“Write short note: Social system and the Pattern Variables.” (2003)
In Talcott Parsons‘ scheme the social system is the structure and the pattern variables are the choices that give it shape. A social system is made of roles; every role requires the actor to settle five dilemmas; the settled answers, institutionalised as expectations, are what make roles, and therefore the system, predictable.
The social system as a system of roles
In The Social System (1951), interaction between actors becomes stable when it is organised into status-roles carrying reciprocal expectations. Each actor orients to a situation in two ways:
- motivational orientation (cognitive, cathectic and evaluative), which relates the situation to the actor’s needs;
- value orientation, which applies cultural standards to decide what ought to be done.
Before acting, the actor must define the situation. Parsons and Edward Shils (Toward a General Theory of Action, 1951) argued that this definition always involves choosing between five pairs of alternatives. The cultural system prescribes the choice and the social system institutionalises it in role expectations.
Pattern variables as choice points
| Dilemma | Question the actor faces | Doctor in a district hospital | Son caring for an ill father |
|---|---|---|---|
| Affectivity / affective neutrality | Seek emotional gratification or restrain it? | Neutrality | Affectivity |
| Self / collectivity orientation | Own interest or the group’s? | Collectivity (professional ethic) | Collectivity (family) |
| Universalism / particularism | General standard or special relationship? | Universalism: treat all patients alike | Particularism |
| Achievement / ascription | Judge by performance or by quality? | Achievement | Ascription |
| Specificity / diffuseness | Limited or all-round obligation? | Specificity: the illness only | Diffuseness |
The same person can hold both roles. The pattern variables explain why his conduct legitimately differs between them: the systems (the hospital and the family) have institutionalised different answers.
Why the link matters
- Bridge between action and system: pattern variables convert individual choices into structural properties, so the system can be described as a combination of solutions to the dilemmas.
- Classifying whole societies: Parsons combined universalism–particularism with achievement–ascription to derive four types, placing the United States in the universalistic-achievement cell and classical China in the particularistic-achievement cell.
- Explaining strain: when a doctor from the patient’s own caste or village is pressed for favours, universalistic and particularistic expectations collide; role conflict of this kind signals imperfect integration.
Limits
- Actors often mix both ends. Milton Singer found Indian industrialists universalistic at work and ritually particularistic at home.
- The pairs are presented as dichotomies, yet real choices are matters of degree.
- The scheme is top-down: cultural prescription settles the choice, leaving little room for negotiation, power or the “oversocialized” actor that Dennis Wrong (1961) criticised.
Conclusion
The social system and the pattern variables are two sides of one theory: the variables are the choice points at which values enter action and harden into roles. Together they give a precise way to compare institutions, even though actual role behaviour is more blended and contested than the model assumes.