Matza and Drift and Moral Neutralization Theory PDF

Preview

Summary

Download Matza and Drift and Moral Neutralization Theory PDF

Description

Matza and Drift and Moral Neutralization Theory: Anti-positivist theoretical tradition. This involves society shared meanings not causal laws. David Matza: The philosophy behind is work is called naturalism. He takes a naturalistic approach to crime. Like any other form of human behaviour deviance is not caused by outside forces, it is not caused by outside pressures. He rejects positivism. People aren’t the product of their environment like Chicago, Merton said. Crime and delinquency are not result of case and effect relationships. He takes an antideterminist approach. Crime and delinquency are generated by the beliefs we carry in our head. Its generated by our own beliefs and values, which we freely embrace up to a point. The role of the researcher is to find out that what the beliefs are of the people who commit crime and are deviant and why they hold those beliefs. To understand deviant behaviour, we have to look at people’s motives and understand their beliefs and why they break the rules. Overall, our beliefs and values break the rules, whether they are good or bad. The role of sociologist of deviance should not be about trying to correct or reform the deviance in society. The role of researcher should not be concerned with correcting behaviour. Because taking this correctional perspective prevents the sociologist from getting in the head of the deviant as you create a barrier between you and them. So, you won’t be able to know what the beliefs really you are would misunderstand them. You have to assume it meaning without making a judgement about it. Naturalism means that the methods of study you’re using has to be faithful to what your studying. Theory of delinquency: In his book ‘Delinquency and drift’ he criticises subculture theory as it gives us a deterministic view of delinquent. According to subculture theory working class adolescents are socialised into deviance and culture that leads them astray. Delinquents are committed rule-breakers. Trouble with this view is that it over-predicts lower class delinquency. I mean subculture theory makes delinquency a bigger problem than it really is. If the subculture was right the youth in lower-class would have widespread and persistent delinquency. This doesn’t align with the facts. Most slum youth don’t regularly involve themselves in delinquency. Most are occasional rule-breakers, who most of the time they conform. Of the youth who get into serious deviance they tend to give it up when they become adults. Young delinquents do not particularly get involved in organised adult crime. A minority does. These delinquent subculture ethery are marginal and exotic. It does not explain most juvenile crime and this is a limitation. Matza had a concept called a drift theory of delinquency. Delinquency should be understood in terms of drift. Most juveniles are occasional rule breaker so most slum youth do not embrace delinquency as a way of life. Most conform. So, delinquency tends to be casual and intermittent. The juveniles drift in and out of delinquency and so are not committed to delinquency. But why do they drift and deviate in the first place? Law breaking result that the leisure time of slum youths is centred on a peer group. Young men tend to hand out in unstructured loose friendship groups. They have a key interest in common, which is pleasure-seeking. The pursuit of hedonism (thrills). The main problem is trying to find things to do during their leisure time and they had a lot.

Another key interest is maintaining the approval of their peers. Juvenile put on public display of their masculinity and want to prove they have the attributes of manliness. This Is called statusmaintenance. Due to these key interest young males drift in and out of delinquency. The restless search for excitement and approval creates delinquent behaviour. They put themselves under pressure, so they can get excitement or approval of their mates. This mainly will involve harmless thing but occasionally it can generate petty law breaking. Someone in the group suggest a dare i.e. law breaking. All members of the group give their support to it and they are not committed to law-breaking and they may be feeling apprehension sue to the idea of law-breaking. They support it as they feel like everyone else in the group is supporting it. They don’t want to be seen as the odd one out. The drift into delinquency results from comedy of misinterpretation of each other’s motives. Each member may commit to law breaking that no one would do if they were alone. So, it generated by pressure on self to gain status in peer group. Drift is connected to subterranean values. Subterranean values are the unofficial values of a consumer society. Subterranean values are those of pleasure-seeking. They are values of hedonism and immediate gratification. Values that promote excitement. Our society promotes subterranean values and we need to have fun and encouraged to have fun and seek pleasure. Tend to be regarded as specific to lower class in subculture theory. According to Matza et al they are not part of a subculture of deviant views but part of culture mainstream. All classes middle lower etc all endorse subterranean values and shared by everyone and are universal but are not official values e.g. respect for property and authority. But alongside these official values are subterranean values. We don’t consume to live but for entertainment and excitement. These subterranean values are especially embraced by youths. As, youth are a leisure class and have plenty of leisure time as they don’t have adult responsibilities. Youths limbs in a limbo between childhood and adulthood. During this transitional phase young people are expected to fill their leisure time with fun thing to do. You are expected to fill your leisure time with fun and pleasure-seeking things. But this can cause deviance and desire for excitement and need for approval of masculinity can lead to street fights, arson and vandalism. But, under different circumstances these subterranean values can cause legitimate acts. Depends on circumstances. E.g. computer games. Youths prone to law breaking lack the money to pursue pleasure seeking legitimately so they have to fulfil desire for excitement in socially disapproved ways. Why do youths drift out of delinquency and why is delinquency a problem of youths? Young people are in transition from highly controlled word (childhood) and have not transitioned into controlled adulthood. They stuck in between. Social control is at its weakest point and not highly controlled. They want to be autonomous. Youth are caught between sub-adult status and rid of dependency and have a desire to rid of childhood. This gives rise to delinquency as they break the law to take control of their lives. They break the law to get over their low status and are make things happen to assert their individuality. This self-assertion can happen legitimately by self-success and rid of dependency e.g. sports. But delinquency is a cheaper and easier way to reach self-empowerment. You need talent for sports, but you don’t need talent to be a rebel and delinquent. Subterranean values exist but most working class conform.

He answers this with neutralisation. Delinquents seek to justify their rule breaking to themselves and others. They want to give a moral reason why they broke the rules. Techniques of neutralisation: Denial of responsibility – wasn’t their fault, blame parents Denial of injury – deviant claims that his crimes hasn’t injured someone e.g. rob people who are wealthy, or claim crime was harmless prank Denial of a victim – say that people who gets injured are not victim and don’t count Condemnation of condemners – those who judges the youth claims that they are not fit to judge Appeal to higher loyalties – they broke the rules for other e.g. robbed to help his family or friends. They are not excusing to avoid punishment, they are made up by deviant before they do the act. The purpose is to allow people to break the rules in the first place. The individual can release themselves from the controls of society. The existence of techniques shows most conform to society. The fact they have to come up with techniques showed they respect the rules fundamentality....