(Demise; 05-02; p.2)

For Functionalists, this critique is just a form of correcting mechanism of "autopoiesis", i.e. "self-production guided by goals". Others, interested in legitimations are looking for specific patterns of argumentations.

 

History of ideas and power

Examples for practices criticised are "Enronism", maximising one's personal use by politicians and the shaping of the education system. Applying a functionalist's stance, demanded changes can only be justified by (re-)enabling the attainment of goals which were assigned to the subsystems by a society.
Under a legitimatory perspective justifications for changes demanded become interesting: they ought to be in accordance with ethical norms, a society has accepted for itself.

As contribution to a history of social sciences one may ask why or if some perspectives blossom more than others in the course of time. This also can be described functionally and valued by criteria of efficacy or judged as being in contrast or accordance to norms.
Whereas the former merely enables one to criticise techniques of ruling, the latter can lead to criticising the very justifications of power.

Differentiating between purely functionally valued techniques and justifications that are judged by ethical criteria is something, modern people have learned at least since Niccolò Machiavelli (1469 - 1527). For German citizens of the beginning 21st century, these questions are still current: but why is it right now? (read on here)