The functionalist view of identity is the argument that a person’s sense of self is formed through socialisation into the roles and shared values of society, so that identity helps to hold society together. In this view identity is less a private creation than the way society reproduces itself in each new individual. It follows from the wider approach set out in functionalism, which treats society as a system whose parts work together to maintain stability.
What is the functionalist view of identity?
For functionalists, identity is the product of two linked processes. The first is socialisation, in which a child learns the norms and values of the society it is born into. The second is the taking on of social roles, such as child, pupil, worker or parent, each of which carries expectations about how to behave. Identity is the result of internalising these expectations until they feel like one’s own. A person who thinks of themselves as a responsible parent or a dedicated nurse is, on this account, expressing values that society has already supplied.
This is a strongly structural position. It does not deny that individuals differ, but it treats the shape of identity as set by the social system and not by personal choice. That sets it apart from interactionist accounts, which look at how identity is negotiated in everyday encounters.
How did Durkheim explain identity and social integration?
Emile Durkheim did not write about identity as such, but his work provides the foundation. He argued that individuals are bound to society by the collective conscience, the shared beliefs and sentiments that make up a moral order. People who are well integrated into groups such as the family, religion or occupation gain a sense of belonging and purpose. In Suicide, he showed that when integration or regulation weakens, individuals suffer, and he developed the idea of anomie to describe a state in which norms no longer guide behaviour. Identity, in this reading, depends on being connected to a stable moral community.
What did Talcott Parsons say about identity and roles?
Talcott Parsons gave the functionalist view its most developed form. He argued that society works because individuals internalise its shared values, and that this happens through the family in primary socialisation and through school and other institutions afterwards. His account of value consensus explains why most people want to do what society needs them to do. Personality, for Parsons, is a system shaped by this process, so that the self and the social order fit together. The wider account of his thought can be found in the post on Talcott Parsons.
Robert Merton added the idea of the role-set, the range of relationships attached to a single status. A teacher, for example, relates to pupils, colleagues, parents and managers, and each expects something different. This helps to explain how identity can contain tension, even within a functionalist framework.
Examples of the functionalist view of identity
The family is the clearest example. A child learns gender, language and moral values at home, and these shape a first sense of self. School continues the process by teaching punctuality, competition and respect for rules, preparing the child for adult roles. The workplace then supplies an occupational identity, which for many people becomes a central part of who they are. Shared national or religious rituals, such as public holidays and ceremonies, renew a sense of belonging to a wider community.
What are the criticisms of the functionalist view of identity?
Dennis Wrong’s criticism of an oversocialised conception of man is the best known. He argued that functionalism pictures people as passive recipients of social expectations and leaves little room for agency, resistance or conflict. Interactionists add that identity is built and revised in interaction, not simply handed down. Marxists argue that the values being internalised often serve a ruling class and not society as a whole. Feminists point out that the roles Parsons treated as functional, especially the gendered division of labour, confined women. Postmodernists say that in a fragmented, globalised world, identities are no longer fixed by a stable set of shared roles, and the social constructionist view treats them as made and remade.
Why does the functionalist view of identity still matter?
It remains useful as a starting point because it explains how much of identity is shaped before individuals have any say. Roles and expectations do constrain people, and a functionalist reading helps to show why change in family life or work can feel unsettling. The weaknesses of the theory are the questions that later perspectives set out to answer.
