In this article I will discuss three different schools of thought that, although they appear to explain the inner workings of society, fail to completely satisfy them alone. For each theory, I will discuss the basics and cover the main principles of each. Next, I will discuss the ambiguities, inadequacies and lack of relevance to reality based on our current understanding of modern society. Structural Functionalism In the functionalist school of thought, society is viewed as a complex structure of interdependent parts, analogous to a living being, with many different organs contributing to the daily functioning and health of the entire organism. From evolving societies which are still going through processes of differentiation of social classes, to complex societies having reached almost perfect homogeneity, these social systems play a comparative role in the super-organism that is society, as do the lungs and kidneys in a simple organism. like a rat. For example, in the human body, the defense against hostile invaders and interceptors of “criminal” cells is the immune system. In society, the equivalent would be the police and the army. They fulfill the same function, namely defense against the hostile external world and surveillance of errant variables within the social organism. So, what are these structures? Well, according to a good majority of functionalist theorists (primarily Talcott Parsons), these structures are social institutions such as schools, postal delivery systems, the economy, and governments. Each of these individual institutions is vital to the functions of society, regardless of the distance between the processes of one and the other. If one of them fails, the others will feel repercussions leading to a stacking effect that would be inevitable...... middle of paper ...... more subtle, like how to behave in a social situation based solely on the symbols given by others. These interpretations are aptly called the “situation definition” theory of symbolic interaction. The definition of the situation further draws on the human perspective of the self, compared to the outside world, similar to Charles Horton Cooley's “Looking Glass Self.” Works Cited Elster, J., (1990), “Merton's Functionalism and the Unintended Consequences of Action”, in Clark, J., Modgil, C. & Modgil, S., (eds.) Robert Merton: Consensus and Controversy, Falmer Press , London, pp. 129-35Parsons, Talcott (1951) The Social System, Routledge, LondonParsons, T., & Shils, A., (eds.) (1976) Toward a General Theory of Action, Harvard University Press, CambridgeParsons, T., (1961) Theories of Society: Foundations of Modern Sociological Theory, Free Press, New York