Functionalism versus the structuralist tradition.
The Behavioral and brain sciences July 10, 2026 DOI: 10.1017/s0140525x2510441x (opens in new tab) via PubMed
Summary
AI-generated from the abstractThe 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
| Characteristics | Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed |
|---|---|
| Key finding | Argues that Singh's subjective functionalism inadequately explains the holistic nature of human culture, which structuralist approaches better capture through relational attractors. |
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.