Editing Structural functionalism (section)

==Unilineal descent==
In their attempt to explain the social stability of African "primitive" [[Stateless society|stateless societies]] where they undertook their fieldwork, [[Evans-Pritchard]] (1940) and [[Meyer Fortes]] (1945) argued that the [[Tallensi]] and the [[Nuer people|Nuer]] were primarily organized around [[unilineal descent]] groups. Such groups are characterized by common purposes, such as administering property or defending against attacks; they form a permanent social structure that persists well beyond the lifespan of their members. In the case of the Tallensi and the Nuer, these corporate groups were based on kinship which in turn fitted into the larger structures of unilineal descent; consequently Evans-Pritchard's and Fortes' model is called "descent theory". Moreover, in this African context territorial divisions were aligned with lineages; descent theory therefore synthesized both blood and soil as the same.<ref name=":1">{{Cite book|title=The invention of primitive society : transformations of an illusion|last=Kuper|first=Adam|date=1988|publisher=Routledge|isbn=978-0415009027|location=London|oclc=17841268}}</ref> [[Affinal kin|Affinal ties]] with the parent through whom descent is not reckoned, however, are considered to be merely complementary or secondary (Fortes created the concept of "complementary filiation"), with the reckoning of kinship through descent being considered the primary organizing force of social systems. Because of its strong emphasis on unilineal descent, this new kinship theory came to be called "descent theory".

With no delay, descent theory had found its critics. Many African tribal societies seemed to fit this neat model rather well, although [[Africanists]], such as [[Paul Richards (anthropology)|Paul Richards]], also argued that Fortes and Evans-Pritchard had deliberately downplayed internal contradictions and overemphasized the stability of the local lineage systems and their significance for the organization of society.<ref name=":1" /> However, in many Asian settings the problems were even more obvious. In [[Papua New Guinea]], the local [[patrilineal descent]] groups were fragmented and contained large amounts of non-agnates. Status distinctions did not depend on descent, and genealogies were too short to account for social solidarity through identification with a common ancestor. In particular, the phenomenon of [[Cognatic kinship|cognatic]] (or bilateral) kinship posed a serious problem to the proposition that descent groups are the primary element behind the social structures of "primitive" societies.

Leach's (1966) critique came in the form of the classical [[Bronisław Malinowski|Malinowskian]] argument, pointing out that "in Evans-Pritchard's studies of the Nuer and also in Fortes's studies of the Tallensi unilineal descent turns out to be largely an ideal concept to which the empirical facts are only adapted by means of fictions".<ref>{{Cite book|title=Pul Eliya : a village in Ceylon|last=Leach|first=E. R. (Edmund Ronald)|date=2011|publisher=Cambridge University Press|isbn=9780521200219|location=Cambridge|oclc=751128426}}</ref> People's self-interest, manoeuvring, manipulation and competition had been ignored. Moreover, descent theory neglected the significance of marriage and affinal ties, which were emphasized by Lévi-Strauss's [[structural anthropology]], at the expense of overemphasizing the role of descent. To quote Leach: "The evident importance attached to [[matrilateral]] and affinal kinship connections is not so much explained as explained away."<ref name=":1" />