Final answer:
The collapse of functionalism and bankruptcy of Marxism coincide with the rupture of modernity as both signify the questioning of prior dominant paradigms and suggest a transition to postmodern perspectives that account for global, economic, and technological influences.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question inquires whether the collapse of functionalism and the bankruptcy of Marxism coincide with the rupture of modernity, and how this transition reflects on societal changes. While functionalism posited society as an organism with interrelated parts, it faced criticism for not considering historical context and global influences such as colonialism. Marxism, on the other hand, underscored capitalism's role in societal changes but was challenged by new social movements and changing economic paradigms. David Harvey and Frederic Jameson suggest that the shift from modernity to postmodernity was marked by intensification rather than revolutionary change in work, consumption, and technology, despite earlier predictions by Marx and other theorists.
Regarding modernity's disruption, the post-World War I period led to challenges that modernist movements, Freudian psychology, and economic calamities like the Great Depression reflect. This era raised doubts about progress and saw the rise of dangerous ideologies. The functionalist perspective assumes economic health as vital to the nation, yet the Great Recession revealed dysfunctions due to misadaptation and unregulated practices.
The collapse of functionalist views and the perceived bankruptcy of Marxism can indeed be connected to the rupture of modernity in the sense that they signal a questioning of previously dominant paradigms, paving the way for postmodern perspectives and an understanding of societal change that acknowledges the influence of global economic shifts and technological advancements.