Final answer:
The structural-functionalist perspective's main weakness is its failure to consider power dynamics, creating an overemphasis on social order option (b) and underestimating the significance of conflict and inequality in society.
Step-by-step explanation:
One weakness of the structural-functionalist perspective is that it does not consider power dynamics. This oversight is critical as it relates to the explanation of social change and the role of conflict within society. Functionalism tends to view society as a system of interrelated parts working together harmoniously, which can result in an overemphasis on social order and stability.
On the contrary, conflict theory, grounded in Marxism, argues that societal structures are defined by the ongoing conflict between different social groups competing for resources and power. Conflict theorists are concerned with how wealth and power differences contribute to social patterns of behaviors, deviance, and the usefulness of prescribed norms.
Structural-functionalism also does not adequately manage to explain social changes that occur abruptly rather than as a smooth, steady progression. Deviance occurs within societies, and while functionalists recognize its role in enforcing social norms, they may overlook the complex relationship between deviance, power, and inequality.
Additionally, the circular reasoning inherent in functionalism—where behaviors are deemed functional simply because they are repeated—presents logical challenges to the credibility of the theoretical framework.
Furthermore, functionalism's application is arguably limited in its ability to contribute to macro-level analyses of societies, focusing instead on maintaining relevance to mid-level analyses where detailed aspects of societal function can be observed without necessarily addressing larger power dynamics or systemic inequalities.