Functionalism Theory
There have been certain why deviance takes place are how does it as an impact on the society? Therefore from the early days of sociology, theories have been developed by different scholars with a view to explain deviance and crime on the society. It is possible to classify the theories into three major sociological Paradigms. These are functionalism theory and symbolic interactionism.
Functionalism: The sociologists who are following the functionalist approach are mainly concerned with the ways in which elements of society contribute as a whole. According to them, deviance is considered as is component of the society
The essential nature of deviance: According to Emile Durkheim, deviance can be as an integral part of any successful society. One way in which deviance is functional is it challenges the that present views of the people. For example, when during the Civil rights movement, the black students were taking part in sit-ins, they challenged the notion of segregation of the society. It was also be noted that and deviance is punished, it results in reaffirming the present social norms as they also contribute to society. When a student detention for skipping classes the other scholars are also reminded that such behaviour is not allowed and they too may get detention.
Strain theory: According to sociologist Robert Merton come it was agreed that deviance seeded as an integral part of any functional society. However, he further easy ideas of durkheim by developing the Strain theory. According to this theory, access to socially acceptable goals plays a role in deciding if a person confirms or deviates (Imai and Krishna, 2004). Since the birth, people are encouraged to achieve financial success. A woman who attends Business School, gets her MBA and moves on to become a CEO of a company with million dollar income is considered as successful. However, it is not possible for every person in the society to be on equal footing.
It is possible that a person could have The socially acceptable goal of achieving financial success but socially acceptable means of achieving such goal. This regard the Strain theory provides that an entrepreneur not in a position to launch his own company could be tempted to embezzle the funds from his employee for startup funds (Bursik, 1988).
In this regard, 5 ways have been described by Merton in which people respond to this gap that is present between having a socially acceptable goal and top socially acceptable means of achieving such goal.
Conformity: The persons who confirm also decide not to deviate. Follow the rules to the extent that they can do with socially acceptable means.
Innovation: The persons who innovate follow goals that they cannot reach with the help of legitimate means in place of using deviant criminal means.
Ritualism: The persons who ritualize lower their goals until these goals become achievable by legitimate means. The focus of members of the society is on instead of achieving a distant dream.
Rebellion: There are only a few people who to become Rebels. They replace the goals of the society and means with their own. Freedom fighters or terrorists want to overthrow the goals of the society by unacceptable means.
Strain Theory
Retreatism: there are many who decide to Retreat and reject the goals and means of the society.
There are some beggars and street people who have withdrawn from the goal of the society to achieve financial success.
Social disorganization theory: This theory was developed badal searches from University of Chicago. In 1920 and 30s, this theory provides that crime is usually going to take place in communities that have social ties and also lack of social control. According to the story the person who has grown up in a poor neighbour where there high rate of drug abuse, teenage delinquency mobile and deprived parenting, is more likely to become involved in criminal activities as compared to person who was brought up in a wealthy neighbourhood that has a good eastern and families were positively involved in the community (Clarke et al., 1985).
In this way the social disorganization theory provides that broad social factors that can be considered as the cause of deviance. A person is not born as a criminal birth income and I become a criminal, generally on the basis of the basis of the factors that present in social environment. The research that has been conducted buy the social disorganization theorists significant impact on public policy. For example, it has been found by these studies that the persons coming from disadvantaged communities and who attended preschool programs where basic skills were taught, were less likely to become involved in criminal activities (Bursik, Jr. 1988.).
Criminal deviance theory: It is suggested by this theory that to present cultural norms of society results in crime. Criminal patterns in Chicago during the early 1900 were studied by some researchers (Cohen et al., 1981). They discovered that crying and violence were at their peak in the middle of the city and the gradually decrease when travelled further away from the urban centre and moved towards the suburbs. It was also noted by the researchers that this pattern was the same as the migration pattern of the citizens of Chicago. New immigrants, most of them were poor and did not have good knowledge of English language, were living in the centre of the city. With the expansion of urban pollution, the wealthy people to the suburbs and the less privileged were left behind. Under the circumstances it was noted by the researchers that socio economic status of a person, correlated with race and ethnicity, resulted in a high rate of crime.
Other experts have also tested and expounded the findings mentioned above. It was found that poverty, ethnic diversity and disruption in family in a particular locality work reasons that positively correlated with social dis-organisation. (Miethe et al., 1991) It was also found by these researchers that social disorganization also related with high rate of crime and delinquency or in other words, deviance.
According to some recent studies, similar findings have been recorded. It was found that high rate of poverty and single parent homes relation with high rate of Juvenile violence.
Conflict theory: Under this theory, the social and economic factors are considered as the causes of crime and deviance. As compared to the functionalists, these factors are not considered as positive functions of society by the conflict theorists (Clarke et al., 1985). Therefore, according to them, these factors are considered as evidence of inequality that is present in the system (Felson and Cohen, 1980). These theorists also challenge social disorganization theory as well as the Control theory. It is argued y these researchers that both the theories mentioned above ignore racial land economic issues and they also oversimplified the current social change. In this way the conflict theorists are trying to find out the answers to the correlation of race and gender with crime and wealth.
The work of Karl Marx had a great impact on the conflict theory. According to Marx, the general people can be divided into two groups. The wealthy were labelled as the bourgeois as they controlled the business and the means of production. On the other hand the workers were labelled as the proletariat as a dependent on the other group for employment and even their survival. In this way, Marx was of the opinion that the bourgeois used their power and influence through government, legislation and other agencies for the purpose of meaning and expanding the position of power. Even if Marx had not discussed deviance in detail, his ideas resulted in reading the basis for the conflict theorists who going to study the interaction of deviance and crime with power and wealth (Sampson and Lauritsen, 1990).
Social Disorganization Theory
Crime and social class: Generally crime is associated with the underprivileged but the crimes that are committed by the wealthy are not adequately punished. This imbalance is the result of class power. For example during the 1980, crack cocaine an epidemic and the poorest urban communities were severely hit by it. On the other hand the costly part of the drug was cocaine and was associated with upscale users and was the choice of the wealthy (Cohen et al., 1981).
The result was that the legal implications that will be incurred by authorities with crack or cocaine were completely different. According to the federal law 1986 it was why did that if a person was arrested with 50 grams of crack what’s going to be punished with cement for 10 years. On the other hand, an equivalent sentence for imprisonment for the possession of cocaine required 5000 grams. In this way, the disparity was 1 to 100. As a result of the inequality that was present in the severity of the sentence of imprisonment for the possession of crack versus cocaine can be compared with the equal social class of its respective users. It would be noted by a conflict theorist that persons in society who have the power also have the power, also have the power to make laws related with crime. While doing so, these persons make the law that are beneficial for them, while powerless class, who does not have the resources to make these decisions suffer the consequences. This disparity present in the punishment related with the possession of crack and cocaine remained present till 2010 when president Obama give assent to Fair Sentencing Act, as a result of which the disparity was reduced to 1 to 18.
Symbolic interactionism: The theoretical approach adopted under symbolic interactionism is the one do used for the purpose of explaining how societies or social groups considered any particular as being conventional or deviant. It this way, symbolic interactionism covers the labelling theory, social disorganization theory, differential association and the Control theory.
Labelling theory: Even if all of us violate norms at some time, there are persons who consider themselves as being deviant. Even those who do, I generally labelled as deviant it and gradually they come to believe themselves to be so. In this way, the labelling theory, the ascribing of deviant behaviour is examined to another person by the members of society. As a result, what may be treated as deviant behaviour is decided not so much by the behaviour itself or the people who are involved in it but by the reaction of the other people to such behaviour. The result is that what may be considered as deviant changes from time to time and it can also vary significantly different cultures.
The concepts of labelling theory been expanded by different experts and their define two types of deviance that on the formation of Identity. Primary deviance can be described as the violation of norms that results in the long term impact on the self image of the person are on the individual’s interaction with other people. Speeding is a deviant act but receiving a ticket for speeding does not make others consider the person as a bad person and similarly it does not alter your own concept. Therefore, the persons who are involved in primary can still maintain of belonging to the society and their likely to continue to follow the norms in future.
In some extreme cases, primary deviance may take the form of secondary deviance. The secondary deviance takes place when the self concept and the person starts to change when the actions of the person are labelled as deviant members of the society (Felson and Cohen, 1980). In such a case, the person May start to take on and fulfill the role of a deviant by becoming a Rebel against the society which has labelled the person as a deviant.
Criminal Deviance Theory
In this regard, the example of a high school student can be given who generally bunks classes and is also involved in fights. Such student is frequently reprimanded by teachers. Soon the student requires repetition of being a troublemaker. The result is that the student also starts to act as a trouble maker and starts breaking more rules. In such a case, it can be said that the student had acquired the label being a troublemaker and had embraced the identity of being a deviant. Secondary deviation can be so strong that it provides the status of a master on the person. A Master status is the label which describes the main characteristics of the person. For example, some persons see themselves as artists, doctors or grandfathers. There are many others who consider themselves primarily as beggars, convicts or addicts.
In the beginning of the 20th century, ishwar made by different Scholars to understand how behaviour develops among the individuals. As criminology was young subject at that time, these experts had to rely on other aspects of sociology which included group learning and social interactions. However the conclusions try these experts resulted in the establishment of differential Association theory. It was suggested by the theory that deviant behaviour is learned individuals from the persons who are close to them and who offer the models of deviance as well as the chances for deviance. Therefore, but these experts tried to establish that deviance is let’s of a personal choice and it is more caused essay result of differential socialization processes. Therefore, for example, a young person whose friends are involved in sexual activity is likely to consider such activity as being acceptable. In this way, this theory can explain why is multigenerational. One particular study conducted in 1960 arrived at the conclusion that the predictor of antisocial or criminal behaviour among the children was if the parents of the children have been convicted of any crime. Children who were 10 years of age at the time, when their parents were convicted of a crime, were more likely to be involved in criminal behaviour and spousal abuse as compared to the other children.
In the end, it can be stated that the three main sociological paradigms that have been mentioned above, provide different explanations regarding the motivation behind crime and deviance. According to the functionalists, deviance to be considered as a social necessity as it infosys norms and it reminds the people of sequences of violating these norms. By violating the norms, the society opens its eyes to to the injustice present in the system. On the other hand, it is argued by the conflict theorists that crime is the result of the system of inequality as a result of which the persons with power remain at the top while the is who do not have power remain at the bottom. The focus of attention of social interactionists is on socially constructed nature of related with deviance. Therefore in the end it can be stated that deviance and crime are learned from the environment and they are enforced or discouraged by the persons around us.
References
Bursik, R. J., Jr. 1988. “Social Disorganization and Theories of Crime and Delinquency: Problems and Prospects.” Criminology 26:529-51
Cantor, D., & Land, K. C. 1985, Unemployment and crime rates in the post-World War I1 United States: A theoretical and empirical analysis. American Sociological Review, 50, 317–323
Clarke, R., Ekblom, Hough,M and Mayhew, P. 1985. “Elderly Victims of Crime and Exposure to Risk.” HowardJournal of CriminalJustice 24:1-9.
Cohen, L, James R. Kluegel, and Kenneth C. L. 1981. “Social Inequality and Predatory Criminal Victimization: An Exposition and Test of a Formal Theory.” American Sociology Review 46:505-24.
Cohen, Lawrence E., and Marcus Felson. 1979. “Social Change and Crime Rate Trends: A Routine Activity Approach.” American Sociological Review 44:588-608.
Dollery, B., & Wallis, J. 1996, An economic perspective on crime and punishment in Australia. Agenda, 3(2), 235–240.
Felson, M and Cohen. L., 1980. “Human Ecology and Crime: A Routine Activity Approach.” Human Ecology 8:389-406.
Fleisher, M. 1995, Beggars and thieves. Milwaukee, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.
Freeman, R. B. 1995, The labor market. In J. Q. Wilson & J. Petersilia (Eds.), Crime (pp. 171–191). Oakland, CA: Institute for Contemporary Studies.
Imai, S., & Krishna, K. 2004, Employment, deterrence and crime in a dynamic model. International Economic Review, 45(3), 845–872
Miethe, T. D., Hughes, M., and McDowall. D., 1991. “Social Change and Crime Rates: An Evaluation of Alternative Theoretical Approaches.” Social Forces 70:165-85.
Sampson, R. J., and Lauritsen. J L., 1990. “Deviant Lifestyles, Proximity to Crime, and the Offender-Victim Link in Personal Violence.”Journal of Research in Crime and Delinquency 27
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
