Functionalism versus the structuralist tradition.
The Behavioral and brain sciences July 10, 2026 Peer reviewed DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x2510441x via PubMed
Summary
The author argues that Singh's subjective functionalism, while a valuable synthesis, fails to account for the holistic nature of human culture. Unlike structuralist approaches in anthropology, which treat cultural elements as interconnected within systems, Singh's view isolates them. Using shamanism as an example, the author contends that cultural features are defined by their relationships to other features, not as standalone packages.
Study at a glance
| Design | theoretical or philosophical paper |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Singh's subjective functionalism cannot explain the holistic, relational nature of human culture, as illustrated by shamanism. |
Abstract
I contrast Singh's subjective functionalism with structuralist-related approaches in anthropology, where "attractors" are not isolated packages of beliefs and practices but robust relationships between such packages within cultural systems. While impressive in its synthesis, Singh's account falls short of explaining a defining feature of human culture: its holistic nature. I use shamanism as an illustrative example.