Evaluate Functionalist Theories of Crime and Deviance

Authors Avatar

Edwin Loo 13K                17/10/2007

Sociology Essay

Evaluate Functionalist Theories on Crime and Deviance

Crime is defined as behaviour that breaks laws and is punished by the legal system. Deviance, on the other hand, can be considered to be banned or controlled behaviour which is likely to attract either punishment, disapproval or both (Downes & Rock, 1988). Functionalists view society as based on shared consensus and the proliferation of this shared consensus through socialization by institutions. This makes it particularly difficult for them to deal with the concept of crime and deviance- because in a perfect Functionalist society, crime and deviance would not occur. While some Functionalist theorists, notably Durkheim, regard crime as having a social function, others, including Merton, who point to the strain between socialized aims and reality as the true cause of crime.

Durkheim (1897) argues that crime and deviance are useful and necessary in society. It helps to reinforce the consensus of values, norms and behaviour of the majority non-deviant population, through the idea of outrage at crime which strengthens social solidarity. It also acts as a social dynamic which allows for social changes to occur and for social boundaries to be tested, ensuring that a society, its norms and values and its laws stay in line with the social consensus. Durkheim also sees Crime and Deviance as a provider of employment for law enforcement. Durkheim’s idea behind deviance as a force for social change is supported by the gradual legalization of behaviour once seen as deviant (abortion, homosexuality) over time as social attitudes and consensus changed.  However, Durkheim’s view of crime has some flaws. Other theorists, including Erikson (1966) argue that powerful groups within any society are able to impose their views upon the majority by a process of ideological manipulation.  Marxist theorists including Mannheim and Chambliss criticize the idea that the concepts of crime and deviance are defined by consensus, and instead argue that the capitalist ruling class decides what constitutes crime and deviance. Other functionalist theories, including Merton’s Strain Theory and Parson’s ideas of “Bad Socialization” contradict Durkheim’s claim of crime and deviance occurring to create employment- as they see other factors being the principal cause of crime.

Parsons views crime and deviance as a product of faulty or “bad” socialization. He views the family as the key building block of society. Crime therefore occurs when families fail to instil the correct norms and values into their offspring. Other institutions in society can also fail in their duty of socialization- including education, the media and religion. Faulty or “bad” socialization results in individuals being unaware of the social consensus, with the resulting consequence of crime or deviant behaviour as individuals engage in self-interest rather than pursue behaviour to the advantage of society as a whole. This view is partially backed by Wilson and Herrnstein who claim that proper conditioning through socialization is the only way to prevent criminal and deviant behaviour, and by other ecological and sub-cultural theorists who link the idea of “bad” socialization with surroundings and sub-cultures respectively, as well as by Bowlby, who discusses the concept of maternal deprivation resulting in deviant behaviour.  However, this view of crime and deviance would be criticized by interactionists as being too deterministic- and instead point at the role of human interaction in determining human behaviour including deviant or criminal behaviour. New Left Realists would claim that Parson’s theories only investigate the results of poverty and deprivation to explain crime, and would point at the role of increasing inequality and dissatisfaction as a cause of crime and deviance. On the other hand, socio-biologists such as Anderson would argue that crime and deviance are a result of an excess of male chromosomes, not the results of “bad” socialization of any kind.

Join now!

Merton’s “Strain Theory” (1938) is a development of Durkheim’s ideas of anomie or “normlessness”. Anomie, in Merton’s context, can also occur when individuals are unable to follow the “dominant norms” within a society. Merton argues that individuals are socialized into wanting success, material wealth, status and power. When they are unable to achieve this, it results in a “strain” between what we want, and what we can get. One possible response to this “strain” is deviant and criminal behaviour- through innovation (via crime), retreatism (via drugs and cults) or rebellion.  Merton also explains the reasons for choosing a deviant ...

This is a preview of the whole essay