Explain The Strengths And Limitations Of Structural Functionalism

Expand on in yellow
“Sport and exercise are good for society”. Discuss the merits and limitations of this statement from the following theoretical perspectives: (a) Structural Functionalism, and (b) Marxism (Conflict Theory)?

The purpose of this assignment is to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of the Structural Functionalism theory and the Marxist theory. This assignment will look at the following statement in depth from the two different perspectives mentioned above: “Sport and exercise are good for society”. This written piece of work will explore a wide range or areas including many different merits and limitations faced by each theory. Furthermore it will discuss the different ways it links to sport and exercise.
50 or so words

59) find values in structural functionalism. They say that as a population we are educated and told sport and exercise is beneficial and essential for people to maintain a healthy lifestyle and helps reduce chronic illnesses as a whole. Holistically, there are many associations between structural functionalism and sport. Institutions including national governing bodies, department of culture, media and health are well known as a part of everyday functions within society. The structural functionalist theory has many links to sport (Malcom 2011, pp 36) argues that society must function in a certain fluid way, similarly to the human body, if it wishes to perform without any problems. (Steenburgen, De Knop, and Elling, 2002, p.97) states that young adults are required to adhere to what is expected to be a “social norm” to become a part of society by avoiding anti-social behaviour and conform. They used pro-social and anti-social as a measure, and their findings show that young adults who follow the values and norms have greater social integration and help to function within society correctly. These roles and norms are also integrated into sport, (Steenburgen, De Knop, and Elling, 2002, p.95) believe that sport will influence the way they follow certain aspects of life as they will learn the norms, skills and knowledge of that certain sport. Society needs young adults to help keep traditions rolling over time, (Dixon, 2013,

Pp 36.) Structural functionalism does not value that sports are social constructions that are diverse. They are defined by the people as they interact with each other, functionalists see sport as stable, something that always seeks to serves certain and specific functions within society. (Coakley and Pike, 2014. Pp 36) also argues that an approach such as structural functionalism devalues diversity in such a way that it promotes wealth and power to higher figures within sport and that it may disrupt the functioning of society as a result of the social outcomes it may reproduce. In the 1930’s and the early 1960’s (Coakley and Dunning, 2003. Pp 17) states that structural functionalism almost unopposed in terms of what theory was the most dominant but by the end of the decade, (Zeitlin 1973) discusses that its credibility was failing and people were becoming more aware that it failed to recognise social mobility and change within sport. In terms of other criticism in this theory, it is believed that structural functionalism pays very little attention to the relative stability within society and very much ignores issues around conflict and disagreements. (Bell, 2009, p.