Revision summary
Srinivas replaced a book view of India with a field view from villages such as Rampura. Structure is observed groups; function is how custom holds them together. Dominant caste and Sanskritization explain local power and mobility inside caste. Westernization and politics add new resources without erasing the village system. Conflict theorists say the method underplays class.
Model answer
Copper italics in this answer — like this — are the key facts. Each one is unpacked in the Facts & figures rail.
Introduction
M. N. Srinivas studied Indian society as a living structure of caste, kinship, and village, not as a book of sacred rules. His structural functionalism asks how parts fit, and how they change without the whole collapsing.
Body
Field view, not book view
- Srinivas opposed an Indological India made only of texts. Rampura showed caste, faction, and ritual as observed relations.
- Structure is the network of groups and statuses. Function is the contribution of a custom to order, as in village festivals that knit patrons and clients.
- He kept Radcliffe-Brown’s concern with solidarity, but he put mobility inside the structure through Sanskritization.
Indian tools of the method
- Dominant caste in Rampura joined land, numbers, and local office; ritual rank alone did not decide who ran the village.
- Sanskritization is a functional path: a jati copies the style of a higher local model and still stays inside caste, rather than leaving it.
- Westernization and the vote add new resources. The village remains a system, but the ranking of parts can shift.
Limit
- A. R. Desai and later conflict sociologists said harmony language underplays class and landlord power.
- Andre Beteille’s Sripuram work kept structure but stressed inequality as disharmony, not as a smooth function.
Flow diagram
flowchart TD FV[Field view Rampura] --> ST[Caste kinship village] ST --> DC[Dominant caste] ST --> SK[Sanskritization] SK --> CH[Change inside structure]
Conclusion
- Srinivas’s structural functionalism is a field method: map groups, show what a custom does, and allow ranked change. It is strongest on caste and village, and weakest if class struggle is treated as noise.
Quick related
Students also ask
-
Explain Leela Dube's concept of "Seed and Earth"
Next question on this syllabus topic (2022 · Q1(e)). View answer →
-
Is Srinivas only a functionalist of harmony?
No. Sanskritization and dominant caste are about competition. He still frames change as adjustment of a structure, not as revolution.
-
Does the method deny texts?
It denies that texts are enough. Villagers use texts, but rank is decided in interaction.
Same topic · past papers
UPSC has asked this before
These previous-year questions sit on the same topic. Open one to practise the earlier ask.
-
2026 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
In what respect is M. N. Srinivas' study of Indian village society based on structural and functional perspective? Analyse. -
2017 · Q1(a) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
Write a critique of the structural and functional perspective used by M.N. Srinivas in the understanding of Indian society -
2017 · Q2(c) · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks
What are the changes in the cultural and structural aspects of the caste system since independence? -
2015 · Q2(b) · Sociology GS 2 · 15 marks
Give some of the important studies relating to the structural changes in the Indian family system.
More from this topic
Q5(e) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Bring out the debates of 'insiders' and 'outsiders' approaches in understanding Indian society.
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
• The insider (emic) approach studies Indian society using native categories, sacred texts, and cultural immersion, championed by G.S. Ghurye and D.P. Mukerji. • Critics argue the insider view suffers from upper-caste bias and ignores ground realities in favor of normative texts. • The outsider (etic) approach applies universal models and comparative frameworks, famously used by Western scholars like Louis Dumont. • Critics dismiss the outsider view as orientalist reductionism that imposes Western concepts and misinterprets local idioms. • Modern Indian sociology bridges this binary through a reflexive methodology combining cultural familiarity with analytical rigor. • Ultimately, combining native insights with objective scrutiny is essential to capture India's complex social dynamics.
Q5(a) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Discuss the challenges faced by the aged people in receiving 'elder care'.
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
• India's aging population faces severe elder care challenges due to the breakdown of traditional joint families and youth out-migration. • Over 80% of seniors lack formal pensions because they worked in the informal sector, worsening financial vulnerability. • High out-of-pocket medical costs for chronic illnesses quickly drain meager personal savings. • Public hospitals suffer from an acute shortage of geriatric specialists, dedicated wards, and rehabilitation facilities. • Implementation of the Maintenance and Welfare of Parents and Senior Citizens Act, 2007 remains weak, leaving legal tribunals overburdened. • Solutions require shifting from a welfare approach to a rights-based framework, combining community care networks with strict legal enforcement under Article 41.
Q4(c) · UPSC Mains 2026 · Sociology GS 2 · 10 marks · Solution
Compare G. S. Ghurye's and A. R. Desai's approaches used in understanding Indian society
Perspectives on the study of Indian society
• **Ghurye’s Indological Approach:** Relied on sacred texts and classical literature to study Indian society through civilizational continuity. • **Core Themes in Ghurye:** Focused on caste, kin, and how Hinduism historically integrated diverse tribal and regional groups. • **Desai’s Materialist Approach:** Rejected textual idealism in favor of Marxist political economy to study social structures. • **Economic Formations:** Analyzed Indian society through successive modes of production—ancient, feudal, and colonial capitalist. • **Caste vs. Class:** Viewed caste and religion as superstructural elements that mask underlying economic exploitation. • **Critique of State and Nationalism:** Argued that the nationalist movement was bourgeois, leaving agrarian inequalities intact post-independence. • **Key Contrast:** Ghurye highlights cultural tradition and integration, while Desai emphasizes economic power and class conflict.