Functionalism AND Crime AND Deviance PDF

Preview

Summary

LECTURE NOTES...

Description

FUNCTIONALISM AND CRIME AND DEVIANCE A functionalist analysis of deviance begins with society as a whole. It looks for the source of deviance in the nature of society rather than the individual. Organic Analogy - Like pain in the body of society, it helps to preserve the organism but it is nevertheless unpleasant. Punishment is the antidote to crime. The social reaction to the offensiveness of crime helps to reinforce collective sentiment and keeps crime low and society balanced. Durkheim (1938) argues Crime is inevitable, universal, relative and functional. A certain amount of crime and deviance could be seen as functional and positive for society:  Crime creates social integration as it bonds society together against criminals  Strengthens social control & the collective conscience  Gives society an opportunity to condemn the deviant behaviour  Reasserts boundaries around acceptable behaviour.  Necessary to generate social change – challenge old outdated ideas Durkheim believed that in stable societies crime was low because of a shared value consensus however when crime & deviance occurred it was the result of anomie – where a breakdown of social expectations has occurred e.g. poor socialisation or during time of revolution/riots. However there is evidence that some crime lead to social solidarity (e.g. London riots led to community ‘clean up’ projects).

A03 Criticisms for Durkheim:     

It is not clear at what point the “right” amount of crime (necessary and beneficial) becomes “too much” (creating disorder and instability). The term anomie is very vague and can’t be measured Does not adequately explain why some people commit crimes and others do not, or why they commit particular offences. Assumes that norms and laws reflect the wishes of the population and does not consider the possibility that a powerful group is imposing its values on the rest of society If crime is inevitable, what is the function of punishment?

Merton (1968) argues deviance results from the culture and structure of society. Merton argues that in the USA great importance was attached to financial success and relatively little importance was given to the accepted ways of achieving success. Society was unstable and unbalanced – so there was a tendency for people to ‘reject the rules of the game’ and strive for success by any available means e.g. crime There are 5 possible ways that members of American society can respond to the financial goals: 1. Conformity (non-criminal, non-deviant conformist citizen) 2. Innovation (can’t achieve goals but stick to means) 3. Ritualism (give up on achieving goals, but stick to means) 4. Retreatism (drop-outs who give up altogether) 5. Rebellion (Reject existing goals but substitute new ones to create a new society) Merton maintained that American/British society socialises individuals to:

 

Meet certain shared goals - the ‘American Dream’ (more emphasis placed on this) To follow approved means or ways to achieve the goals e.g. hard work and effort. (meritocracy)

Argued that capitalist societies suffer from anomie – as a result of the strain/conflict between the success goals set by society and the legitimate (law abiding) means of achieving them Strain - a product of an unequal social class structure that blocked many people’s attempts to reach the goals set by society through the legitimate (legal) opportunity structure.

AO3 Evaluation for Merton: 



Strengths: Merton offers a solution; to produce equal opportunities in society Merton begins to offer a fuller functionalist account of both the nature and extent of deviance by building on the work of Durkheim. Weaknesses: Taylor (1971) argues that Merton fails to recognise wider power relations. He does not explain where the goals (American Dream) have come from or whose purpose they serve. Assumes there is a value consensus and people deviate because of structural strain in society Not all crime is for economic gain Anomie (though defined differently) is a difficult term to operationalise (define / understand)

Similarities:   

Both use the term anomie. Both start from the premise that there is a value consensus in society. Both believe social control will reduce crime.

Differences:     



Durkheim – focuses on the purpose of crime Merton – focuses on the causes of crime Durkheim – anomie = normlessness/moral confusion, usually the result of poor socialisation, that weakens a person’s commitment to shared rules and encourages deviance. Merton – anomie = a state of frustration and normlessness created by the strain people feel between financial success goals in their society and legal means of achieving them Durkheim – doesn’t recognise inequality Merton – recognises inequality and blocked opportunities...