The difference between manifest and latent functions is between conscious motivations for social behavior and its objective consequences. It is indicated that the motive and the function vary separately and that the failure to record this feature in terminology has contributed to the unwitting tendency among sociologists to mix up the subjective categories of motivation with the objective categories of function. The adoption of the terms manifest and latent by Merton is used in a different context. A manifest function refers to “those objective consequences for a specified unit (person, subgroup, social or cultural system) which contribute to its adjustment or adaptation and were so intended.” A latent function refers to “unintended and unrecognized consequences of the same order.” The specific distinctions between manifest and latent terminology can result in heuristic purposes and has served in many analyses of social problems. The distinctions between the two terms are not to limit the possibilities with the usage, but these distinctions can be applied to specific usage and is explained here on in.
Heuristic Purposes of the Distinction
This distinction aids in sociological interpretation of social practices even though their manifest purpose is not reached. These practices are such that they are referred to superstitions and irrationalities. Therefore, the behavior cannot be reach rational purpose and is due to low intelligence, survival purposes, and sheer ignorance. It is name calling. It substitutes superstition for the analysis of the actual role of this behavior in the life of the group. With the term latent function, the behavior of the group may perform a function for the group, even though the function might be quite secluded from their confirmed purpose of the behavior.
The attention is drawn away from the behavior to another range of consequences. The attention is drawn to the individuals and why they are persistent with this behavior. With the Hopi tradition referred to in the book, the problem of the manifest function occurs, it becomes a problem for the meteorologists. Meteorologists agree that there is no technological use and the purpose and actual consequences do not coincide. With the concept of latent function, the analysis is turned to the groups conducting the ceremony. The ceremony has functions, but they have no purpose or latent. The latent function of ceremonies is for group identity and unity bring even the outsiders in for a common activity. Therefore, irrational behavior at times brings positive function. With the behavior that is not clearly attainable, social scientists are less likely to examine the latent functions of the behavior.
Manifest and latent functions goes further to the domains of behavior, attitude, and belief where the observer can apply special skills. The concern is largely in determining whether a practice instituted for a particular purpose and achieves the purpose. It is said that the sociologist should study of manifest functions rather than by the theoretical problems. This emphasis on the sociological view is that the association as a concrete group of human personalities informally involves many other interests. The inclusions of this concept can sensitize sociological investigators to a variety of major social variables, which are otherwise easily overlooked. It is precisely the latent functions of a practice or belief which is not common knowledge, for these are unintended and usually unrecognized social and psychological consequences. As a result, findings concerning latent functions represent a greater addition in knowledge than findings concerning manifest function.
It is stated that the social life isn’t as simple as it first appears. When people shut themselves off, it is easy to pass moral judgments about the practice or beliefs. The evaluations are usually either black or white. The evaluations in society are in part largely in terms of the manifest consequences of a practice or code, when we should be looking at it in terms of the latent function. Therefore, we should ordinarily expect the behavior to perform positive functions, which satisfying basic latent functions.
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Ch. 34 Manifest and Latent Functions [1957]
After reading chapter 34 I found Merton’s work to be slightly inconsistent. I felt like he jumped around a lot in order to get his point across. However, here is my analysis. It is first important to understand the difference between manifest and latent functions. Manifest function is the incentive for a behavior, attitudes or beliefs within a social situation (to manifest, in other words to find the motivation for the behavior, attitudes, or beliefs). The opposite is the latent function, which is simply the end result of said behavior, attitudes, or beliefs (latent = hidden, make it visible and observable). Merton feels that this is essential in understanding in order to meet the functional needs of society. This makes sense because the needs of society are determined on the behaviors of individuals within a society. He gives many examples in our text including: “racial intermarriage, social stratification, sociology of knowledge, fashion, etc.” Each of these examples is true when applying these functions. A person’s behavior regarding racial intermarriage will affect the end result of the marriage. For instance, if a father of a black bride disapproves of her marrying a white male, this behavior will have an affect on the marriage itself. There could be pros and cons as an end result, but an affect none the less. The same is true with the knowledge example. The reason for thinking a certain way (knowledge of an individual) has its consequences. People can choose to agree or disagree with someone else’s thinking can result in argument and deliberation. I thought that Falesha did a good job at explaining the Merton’s concepts, but I find that real life examples help me understand concepts better, which is why I added them in my response.
Post a Comment