send mail to support@abhimanu.com mentioning your email id and mobileno registered with us! if details not recieved
Resend Opt after 60 Sec.
By Loging in you agree to Terms of Services and Privacy Policy
Claim your free MCQ
Please specify
Sorry for the inconvenience but we’re performing some maintenance at the moment. Website can be slow during this phase..
Please verify your mobile number
Login not allowed, Please logout from existing browser
Please update your name
Subscribe to Notifications
Stay updated with the latest Current affairs and other important updates regarding video Lectures, Test Schedules, live sessions etc..
Your Free user account at abhipedia has been created.
Remember, success is a journey, not a destination. Stay motivated and keep moving forward!
Refer & Earn
Enquire Now
My Abhipedia Earning
Kindly Login to view your earning
Support
Talcott Parsons developed his social theory of action systems throughout his career. Parsons own approach to the social system is integrative[1] in nature since he not only brought out the significance of motivational factors, such as those present in the utilitarian perspective in the formation of the system, but also that of values. He formulates this approach through his theory of social action, which is an intrinsic element of the social system. Action, according to Parsons, does not take place in isolation. The concept of action, according to Parsons, is derived from behaviour of human beings as living organism. As living organisms they interact with outside reality as well as within their own mind. According to Parsons , any act consciously performed is social action. It becomes social action when four conditions are present:
When all these factors are present, behaviour becomes action. Take for example a lady driving an automobile to go to a temple. She is probably going to offer prayers. In which case then the offering of the prayer is her end or goal to which she is oriented. The situation is the road on which she is driving and the car in which she is sitting. Moreover, her behaviour is regulated by social norms or values in which the offering of prayers is recognized as desirable. In addition, she is applying her intelligence in the skill of driving which is learnt from society. Finally, the very act of driving the car implies expenditure of energy, holding the wheel, regulating the accelerator and skillful negotiation through the traffic on the road. When behaviour is seen in this analytical context, it can be defined as action.
Orientation of action can therefore be divided into two components: the motivational orientation and the value orientation. Motivational orientation refers to a situation in which action takes place taking into account needs, external appearances and plans.
The range of motivational orientations are three. These are the cognitive, the cathectic and the evaluative orientations.
The second form of orientation is value orientation, which is based on considerations of standards of values, esthetics, and morality and of thinking.
The range of value orientations also comprises three parts. These are the cognitive, the appreciative and the moral.
Thus, the motivational orientation involves only the motives or psychological aspects of the individual while the value orientation involves the cultural system. Both, the psychological and the cultural aspects of individual behaviour are, however, interlinked and interdependent.
The motivational orientations and value orientations are two levels of orientations, according to Parsons, that define the behavioral and cultural aspects of role and role expectations.
The role expectations in a social system serve as patterns of evaluation. Every actor who performs a role has a dual capacity, because role implies interaction with other person or persons. It divides role into two kinds according to Parsons. The first is, the orientation role where actor as ego (self) interacts with alter (the other person) as his or her object. The second is, the object role where actor is the object of alter’s orientation.
Role being the most vital element of the social system, its performance generates forces of strain or tension. The extent of strain depends on the way role-expectations are institutionalized in society and also on the degree to which the values of role-expectations are internalized by social actors. In relation to motivational orientation and value orientation, in the performance of roles, each actor faces dilemmas. These dilemmas emanate from strains in an individual’s choice of or preference within a range of orientations both related to needs and to values. Though these dilemmas are often seen dichotomously they in fact are placed along a continua. These dilemmas Parsons refers to as Pattern Variables. The actor must choose between the options, before she or he can act in character. The actor must choose between the options, before she or he can act with respect to the situation. For example, in a situation, which requires an actor to choose between universalistic values or particularistic values, the actor can choose only one of them.
For reasons of simplicity these dilemmas were seen by Parsons in a dichotomous character. There are in all five-pattern variables, each side of it represents one polar extreme. These pattern variables are:
(DILEMMAS OF ORIENTATION WHICH MUST BE SOLVED BEFORE ACTION CAN TAKE PLACE) PATTERN VARIABLES
EXPRESSIVE (GEMEINSCHAFT)
INSTRUMENTAL (GESELLSCHAFT)
ORIENTATION TOWARDS OTHERS amount of emotion to be shown in an interaction
ASCRIPTION
ACHIEVEMENT
RANGE OF DEMANDS ON RELATIONSHIP how far reaching are the obligations in an interaction situtation
DIFFUSENESS
SPECIFICITY
CAN ACTOR EXPECT EMOTIONAL GRATIFICATION how much emotion is appropriate
RELATIONSHIP (Affectivity)
(Affective) NEUTRALITY
ACTING ON PARTICULAR RELATIONSHIP OR GENERAL NORM should the same satandard be used to evaluate all actors in interaction situtations
PARTICULARISM
UNIVERSALISM
COLLECTIVE OBLIGATION OR PRIVATE INTEREST is action oriented toward individual or group action
COLLECTIVITY
SELF
Affectivity versus affective neutrality concerns the dilemma of role performance where evaluation is involved in relation to a situation. How much should a situation be evaluated in emotional terms or with a degree of emotional neutrality? This poses a difficult choice in most roles that we are expected to perform in society. Take for example the mother-child relationship. It has high degree or affective orientation, but discipline is also required. So on many occasions a mother would have to exercise affective-neutral role in relation to her child’s socialization. But mother-child relationship is essentially dominated by affectivity. In comparison, doctor-patient relationship brings out the aspect of affective neutrality that characterizes a doctor’s role. Affective-neutrality is essential for proper medical care, especially where surgical treatments are involved. But according to Parsons in all role performance situations the dilemma of choice and its degree of expression or commitment remains.
Similarly, in self-orientation versus collectivity orientation pattern variable the main issue is that of moral standard in the procedure of evaluation. The moral standard arises from the fact that actor has to make a choice between his or her own gratification and its deferment for the good of a larger number of people, a collectivity. Some form of altruism and self-sacrifice is involved. The dilemma of this pattern variable has always been present in human life from primitive mode of economy and society to modern civilization. The notion of socialist society and socialist consciousness offers us a good example where a whole social system and patterns of its institutions are based on the dominant choice in favour of collectivity orientation. But as Parsons has rightly pointed out, institutionalization of such values is always fragile. This is because the response to the situation by the actor is always in the form of a dilemma.
Universalism versus particularism is a pattern variable, which defines the role situation where the actor’s dilemma is between the cognitive versus the cathectic (or emotional standards) evaluation. A very good example of roles adhering to universalistic standards of human behaviour are role performance which go strictly by legal norms and legal sanctions. If one abides by the rule of law irrespective of personal, kinship or friendship considerations, then that would be an example of the universalistic mode of role performance. If one violates legal norms only because the person involved is a kin or a friend, then particularistic considerations would be said to be operating. Persons says that in societies where the role of the bureaucracy of formal organizations and modern institutions have become widespread there the dilemmas of universalism and particularism have become a matter of choice in everyday life.
The actor’s dilemma in the ascription versus achievement pattern variable is based on whether or not the actor defines the objects of his or her role either in terms of quality or performance. In India a very good example of this pattern variable is the role performance governed by the caste system. In the caste system, the statuses of persons are determined not on the basis of their personal achievement or personal skills or knowledge but on the basis of their birth. Ascription is based on assigning certain quality to a person either by birth, or age, or sex or kinship or race. Achievement is based on personal acquisition of skills and levels or performance in society.
The specificity versus diffuseness pattern variable concerns the scope of the object of role performance. Scope, in this case, is to be understood in terms of the nature of social interaction.
Some social interactions, such as between doctors and patients, or between buyers and sellers of goods in the market, have a very specific scope. The nature of these interactions is defined in terms of a very precise context of interaction. A doctor does not have to understand the social, financial or political background of his or her patients in order to treat them and to give them a prescription. Doctor’s task is very specific. So is the case of sellers of commodities in the market, who do not have to know the general details of the life of their customers. Such roles are specific in terms of the standards of response between actors.
On the contrary, some role relationships are very general and encompassing in nature. Such roles involve several aspects of the object of interaction. Some examples of such role relationships are friendship, conjugal relationship between husband and wife, relationships between kin of various degrees. All these relationships are such where the actor does not interact with another in a relationship in a specific context as such, but in a diffuse manner such as in case of two close friends. The scope of interaction is flexible, open and encompassing in nature.
The pattern variables, according to Parsons, not only define the nature of role interaction and role expectations in social system but provide, in addition the overall direction in which most members of a social system choose their roles. It also gives us an idea about the nature of the social system. For instance, take the family as a social system: the role expectations within the family amongst its members can be said to be affective, largely collectivity oriented, particularistic, ascriptive and diffuse.
On the contrary, take the example of your membership in a medical associations or bar association, or student association: here role expectations and standards or role performance would largely be oriented towards pattern variables of affective neutrality, self-orientation (due to competition), universalism, achievement and specificity. But these are extreme examples. In real life the dilemma of choices in terms of pattern variables are much more precarious and full of strain than we find in the examples we have mentioned.
[1] integrative – A combination of elements from three approaches he summarizes viz utilitarian, the idealist and the positivist
By: Parveen Bansal ProfileResourcesReport error
Access to prime resources
New Courses