(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
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)