Talcott Parsons (1902 - 1979) is a renowned American sociologist who founded structural functionalism and social systems theory.
T. Parsons' study of social systems is based on the general theory of social action. The main ideas associated with the theory of social action are described in his works "The structure of social action" (1937), "Towards a general theory of action" (1951) and "Workbooks on the theory of action" (1953).
When developing the theory of social action, T. Parsons relied on the works of such scientists as Marshall, Max Weber, W. Pareto and E. Durkheim. A feature of this theory is that it is not society as a whole, not a person, not culture, but a separate human action is taken as a unit of research. Social action is something limited by time and space; it is a point that is a center where interactions of such large spheres as "Personality", "Society" and "Culture" intersect. In the "Personality" there are not only needs, interests that determine each action, but also a host of other characteristics: values, attitudes, personality traits - its advantages and disadvantages, - a way of thinking, a sphere of knowledge and everything that can affect an action indirectly. In the sphere of "Society" there are relationships with other people that are important for a given action, as well as many different relationships of a person with other people. Taken together, they indirectly affect every action performed in a particular society. The sphere of "Culture" includes norms and values that determine how an action should be performed, as well as how other actions should be performed, how relations between members of a given society should be built, and even what qualities and personality traits are considered adequate in a particular society. This construction of three spheres is immersed in the external environment, which includes natural conditions, other societies, the physical nature of the individual, and so on. And all these spheres interact with each other.
Problems pursued by the general theory of action by T. Parsons:
1. Determination of the features of the structure of social action;
2. Development of action variables associated with the value orientations of the subjects of action;
3. Finding the requirements for the system of action from the external environment and from the internal needs of the development of the system itself;
4. Establishment of mechanisms of interchange between the main subsystems of action;
5. Application of the theory of action to the consideration of social evolution.
The structure of an elementary action, according to T. Parsons, includes the following elements:
1) an actor or "actor" is an individual or a group;
2) the goal pursued by the actor;
3) a situation implying conditions and means of action;
4) the values and norms by which the actor is guided (in another way, the normative orientation of the action).
In the later works of T. Parsons, action is revealed not through conditions and means, but through the objects that make up it. These objects are divided into social and non-social. The first, that is, social objects, are other actors (individuals or groups). The second, that is, non-social objects, are cultural and physical phenomena that do not interact with the actor.
T. Parsons called his theory of action voluntaristic, that is, one where the factor of free will plays an important role in choosing a strategy of behavior. This factor is associated with his problem of motivation. T. Parsons's motivation is focused on improving the balance between satisfaction and dissatisfaction of the actor. Cognitive (cognitive) motivation is aimed at meeting the needs for knowledge, and emotional (cathectic) is manifested in a positive or negative attitude towards another person. The mechanisms of motivation are aimed at adapting the actions of individuals to the existing social order. They connect the relationship between man and society.
In the course of studying the structure of action, T. Parsons concludes that elementary actions cannot be realized outside the social and cultural context. The concept of social action dominates here. Social action, according to T. Parsons, is a system of interaction that includes many actors who have a certain status and perform roles defined by norms. This understands one of the main systems of human action - the social system.
In addition to the social system, T. Parsons singles out the personality system, the cultural system and the biological system, which was considered above. The personal system is a person's acceptance of personal goals and decisions. The cultural system indicates general norms and values and exercises control over their implementation. The biological (or behavioral) system determines human behavior from the side of natural factors (environmental properties, heredity). These systems of action, according to T. Parsons, are open. To maintain their existence, they must satisfy four necessary conditions or prerequisites: adaptation, goal-setting, integration and latency. Thus, each system at a lower level is represented by four subsystems created to continue the normal functioning of these systems:
1. Adaptation - each system must adapt to its environment;
2. Goal setting - each system must have the means to achieve the goals and use the resources of the system in the process of achieving these goals;
3. Integration - each system must maintain its unity, preventing any deviations;
4. Latency - every system should strive to maintain internal order.
Relations between systems and subsystems within them are considered by T. Parsons in the form of information exchange, that is, as a certain amount of symbols that cause changes in the receiving system and the system transmitting this information. Thanks to the exchange of information, on the one hand, mutual penetration of one system into another is supported, and on the other hand, the system's own independence is asserted.
Each of the main systems is controlled by one of four subsystems, which has a large information potential and consumes the least amount of energy. In another way, each of the systems has an energy potential, which depends on the subsystem, which has a greater impact on it with less energy consumption. The energy potential determines what place it will occupy among other systems and what effect it will have on other subsystems. Among the systems of action, the system of a biological organism has the greatest energy potential. It creates the conditions for the flow of action and, at the same time, has the least control effect on it. The system with the lowest energy potential is cultural, on the contrary, it has a higher controlling influence.
Action, according to T. Parsons, has a consciously rational, purposeful, selective character. It is influenced by four relatively independent systems of action, each of which performs a specific function. However, with this approach, the field of choice turns out to be too wide. T. Parsons tries to overcome this uncertainty of choice by introducing several coordinate axes defining the multidimensional space of the character's choice. Each axis is represented by extreme values that form pairs of variables, and in reality, according to T. Parsons, we can only talk about the degree of deviation of the choice in one direction or the other. The following are the extreme values of the T. Parsons coordinate axis:
1. Universalism - particularism. The object is viewed either as something unique or in terms of common norms and values. This alternative pair characterizes the criteria used when making a decision in a particular situation, showing which standards are used - subjective (one person) or agreed (several people, groups, society).
2. Emotionality - emotional neutrality. The degree of emotional coloring of the interaction, the number, intensity of feelings shown by the actor ("actor") in a certain situation.
3. Achievement - attribution. Assessment of the object as such, or in terms of its potential use. This pair describes another set of criteria for making a specific decision: from evaluating a person based on his natural properties - race, gender, age, etc. - to evaluating him in terms of the quality of his performance of the role. It shows whether the "actor" builds his relationships with others on the basis of their achievements, or on the basis of the qualities attributed to them that are not related to the roles they play.
4. Diffusion - specificity. These criteria explain the versatility and one-sidedness of interaction with the object; an indicator of the degree of involvement in a specific interaction, which determines the level of responsibilities of an actor ("actor"): from narrow - specific, to broad (vague) - diffuse.
T. Parsons' theory of social action has a number of controversial issues. Among them, three fundamental points can be distinguished: an analogy with an organism taken to an extreme, the identification of human activity and the behavior of a system, as well as interpretive formulations of the main provisions.
Alvin Gouldner believed that systems integration can include many shades - from perfect dependence to the relative freedom of parts relative to each other. All these authors, in contrast to T. Parsons, consider to a greater extent the functioning and development of individual elements of the system than the system as such. Pointing out that Parsons' grandiose concept does little for the comprehension of empiricism, Merton considered it premature to try to create such all-encompassing constructs. Therefore, he argued that functionalism should become a method of constructing concepts based on approximation to specific facts, created by generalizing empirical positions and containing concepts that can describe and interpret reality through operational definitions. Only after the creation of such theories will it be possible to synthesize them into a system similar to the Parsonian, using the functional method as a means of bringing them closer together. Thus, if the strategy of T. Parsons consisted in a gradual transition from the most abstract concepts to the fixed reality, then R. Merton offers the exact opposite path - from reality to general concepts. T. Parsons' strategy is deduction, cognition of the "individual" and "particular" on the basis of the "general"; R. Merton's strategy is induction, reduction to the “universal” from the “single” and the concrete.
Another "point of application" of criticism was the statement implicitly introduced by T. Parsons about the similarity of the process of an individual's activity and the behavior of a social system, leading, according to researchers, to "logically unfair teleology" - attributing the function of goal-setting to systems in describing the course of social processes and their interpretation.
The illegality of such "attribution" is expressed in the fact that explaining the existence of something by a function performed by it makes the idea of causality meaningless, since the function is not feasible until this something becomes existing. Therefore, it appears to perform a function. And if function is the cause of existence, then the effect — existence — must precede the cause — the function; as a result, cause-and-effect relationships are reversed.
Problems of functional interpretation were perhaps most vividly revealed by Charles R. Mills, who showed that by choosing individual passages of Parson's works and translating them into "ordinary" language, adding clarity, we do not lose a single valuable idea, but, on the contrary, gain a new look at things. He believes that “the 555 pages of The Social System could be turned into about 150 pages of plain English text. This would not lead to significant changes. " The reason for the judgment was the great importance that T. Parsons attached to the level and purity of abstract theorizing. It is only necessary to translate all concepts into a single terminological language, divide them by levels, and then bring them together into a logically coherent system.
Conclusion: The theory of social action by T. Parsons is based on a systems approach that divides human action into four systems: biological, social, cultural and personal. These systems perform four functions: adaptation, goal-setting, latency, and integration. Social action has a number of extreme meanings, which contain the multidimensional space of the actor's choice.
In each system, Parsons identifies four main functions: adaptation, goal achievement, integration, preservation of the existing order (latent function). Thus, the system must adapt to the environment, achieve the goal, possess internal unity and be able to maintain this state, reproduce the structure and relieve stress in the system.
By separating these four functions, it became possible to analyze systems of any level in terms of functional subsystems. So, at the highest level, the so-called system of human action is distinguished - a self-organizing system, the specificity of which, in contrast to the system of physical or biological action, is expressed in the presence, first, of symbolism (language, values, etc.), and, in -second, normativity, and, finally, in irrationality and independence from environmental conditions. In this system of human action, Parsons identifies four subsystems: an organism - a subsystem that provides the function of adaptation and gives the system physical and energy resources to interact with the environment; a person who provides goal achievement; a social system that is responsible for integrating the actions of many individuals; a cultural system (in essence, this term should mean an ethnic system), which contains values, beliefs, knowledge, etc.
At the level of the social system, Parsons, in turn, also distinguishes four subsystems, each of which performs one of four main functions: economic, designed to ensure the adaptation of the system to the environment, political, the purpose of which is to achieve the goal, the societal community (a single collective, subordinate the accepted normative order), which ensures internal unity, and a system for maintaining institutional cultural (ethnic) patterns (that is, not all culture belongs to the social system), which is responsible for legitimizing the normative order and maintaining the state of unity.
Thus, each subsystem specializes in performing some function, and the results of its activity can be used by another, wider system - like a nesting doll. Moreover, each subsystem depends on other subsystems; they exchange the results of their activities.
What, then, is a Parsons society? Society is "a type of social system (among the entire universe of social systems), which as a system reaches the highest level of self-sufficiency in relation to the environment." Parsons explains self-sufficiency as a function of a balanced combination of control mechanisms over society's relations with the environment and the degree of its internal integration. It consists in the ability of society to institutionalize some elements of culture, which are set from the outside - by the system of culture; provide a wide range of roles to individuals, as well as control the economic complex and territory.
Structural functionalism, considering society, emphasizes that any system strives for equilibrium, since it is inherent in the agreement of the elements; it always acts on deviations in such a way as to correct them and return to equilibrium. Any dysfunction is overcome by the system, and each element invests something in maintaining its stability.
The systemic method in the analysis of society makes it possible to study society in the form of a stable social structure in which a person is guided by a rigidly given pattern of behavior, which is established by the collective. And in this respect, the structural and functional direction of sociology is probably one of the most significant. It is closely related to mathematical modeling and allows you to identify many patterns in the social system. The only thing that causes criticism from other directions is the exclusion from consideration of the individual person who has his own choice and personal position. A person really turns into an average pebble, he is just a part of the system. Therefore, the systems approach and mathematical modeling are sometimes supplemented in sociology with conclusions drawn in other directions (interactionism, phenomenology, existential direction).
A similar approach, in which functions are divorced from the structure and properties of objects, is characteristic of the entire functionalist direction. Nicholas Luhmann, who also used a systems approach, went even further than Parsons. According to his theory, systems are no longer formed by actions, but by communication, and, as a result of this approach, a person even lost the right to unity. "A person can be considered ... a unity, but only for himself or for an observer, but he does not represent a system as such." Society was even more unlucky: "People are not part of society (system), they are only part of its environment, hence society ceases to be any kind of organized action, interaction, etc." According to the researcher of Luhmann's creativity, the Bulgarian scientist Tsatsov: "The absolutization of function in relation to structure ... is a radicalization of functionalism."
Obviously, with this approach, Luhmann needed not only a new definition of scientific theory, but also a new language, which gives very interesting linguistic impressions and creates an image of an infinitely complex "not for the average mind" theory. At the same time, it is not out of place to recall the well-known aphorism: "He who thinks clearly, expresses it clearly."
Unlike Luhmann's ideas, Parsons' theory retains more connections with classical systems theory. Its general system of action consists of a personality system, a behavioral system, a cultural system, and a social system (Fig. 1.).
Rice. 1
T. Parsons in his book "The System of Modern Societies" examines the historical processes that led to modern society: "pre-modern foundations of modern society", "early Christianity", "institutional heritage of Rome", "medieval society", "differentiation of the European system" and etc., religion, politics, revolutions (industrial and democratic), etc. etc. It would be logical to assume that Parsons will explain the causes of social change with the help of his system of action, but he uses only historical knowledge and sometimes some of his own terms, such as "societal society".
For example, this is how he describes the democratic revolution: “The democratic revolution was part of the process of differentiation of the political subsystem and societal society. Like any process of differentiation, it gave rise to integration problems and, where it was successful, new mechanisms of integration. the presence in a societal society of a certain degree of popular support for the state and government. " And then about the contradictions of monarchies, about the high level of national identity, about the slogans of revolution, equality, aristocracy in England, etc. etc., but nowhere is there an explanation of the reasons for differentiation or ways of solving integration problems or any processes in general from the point of view of the system of action. Moreover, in the entire historical retrospective that he unfolded, the phrase "action system" is never mentioned (!), As well as "social action." From which it is difficult not to conclude that Parsons' "system of action" is incapable of explaining the dynamics of social processes.
However, not only the general theory of systems has changed beyond recognition in the works of some sociologists, the same fate befell the theory of evolution. Indeed, modern biology has a universal theory of evolution that can explain the evolution of all organic life on Earth. And since man as a species is a product of organic evolution, then perhaps the key mechanisms of social evolution are in his biological nature and obey general evolutionary laws.
Talcott Parsons(1902-1979) will be one of the most significant sociologists of the second half of the 20th century, who most fully formulated the foundations of functionalism. In their writings, Parsons devoted considerable attention to the problem of social order. It is worth noting that he based on the fact that social life is more characterized by "mutual benefit and peaceful cooperation than mutual hostility and destruction", arguing that only adherence to common values provides the basis for order in society. He illustrated his views with examples of commercial transactions. When executing a transaction, the interested parties draw up a contract based on statutory rules. From Parsons' perspective, the fear of sanctions for breaking the rules is not enough to force people to follow them rigorously. Moral obligations are central to this. Therefore, the rules governing commercial transactions must flow from generally accepted values, which indicate what will be right, what should be. Consequently, order in the economic system is based on a general agreement on commercial morality. The sphere of business, like any other component of the activity of society, will necessarily be the sphere of morality.
Consensus on values is a fundamental integrative principle in society. Generally recognized values lead to general goals, which determine the course of action in specific situations. For example, in Western society, workers in a particular factory share the goal of efficient production, which follows from a common view of economic productivity. A common goal becomes an incentive for cooperation. Roles will be the means of translating values and goals into actions. Any social institution presupposes a combination of roles, the content of which can be expressed with the help of norms that determine the rights and obligations in relation to each specific role. Norms standardize and streamline role behavior, making it predictable, which forms the basis of social order.
Based on the fact that consensus is the most important social value, Parsons sees the main task of sociology in the analysis of the institutionalization of samples of value orientations in the social system. When values are institutionalized and behavior is structured in accordance with them, a stable system arises - a state of "social equilibrium". There are two ways to achieve this state: 1) socialization, through which social values are transmitted from one generation to another (the most important institutions that perform this function are the family, the educational system); 2) creation of various mechanisms of social control.
Parsons, considering society as a system, believes that any social system must meet four basic functional requirements:
- adaptation (adaptation) - refers to the relationship between the system and this environment: if it exists, the system must have a certain degree of control over its environment. It is worth saying that for society, the economic environment is of particular importance, which should provide people with the necessary minimum of material benefits;
- goal attainment - expresses the need of all societies to set goals towards which social activity is directed;
- integration - refers to the coordination of parts of a social system. The main institution through which this function is realized will be law. Through legal norms, relations between individuals and institutions are streamlined, which reduces the potential for conflict. If a conflict does arise, it should be settled through the legal system, avoiding the disintegration of the social system;
- retention of the sample (latency) - involves the preservation and maintenance of the basic values of society.
Parsons used this structural and functional grid in the analysis of any social phenomenon.
The consensus and stability of a system does not mean that it is incapable of change. On the contrary, in practice, not a single social system is in a state of ideal equilibrium, therefore the process of social change can be represented as a “mobile equilibrium”. So, if the relationship between society and its environment changes, then it will lead to changes in the social system as a whole.
Sociology T. Parsons
Talcott Parsons(1902-1979) - American sociologist, very influential in the XX century, an outstanding representative of structural functionalism. Major works - "The Structure of Social Activity" (1937), "The System of Modern Societies" (1971) It is worth noting that he considered himself a follower of Durkheim, Weber and Freud, who were trying to carry out the overdue synthesis of utilitarian (individualistic) and collectivist (socialist) elements of thought. “The intellectual history of recent years,” writes T. Parsons, “makes, it seems to me, inevitable the following conclusion: the relationship between the Marxist type of thinking and the type of thinking represented by the supporters of the theory of action at the turn of the twentieth century has the character of a stage sequence in a certain developmental process ".
Parsons went on to develop Weber's theory of social action. He considers the subject of sociology system of (social) action, which, in contrast to social action (actions of the individual), contains the organized activities of many people. The system of action contains subsystems that perform interrelated functions: 1) social subsystem (group of people) - the function of integrating people; 2) cultural subsystem - reproduction of a pattern of behavior used by a group of people; 3) personal subsystem - goal achievement; 4) behavioral organism - the function of adaptation to the external environment.
The subsystems of the social action system differ functionally, having the same structure. Social subsystem deals with the integration of the behavior of people and social groups. Societies (family, village, city, country, etc.) Cultural(religious, artistic, scientific) subsystem is engaged in the production of spiritual (cultural) values - symbolic meanings, which people, organized into social subsystems, implement in their behavior. Cultural (religious, moral, scientific, etc.) meanings orient human activity (give it meaning) For example, a person rises to the attack, risking his life, for the sake of defending the homeland. Personal the subsystem implements ϲʙᴏand needs, interests, goals in the process of some activity for the sake of satisfying these needs, interests, achieving goals. Personality is the main executor and regulator of action processes (sequence of some operations) Behavioral organism is a subsystem of social action, including the human brain, human movement organs, capable of physically affecting the natural environment, adapting it to the needs of people. Parsons emphasizes that all of these subsystems of social action will be "ideal types", abstract concepts that do not exist in reality. Material published on http: // site
Hence the well-known complexity in the interpretation and understanding of T. Parsons.
Parsons considers society as a type of social subsystem with the highest degree self-sufficiency in relation to the environment - natural and social. Society consists of four systems - organs that perform certain functions in the structure of society:
- societal community, consisting of a set of norms of behavior, serving to integrate people into society;
- a subsystem for the preservation and reproduction of a sample, consisting of a set of values and serving to reproduce a sample of typical social behavior;
- political subsystem serving to set and achieve goals;
- economic (adaptive) subsystem, which includes a set of roles of people in interaction with the material world.
The core of society, according to Parsons, will be societal a subsystem consisting of different people, their statuses and roles, which need to be integrated into a single whole. The societal community is a complex network (horizontal relationship) of interpenetrating typical collectives and collective loyalties: families, firms, churches, etc. Note that each such type of the team consists of many specific families, firms, etc., which include a certain number of people.
Social evolution, according to Parsons, will be part of the evolution of living systems. Therefore, following Spencer, he argued that there was a parallel between the emergence of man as a biological species and the emergence of modern societies. All people, according to biologists, belong to the same species. Therefore, it can be considered that all societies descended from one type of society. All societies go through the following stages: 1) primitive; 2) advanced primitive; 3) intermediate; 4) modern.
Primitive the type of society (primitive communal society) is characterized by the homogeneity (syncretism) of its systems.
It should be noted that the basis of social ties is formed by family and religious ties. Members of the society have the statuses of the role assigned to them by the society, in many respects depending on age and gender.
Advanced primitive society is characterized by division into primitive subsystems (political, religious, economic). The role of prescribed statuses is weakening: people's lives are increasingly determined by their success, which depends on people's abilities and luck.
V intermediate societies are further differentiated systems of social action. There is a need for their integration. There will be a written language that separates the literate from everyone else. On the basis of literacy, the accumulation of information begins, its transmission over a distance, preservation in the historical memory of the people. The ideals and values of people are obsessed with religiosity.
Modern society emerges in ancient Greece. It is worth noting that it gave rise to a system of modern (European) societies, which are characterized by the following features:
- differentiation of adaptive, targeting, integrative, supporting subsystems;
- the basic role of the market economy (private property, mass production, the market for goods, money, etc.);
- the development of Roman law as the main mechanism for the coordination and control of social activities;
- social stratification of society based on the criteria of success (political, economic, cultural)
In every social system, two types of processes take place. It is important to note that some processes - managing and integrative, which restore the balance (stabilization) of the social system after external and internal disturbances. These social processes (demographic, economic, political, spiritual) ensure the reproduction of society and the continuity of its development. Other processes affect the system of basic ideals, values, norms, by whom people are guided in social behavior. They are called processes structural changes. It is worth noting that they are deeper and more essential.
Parsons identifies four mechanisms for the evolution of social systems and societies:
- mechanism differentiation, investigated by Spencer, when systems of social action are divided into more specialized ones according to their elements and functions (for example, the production and educational functions of the family were transferred to enterprises and schools);
- increasing mechanism adaptability to the external environment as a result of the differentiation of systems of social action (for example, a farm produces more diversified products, with less labor costs and in large quantities);
- mechanism integration ensuring the inclusion of new systems of social action in society (for example, the inclusion of private property, political parties, etc.) in the post-Soviet society;
- mechanism value generalization, consisting in the formation of new ideals, values, norms of behavior and their transformation into a mass phenomenon (for example, the rudiments of a culture of competition in post-Soviet Russia). ...
Parsons examines the evolution of modern (European) societies and does not hide him: “... the modern type of society arose in the only evolutionary zone - in the West<...>Consequently, the society of the Western Christian world served as a starting point from which "originated" what we call the "system" of modern societies. " (In my opinion, along with the Western type of society and the system of these societies, there is an Asian type of society and a system of Asian societies. The latter have significant differences from Western ones.)
From what has been said, we can conclude that Parsons' sociology will be largely subjective in the sense that Hayek puts it in ϶ᴛᴏ. Incidentally, this sociology focuses on the subjective component of social activity; considers collectivist the leading form of social activity; refuses to interpret social phenomena by analogy with the laws of nature; does not recognize the universal laws of social development; does not seek to design the reorganization of societies on the basis of open laws.
It is one of the most popular methods of studying social processes in the twentieth century. Its value lies in the fact that it can be used to explore not only individual elements and stable relationships, but also their vertical and horizontal hierarchical relationships. In the 50s-70s of the twentieth century, the most prominent representative of this trend was T. Parson
with. Defining the concept of the social structure of society and its role in the analysis of people's vital activity, he used the methodology of contemporary semiotics, synergetics and cybernetics. He also used the works of E. Durkheim and M. Weber. Parsons is not very interested in the historical types of society, since he rejects the evolutionary approach to its formation. He is interested in modern society and the processes taking place there.
Social structure of society and the theory of social action
Man, according to Parsons, is the basic element of any society. He and his relationships with other people are a system that organizes itself. You can also characterize the actions of any person that are of a public nature. They have some peculiarities. The social structure of society determines human behavior, especially role behavior. It is symbolic in nature. After all, the role of a regulatory mechanism in it is played by language. He expresses the concepts that determine our reaction, down to the subconscious, through symbols. Moreover, behavior is inherently normative because it depends on a range of generally accepted frameworks. A person must do this or that, because it is customary. And, finally, one of its main characteristics is voluntarism, since a person has personal preferences, desires, and so on. The structure of social action, which is human social behavior, is as follows. It consists of the subject, the situation in which everything happens, and the orientation, direction of the individual. Parsons disagrees with Weber about whether this action must necessarily have a human-conscious meaning, or whether it can be spontaneous, affective. On this basis, the sociologist builds a whole system and classifies it into subdivisions: cultural, social, personal. They are all interconnected by various relationships, among which three regulators dominate: language, money and power.
The social structure of society. Sociology of a systems approach
Thus, according to Parsons, the social system is a complexly organized, ordered integrity, which is held together by specific connections. Examples of this are a state, nation, large organization, or movement. All such systems, as the author believed, should be studied using a special methodology. First of all, it is necessary to determine what is the social structure of the society that is being investigated. That is, you need to find out into which elements it can be broken down and which of them is being constructed. Parsons assumed that the largest structures are divided into four types: family, institution, political and social organizations, and the state. Their main regulators are the values and norms accepted at this level. Then an analysis should be carried out that would show the relationship between the elements and the whole. In addition, such a method can clarify the roles of the social systems themselves. This is how structural and functional analysis is carried out.