Three objections to Gyekye's functionalist conception of development

I consider three objections to Gyekye's functionalist conception of development. According to the first objection, the goal of development is ultimately economic development. I examine this objection but find Gyekye's integrative functionalist conception vindicated. The second objection pe...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published inAfrican studies quarterly Vol. 17; no. 1; pp. 61 - 77
Main Author Ani, Emmanuel Ifeanyi
Format Journal Article
LanguageEnglish
Published Gainesville Center for African Studies 01.03.2017
African Studies Quarterly
Subjects
Africa
Analysis
Attribution
Developing countries
Economic development
Economic growth
Engineers
Gyekye, Kwame
LDCs
Philosophers
Social development
Society
Sociocultural factors
Works
Africa
New York
United States > US
Online AccessGet full text

Cover

More Information
Summary:I consider three objections to Gyekye's functionalist conception of development. According to the first objection, the goal of development is ultimately economic development. I examine this objection but find Gyekye's integrative functionalist conception vindicated. The second objection pertains continuity: it argues that development must be a continuous process. I agree with this objection because (a) there will always be goals to create and accomplish, (b) certain goals, such as the exhibition of certain behaviors, will remain goals in as much as they can never be totally achieved, and (c), existential challenges are ever changing, necessitating that behavioral adaptations to (dealing with) them remains a continuous process. The third objection results from the second: it argues that if development is a continuous process, then no society qualifies to be called "developed." Since I agree with the second objection, it seems I have to agree with this: in as much as no society has fully captured all of the behavioral attributes necessary for a society to respond adequately to its entire physical and socio-cultural environment, no society should strictly be called "developed." But we can, nevertheless, use that attribution in a loose or attenuated sense for ease of convenience in a relative context. I conclude with a few reflections about the implications of this discussion for debates in post and alternative development.
ISSN:2152-2448
2152-2448