Comment on Blain's "A Critique of Parsons' Four Function Paradigm"

A comment on Robert R. Blain (see SA 0207/E6906). It is shown that Blain is incorrect in maintaining that many "functional redundancies" exist in the Parsonian scheme. The point which Blain has missed is that the entire 4 function paradigm has a dual application. It has been applied relatively systematically to each of the 4 system levels, & then re-applied to the general action system as a whole (which is composed of all 4 system levels). Blain's critique of T. Parsons may, however, be useful, inasmuch as it has produced the notion of the interaction chain length, which can be applied to the study of soc processes. Robert R. Blain (Southern Illinois U, Edwardsville), REPLY TO BEEGHLEY--indicates difficulties in the application of the 4 function paradigm, & it is pointed out that he had not seen it necessary to deal with its dual application. The application which Beeghley describes is untenable by logical implication. "A theory built upon contradictory propositions remains just as invalid whether the propositions are applied in 1, 2, or any number of combinations." But quite independent additional arguments are made which also support Blain's original charges against Parsons' paradigm: eg, the external functions of adaptation & goal-attainment have no external interchanges, ie, they are not connected with each other. Parsons' scheme is built on the geometry of 4 boxes & 6 sets of arrows which neither enter into nor exit from the boxes. None of the interchanges cross system boundaries. "The paradigm has become a prime example of a methodology out of control & obstructing the development of a theory. It is time to abandon a geometry that has far outlived its usefulness." 2 Figures. M. Maxfield.