This essay looks at three sociological approaches used to define crime and deviance. Examining theories within these approaches and reviewing empirical evidence to either support or question their validity. Comparing statistical data to identify trends in criminality across the UK and looking at the ways crime is recorded.
Functionalism, a consensus structuralist theory, sees society as the source of crime and deviance, not the individual self. Believing control mechanisms such as Police and Law Courts are necessary to control social order (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Durkheim considered crime inevitable in all societies resolving that it should be expected, suggesting crime in advanced societies would be more prolific than those less developed. Functionalists see a positive impact in certain levels of deviance, Durkheim believing that if society was too saintly, then the smallest crime would be regarded as serious. For any social change in society, there must be some form of deviance to induce it (Durkheim, 1938).
Merton (1930) looked at explanations for criminal behaviour, outlining causes and effects. He believed society set goals and …show more content…
Socially constructed of two groups; one lower powered and one with higher power having negative responses to deviances from the cultural norms and criminal labeling, those labels leading to changes in self concept and social identity. Becker (1973) refers to the deviant career, suggesting those identified as deviants in society aren’t the only ones who contemplate deviant acts, as the impulse to deviate is a human trait (Kirby et al., 2000). Becker (1973) suggests deviance is learned, not just a label, his view supported by the self fulfilling prophecy whereby those labeled assume the labels characteristics and join together with those similarly branded (Kirby et al.,
Functionalism, a consensus structuralist theory, sees society as the source of crime and deviance, not the individual self. Believing control mechanisms such as Police and Law Courts are necessary to control social order (Haralambos and Holborn, 2004). Durkheim considered crime inevitable in all societies resolving that it should be expected, suggesting crime in advanced societies would be more prolific than those less developed. Functionalists see a positive impact in certain levels of deviance, Durkheim believing that if society was too saintly, then the smallest crime would be regarded as serious. For any social change in society, there must be some form of deviance to induce it (Durkheim, 1938).
Merton (1930) looked at explanations for criminal behaviour, outlining causes and effects. He believed society set goals and …show more content…
Socially constructed of two groups; one lower powered and one with higher power having negative responses to deviances from the cultural norms and criminal labeling, those labels leading to changes in self concept and social identity. Becker (1973) refers to the deviant career, suggesting those identified as deviants in society aren’t the only ones who contemplate deviant acts, as the impulse to deviate is a human trait (Kirby et al., 2000). Becker (1973) suggests deviance is learned, not just a label, his view supported by the self fulfilling prophecy whereby those labeled assume the labels characteristics and join together with those similarly branded (Kirby et al.,