Revision:Functionalism and Anomie

TSR Wiki > Study Help > Subjects and Revision > Revision Notes > Sociology > Functionalism and Anomie

DURKHEIM

Functionalist explanation mainly based on work of Durkheim, who wrote at end of 1800s.

2 Crucial elements to understanding crime:

• A limited amount of crime is necessary and beneficial to society so much so that society couldn't exist without some form of deviance
• Too much crime, however, is bad for society and can help bring about its collapse

Thus, the amount of crime that exists in society, is the distinguishing factor of whether crime is good or bad for society.

This contrasts with typical view that crime is harmful to society

The Necessity of Crime

• Criminal Law - to ensure that members of society know the boundaries, marks extremities of acceptable behaviour
• Boundaries must be made clear to everyone; publicity is required
• Some crime necessary to set boundaries
• Too much crime is bad for society anomie is a dangerous state
• Anomie caused by rapid social change
• E.g. urbanisation causes worries as community life disappears
• Norms and values disappear
• Revert to original state of self-interest
• Durkheim provides social reason for crime and deviance
• Erases previous beliefs that crime is caused within the individual

The Contribution of Durkheim

• Didn't look for what was 'wrong' with the criminals and deviants
• Argued that crime was not result of sick individual, nor was it 'un-natural' rather that deviance was integral part of society which performed a crucial function

Problems with Durkheim's View

• Didn't offer any real explanation as to why certain people more likely to commit crimes

than others; more interested in relationship between deviance and order in society.

• Ignores concept of power. Generally accepted that in all societies, some groups have greater ability than bulk of population to influence law-making process

ERIKSON - Positive Aspect of Crime

• Bridges between Functionalism and Marxism
• Adapted anomie, thought that Durkheim ignored concept of power

In mid 60s, Erikson developed Durkheim's idea on boundary setting and maintenance functions of crime

He made one alteration to Durkheim's original explanation; suggested Durkheim omitted differences in power that exist in society.

Showed how crime set boundaries of permissible action, but did so in interests of powerful. In doing so, bridged between Marxists and Functionalist schools of thought.

E.g.Wayward Puritans: 17^th Century European Puritans emigrating to 'New World' to escape persecution as result of belief that God speaks directly to each person, without need of intermediene, such as church.

Churches, however, played certain role in maintaining social order on behalf of European states. Often conveniently interpreted God's will as reflection of Government's views.

By preaching irrelevance of church, Puritans were undermining major prop of Government. Within Puritan groups, leaders derived authority from leading the opposition into oppression.

After flight to America, basis for authority was removed, if God spoke directly to each person there was no need for leaders. To give themselves role, old leaders began to alter previously held beliefs. Yes, it was true that God spoke to individuals, but only a select few (the leadership) could interpret correctly what he said.

This upset many Puritans, but any who rebelled or challenged it were thrown out of congregation.

People in power create rules to preserve their power.

MERTON - Strain Theory

• Strain between what people want (goal), what they can realistically achieve, and how they attain their goal (mean)
• American Dream became obsession
• Materialism taken to such an extreme within the value consensus that it caused a state of anomie

Rejection of means and goals, replaced with new ones.

Used concept of anomie, but thought it was too vague in its original form, so altered it to mean a society where there is a disjunction between means and goals.

• In the US in the 1930s, he witnessed a rise in desire for material goods. Where there is a contradiction between what is wanted (goal) and if and how they can realistically achieve this (mean)
• This explanation is structural, as Merton locates cause of deviance in the nature of US society, rather than any defects originating from the individual

BEING BLOCKED FROM SUCCESS LEADS TO DEVIANCE

Merton went on to explain why people chose different patterns of deviance.

CONFORMITY: Person continues to accept goals and means set by society, even though failure is likely outcome.

INNOVATION: Response when person accepts goals set by society but rejects socially acceptable means e.g. find another (legal) way of making money or crime.

RITUALISM: Means and goals conformed to, but person loses sight of goals. Person does work but has no real interest in outcome.

RETREATISM: Person loses sight of both means and goals, 'drop out of rat race' to alcoholism or drug abuse.

REBELLION: Rejection of both means and goals leads to substitution of means and goals (political radicals/terrorists)

Criticisms of Merton

Doesn't specify why particular person chooses one form of deviance over another.

Merton argues different levels of ritualistic and innovative behaviour by social class is reflection of different emphases in socialisation between MC and WC.

WC are deviant because they are socialised less rigidly.

• ERIKSON suggests dramatic courtroom setting is a form of this, public can view condemnation of behaviour
• Media also aids this
• Criminals provide a test of boundaries. Every time criminal act is committed, public have own opinions, most show shock/horror at evil nature of act. However, some may have sympathy with criminal. In this case, law is out of step with common feelings of society, reformation of law is required
• When members of society share common view about a crime, they come together and share opinions, thus strengthening social bonds

The Effect of Crime on Society

Society based on collective conscience.

Not a natural state, normally a state of self-interest and greed, but we are socialised into it.

What stops them are law and collective conscience.

Of two enforcement agencies, law is weaker.

But in periods of great social strain/change, collective conscience is weakened.

Develops into a state of anomie.

Revert to state of greed and self-interest.

For society, this is the long-term collapse of order and harmony.

Anomie is a harmful, dangerous state.

Comments