In the history of anthropology and sociology there have been many different social theories. Often these theories are influential for a period of time and then lose popularity once a new, more seductive theory is established. Marxism and functionalism are two examples of social theories that had a great impact on the anthropological and sociological fields, but have since disappeared from the limelight. Marxism was founded by Karl Marx in the mid-1800s and was later adopted by other theorists, such as Marvin Harris. Marxism was built on the idea that there has been an ongoing class struggle throughout human history and it is this conflict between classes that will lead to social change and ultimately the rise of communism. Functionalism was introduced during the mid-1900s and was adopted by Émile Durkheim, E.E. Evans-Pritchard, Bronislaw Malinowski, Alfred Radcliffe-Brown, and many other ethnographers. The basic notion of functionalism is that society is made up of many different but interrelated parts, each of which has a specific function and works together to maintain a society. The ethnographer often saw it as his task to discover the social order and structure present within society (Baert 1998). Although Marxism and functionalism developed in close temporal proximity and similarities can be established between the two theories, in their essence they are fundamentally in opposition to each other. The main difference between the two theories is that from a Marxist perspective society is seen as constantly changing, whereas from a functionalist way of thinking society is seen as relatively stable. Marx viewed society as dynamic, or “ever-changing,” due to the recurring replacement of the ruling class… middle of paper… the strengths and weaknesses of the theories complement each other. Marxism is useful for explaining change, yet it lacks the ability to account for stability. On the other hand, functionalism is good at explaining stability, but is incapable of justifying change. Although the two theories are distinct from each other, they balance each other out. This suggests that when research is conducted in the fields of anthropology and sociology, it would be beneficial for the researcher to incorporate both frameworks into his or her research in order to obtain the richest and most relevant information. In conclusion, rather than forgetting one theoretical framework, as the next more attractive framework is developed, it may be advantageous for the anthropologist or sociologist to incorporate the strong aspects of the previous theory into their new approach..