For many years, sociologists and psychologists have tried to explain the origins of deviant behavior in the society. However, in order to understand the nature and structure of criminal behavior, there is need to understand a myriad of factors, such as societal functions, beliefs, norms, values, as well as sanctions. All these are part of a system in the society, and they play a significant role in influencing the behavior of individuals. For this reason, scholars have come up with social theories, which aim to explain why some individuals indulge themselves in deviant acts. Robert Merton and Peter Blau are among some of the sociologists who have dedicated their time and effort to developing comprehensive and informed perspectives towards crime in the society. This paper seeks to address the viewpoints of Merton and Blau, comparing and contrasting how Robert Merton and Peter Blau explain why people commit crimes and identifying the rationale behind their evaluations and assertions regarding criminal behavior in society. Assertively, both theorists present that a conflict between individual and collective responsibilities or obligations is the main source of criminal behavior in the society. Robert Merton Merton’s theoretical orientation centers on the fact that the society is divided into two distinctive levels: the individual and collective spheres. In his theory of deviance, he specifically focuses on the influence and interaction between the two levels mentioned
Understanding the criminal behavior system and crime typologies that the book demonstrates; it is kind of hard to distinguish what type of serial killer Robert Durst is. Judging from the book examples of different type of serial killers, I would have to say Robert Durst is a hybrid serial killer. While some of his actions from the video series, “The Jinx”, lead me to feel as if he was an expedience killer who wants to protect themselves from a perceived threat as the book states. Some of Durst’s actions also lead me to believe he was a mission killer, who had a vision for killing someone. None of his victims seemed as if they were some random act of murder. I feel as if he had a mission to kill all of them.; one reason making me suspect
Brym, R.J., & Lie, J., & Rytina, S. (2010) Deviance and Crime. Sociology: Your Compass for a New World. 3rd Canadian Edition. Toronto: Oxford University Press. Toronto: Nelson
Throughout the years, the association between a criminal offense and a criminal have become more relevant. Although there are many theories that try to illustrate the concept of why crimes happen, no theory has a profound influence of understanding an individual’s nature, relationship, development, and a society itself (Coleman & Ganong, 2014). To further explain, “theories of crime are defined in relation to modernity, spanning their development from the enlightenment to the present, with the advent of postmodernism” (Miller, 2012, p. 1798). In other words, theories of crime are an approach to understanding an individuals behaviour and actions in their environment, society, and themselves that may lead to crime. Nevertheless, within this paper, it will be comparing the case of
There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.
According to Merton, deviance is the result or an outcome of an imbalance between legitimate cultural goal and the legitimate means. Hence, he introduced 5 adaptations of typologies of deviance.
Many individuals in today’s society wonder what pushes people past a breaking point in which they become involved in actions not accepted by society, such as stripping, prostitution, drug use, alcoholism and more. The reasoning behind this is deviance. Deviance can be either positive (over conforming) or negative (under conforming). When applying the subject of crime to a type of deviance, it falls under the negative category because those who under conform in society have a tendency to reach their goals with non-accepted means. Considering the crime of drunk driving, many factors add up to develop a reason why so many people do it. Merton’s strain theory perspective explains the deviance behind drunk driving very well, using its’ assumptions, key focuses, and root of deviant acts to support it. Before focusing on Merton’s theory relating to the crime of drunk driving, we first have to recognize how sociologists understand the concept of deviance.
Sociological theories of crime contain a great deal of useful information in the understanding of criminal behavior. Sociological theories are very useful in the study of criminal behavior because unlike psychological and biological theories they are mostly macro level theories which attempt to explain rates of crime for a group or an area rather than explaining why an individual committed a crime. (Kubrin, 2012). There is however some micro level sociological theories of crime that attempts to explain the individual’s motivation for criminal behavior (Kubrin, 2012). Of the contemporary
Deviance and crime are wide-ranging terms used by sociologists to refer to behavior that varies, in some way, from a social norm. Cultural Norms are society's propensity towards certain ideals; their aversion from others; and their standard, ritualistic practices. Essentially the 'norm' is a summation of typical activities and beliefs of group of people. This essay will evaluate the sociological theories associated with crime and deviance and to compare and contrast these main theories. And find links between these theories to today’s society. There are various Sociological deviance theories, including Structuralist: why do some people break the rules? ,
Introduction: Throughout history there have always been many different theories of crime and why people commit crimes. In the late 1930s a new theory rose to the forefront; this theory was called the anomie theory. Anomie means a lack of ethical standards. The anomie theory was proposed by Roberton Merton. It stated that society, as a whole, generally shares the same goals relating to having success in life; whether that is having a family, wealth, power, or just happiness. Society generally agrees that these are things that are to be sought after. Furthermore, Merton proposed that society, as a whole, also has a list of generally accepted ways to achieve such goals (Merton, 1938). Criminal activity, such as robbery, murder, and corruption, are among the things that are not accepted by society as appropriate means to achieve these goals. Merton’s anomie theory was built upon in 1992 by Robert Agnew who developed the general strain theory. General strain theory argues that when members of society are unable to achieve the general goals that society has set forth, they will, in order to avoid further rejection, further alienate themselves from society. Agnew also argued that if these individuals feel as if their shortcomings were a result of their environment failing them they will likely develop very negative feelings towards society, causing them to
When looking at criminal activity and the direct connection to the criminal behavior we see that there have been many research trials that have taken place over the history of humankind (Mishra & Lalumiere, 2008). Two of these research areas that have been developed to attempt to understand the causes of criminal behavior are known as biological and psychological perspectives of crime causation. These two sectors have their principles that are held in their theories as a standard scientific understanding of the basics that each evaluation of criminal behavior is built on (Dretske, 2004).
To come to understand why people act with deviant behavior, we must comprehend how society brings about the
The psychological theories of criminal behavior focus on the lack of socialization, incomplete cognitive development, and bad childhood experiences. Those who study psychological theories believe that failures in cognitive development can be a major factor in malfunctioning behavior. These criminals have difficulty controlling anger and containing violence, which causes them to lash out. The results of these episodes are murder, rape, robbery, assault, and battery. Many more crimes can come about from such behavior, especially when the criminal falls into a negative cycle. Their behavior spirals out of their control, as they try to solve each of their crimes by committing another, to try and right the situation.
‘While theories which locate the causes of crime in biological differences might provide useful explanations for the behaviour of a minority of offenders, they are very limited as general explanations of criminality’. Discuss.
In analyzing social process theories, it is typically viewed that elements of crime function as part of the interactions of people through the use of different institutions of society that include different organizations. No matter where a person comes from, if people maintain unhealthy relationships that is detrimental to their behaviors and daily activities, their potential to become a criminal greatly increases. As social process theories were developed by a group of sociologists during the 1930’s-1940’s in order to observe and collect data on human interactions and the influences group socialization may create. Through social process theories, the mentality of rationalizing crime as an alternative route to success becomes evident through sociologist’s observations through group interactions. People are just as susceptible to learning criminal behavior, as they are to learning other customary behaviors that are essential in the daily lives of individuals. Even though crime can be limited, some societies fail to limit the continuous actions of crime as addressed by the social control theory. Additionally, combining this theory with the social reaction theory analyzes how certain labels could potentially motivate criminal behaviors into a form of career (Siegal, 234).
What makes a criminal a criminal? Can anyone become a criminal? Answering and understanding these questions is the core work of criminologists as most criminologists attempt to make sense of why people do certain things (Garland, Sparks 2000). This essay will consider the notion that any person could become a criminal and in so doing consider the initial question. This essay will outline a range of theories that attempt to describe human behavior in relation to criminal behavior given the complexities of behaviour. Several theories will be considered as no single theory of behavior can account fully for the complexities and range in criminal behaviour. The theories range from social-control, to classical, to biological, to personality