Final answer:
Structural-functional theory is criticized for its inability to explain social change and its circular logic regarding the persistence of social practices. It also struggles with the ongoing existence of dysfunctions that do not serve a clear societal function.
Step-by-step explanation:
One criticism of the structural-functional theory is its inadequacy in explaining social change. This approach tends to assume that social practices persist because they serve a function, but this is considered a circular argument as the function is often inferred from their mere repetition.
Additionally, this theory struggles to address why dysfunctions continue to exist if they do not serve a societal function, which opposes the theory's fundamental premise. Such weaknesses suggest that functionalism may not be viable for macro-level analysis, though it may still have utility in mid-level analyses.
Functionalism has also been critiqued for not taking into account the specific historical experiences of societies, especially in the context of colonialism and its effects on social stratification and global political inequalities. As a result, many sociologists have moved beyond functionalism to examine rapid social changes and emergent social practices more effectively.