Can Latent Function be Manifest?

While figuring out for manifest and latent functions of a social phenomenon for my final essay, I just got curious about the boundary between two functions. Once people recognize a hidden function of a social event/phenomenon and notice further effects on society, does that latent function still remain as latent? Then, what would be the appropriate boundary to distinguish them when people are recognizing both functions?

This is a really interesting question and I think that the boundary is very abstract and has no determinate line to categorize one side as latent and the other side as manifest. I believe that the latent function will always remain latent because it is not 'advertised' as such. For example, we recognize that a school's latent function is not to just educate students but its manifest function remains intact and known as the manifest function because that is what is being promoted by society and the schools themselves.

Aram, you make an interesting point. I agree with Jessica that "latent functions will always remain latent". The meanings in which we assign to objects/phenomenons are never fixed, but are rather evolving. When the latent function becomes obvious, by default it is no longer latent. As a result, I think the function can transform into a manifest function through space and time.

Thanks for an interesting question, Aram, and for some insightful responses! I agree with both Jessica and Bich that latent functions will always remain latent as they lose their latency once widely recognized by the public. With that being said, latent functions can, in a sense, transform into latent functions; once this transformation is complete, however, the exact same functions once latent are classified as manifest.

To add on to this for another direction, the idea of understanding HOW latent and manifest functions are conceived and re-ified as either manifest or latent is interesting to me. For example, I have not read Chomsky's work on "Manufacturing Consent" with mainstream media, but I know that in it, he makes the argument that mainstream media's function of manufacturing consent was not latent, but absolutely manifest from its conception. It's interesting that the subject of such a prominent work is not entirely focussed on the function itself (although it is somewhat, I imagine), but much moreso on the distinction of how a the nature of a function (either manifest or latent) really has an effect on function itself, and how there is such a need, scholarly, to uncover whether or not institutions like mainstream media are indeed manufacturing consent either manifestly or latently.

I think that latent functions have a possibility to remain latent functions even after the hidden functions of an action/institution is recognized, as it is up to the individual whether or not they choose to accept these hidden functions as such or to ignore it and continue to solely believe in an action's/institution's manifest function. For example if we examine individuals who pray to their god in the hopes that their problems/wishes are answered, we can see this boundary between latent and manifest function being challenged. The manifest function of praying would be that they actually believe in the existence of a god and that in doing so their god will solve their problems or answer their wishes. The latent function of praying would be that individuals use it as a means to console themselves in times of stress and hardship. However when an individual's pray is continuously unanswered, at what point do they reject its manifest function and accept the fact that the action of praying has a latent function that acts as a way for individuals to console themselves. For those that eventually lose faith in the manifest function of praying, the latent functions of it would then become manifest functions. However, for those that refuse to accept the latent functions of praying as such, the lines between manifest and latent functions remain.

Great question Aram, like many of the social phenomenons we have learned about, it is rare to find a salient periphery that makes us understand, distinguish, and determine exactly when to classify the theory. Some are more obvious than others but I do think Merton's claiming and the differences between manifest and latent functions can easily get confused. I think that the two functions are not entirely dichotomous which is why interpretation can be difficult.