Structural Functionalism Essay

Functionalism is a macro system theory which sees society as a mega structure of linked social institutions such as school, family and the legal system. Each different institution is functional to ensure the whole of society is maintained. For example primary socialisation takes place within the home where children are taught basic life

Functionalism is a sociological approach that sees the institutions of society – which are sometimes likened to the human body, as the institutions, such as the police, hospitals, etc, work in union and they make specific contributions to the smooth running of society.

Functionalism in sociology is a theoretical framework in which society is viewed as a complex system composed of various parts that

One question that a sociologist might ask is: “Why has the society deemed this a problem?” A sociologist may ask something like this because they want to know why something that was not thought of as bad is now a hot-button issue. They are also aware of the fact that social problems are a result a society recognizing something as bad and not just an individual seeing something as bad. Another question may be something along the lines of: “What purpose does this social problem serve?” this might be a question that a sociologist asks for the purpose of getting to the root of why there is a social problem to begin with. A Structural-Functionalist would argue that everything existing in our society, both good and bad, serves a purpose. If you could

Although these are two different theories they are very similar in that they both explain that criminal behavior comes from influences that are around the offender. In Differential

Criminological theories have come a long way from their origins; in ancient times it was believed that crimes were committed by people who were possessed by the devil, or women who practiced the dark art of witchcraft (Lilly, Cullen, Ball, 2011, pg 18). As the theories progressed into modern times, the theorist behind these criminological theories had only focused on one single cause behind criminality. Thanks to the work done by member of the Chicago School many of the new theories were able to further elaborate on their work. Integrating work done by scholars of the past has allowed criminologist and law enforcement agencies to get better understandings on why criminals choose the life style that they live. Theories that came about as a result of integration are: Cloward and Ohlin's differential opportunity theory, Agnew's general strain theory, and lastly Akers social learning theory. The integration of these theories by the theorist helped further elaborate on the work of the original authors and in some cases the new theories were able to fill in missing voids that the previous theorists had not taken into account.

Many theories have been created over the years to explain why not only delinquents but other individuals as well engage in deviant behavior. Social learning theory is one of the most pronounced theories in criminology. As we all may know, there will always be some sort of inappropriate behavior that leads to crime. This theory attempts to figure out what is it that makes people commit these acts. The social learning theory is a theory I believe produces a well-explained reasoning behind why people behave the way they do. This theory states that human behavior is modeled through imitation, observation, and one’s environment.

Structural Functionalism sociological perspective sees a human society as a system. In a system, many interconnected parts work together with a common objective. In a society, all individuals have specific roles. In addition, things like beliefs, rituals, values, rules, morals and ethics all determine the specific behavior expected of all members in a community. The interactions between individuals depend on the role of the individuals and the collective social values and rules in the society.

However, the two theories to be discussed throughout this paper nevertheless share one common attribute – they are products of the same time period, namely the past two centuries. Consequently, these differing explanations of crime and criminal behaviour are themselves very much a reflection and indication of the prevailing ideologies that have existed throughout this era. Therefore, the purpose of this essay is twofold. Firstly, it will provide a detailed analysis of both theories of crime with a strong emphasis on; the key characteristics, how each theory conceptualizes crime and criminality, the main theorists responsible for developing each theory, and the subsequent contributions made to the field of criminology. Lastly, this essay will provide a critical reflection on the strengths and weaknesses of labelling theory and biological positivism in order to elucidate through systematic contrast, the similarities and differences between both theories of

1. The first theory dealing with crime and deviance is differential association. It is perhaps the simplest theory, merely postulating that deviant patterns and crime are learned behaviors from others that commonly act in those same ways. Basically, it is passed down by example. The second of these theories is called anomie. Anomie is a situation in which culture usurps the standard norm without replacing it. Thus the culture enters into a state of state of confusion and unrest. It was Emilie Durkheim who first hypothesized this, and noticed its connections with heightened suicide rates. Third, known as labeling theory, stated that some crime and deviance was caused merely by that action being labeled as deviant by the people around those committing the

Psychology and criminality relates to the study of how aggression develops through a variety of possibilities which include; conscience, emotions, childhood, and socialization. Through the path of criminals their direction in violence we are able to determine the connection of psychology and criminality. Through the social learning theory, it can help us develop a better understanding why people engage in violent activity or have aggression, we can identify the state at which a criminal is and how both psychology and criminality connect.

Functionalism is seen as a macro-scale approach to society; it sees society as a whole rather than looking at parts of it. Due to this, functionalism sees society as a body (organic analogy), all the institutions work together to make society. This is particularly useful when observing society in order to understand the way in which it functions and the way in which all the institutions (organic analogy: organs within the body) work together to sustain society as a whole. Functionalism being a macro-scale approach is therefore seen as a strength as it allows functionalist sociologists to observe society, and its institutions, as a whole.

Many theories have been created over the years to explain why not only delinquents but other individuals as well engage in deviant behavior. Social learning theory is one of the most pronounced theories in criminology. As we all may know, crime is something that is never going to end. Needless to say, no matter how we tend to treat it, there will always be some kind of inappropriate human behavior that leads to crime. This theory attempts to figure out what is it that makes people commit these acts. The Social Learning Theory is a theory I believe produces a well-explained reasoning behind why people behave the way they do. This theory states that human behavior is modeled through imitation, observation and social human reaction, one’s environment.

People think of crime differently and what the causation of crime is as well as a way to deter crime. I will talk about three theories and they are classical, biological, and psychological. I will explain a little about each one, the differences and similarities between the three as well as which of these theories is most applicable to crimes committed today.

Firstly, different association theory can be applied to explain more types of crimes since the theory argues that individuals can learn to commit crimes. Sutherland and Cressey (1974) state that criminal behavior is not inherited, it is the result of a learning process. In the debates of nature vs. nurture, Sutherland and Cressey lean towards the nurture side as they argue that people have blank slate and all behaviors are learnt, including criminal ones. A number of recent researches have supported the ideas of learnt behavior as Thornberry (2009) claims that criminal behavior can be learnt from deviant parents. From a different perspective, academics suggest that criminal behavior can also be passed over through the interaction with delinquent friends (Hochstetler, Copes & DeLisi, 2002) and romantic partners (Haynie, Giordano, Manning & Longmore, 2005).