate toward equilibrium (balance).
When a change occurs in one part (e.g., a new technology in the economy), then other parts adjust to restore balance.
He called this process Structural Differentiation—as societies evolve, their institutions become more specialized and complex.
Criticism
While Parsons provided a comprehensive language for sociology, his theory faced heavy criticism starting in the 1960s:
- Neglect of Conflict: Critics like C. Wright Mills argued Parsons ignored power struggles, inequality, and revolution.
- Conservative Bias: By focusing on “stability” and “function,” the theory often seemed to justify the status quo.
- Over-socialized View: It portrays humans as “cultural dopes” who simply follow the scripts that system gives them.
Despite these critiques, Parsons’ work remains foundational for understanding how large-scale social institutions—like the law, the economy, and the family—interlock to create a functioning society.