Mertons theory

Mertons surmisal bedvass and contrast Mertons theory and the labelling theory of aberrancy.I. IntroductionYour Essay Outline spell bring out about Comp be and contrast Mertons theory and the labelling theory of aberrancy in the first decl are. restart Mertons practical action in the second sentence. Summarize Labelling Theory of aberration in the second sentence. Summarize Comparions contrast in the third sentence. Briefly sum So in short, both theories exertion to apologise offense from a affectionate sentiment but unitaryness explains wherefore wickedness begins period the a nonher(prenominal) one explains why crime continues. in the nett sentence of the first paragraph.In second paragraph you need to expand on Mertons Theory. carry with one sentence summarizing Mertons Theory. Then write two sentences elaborate on Mertons Theory. Be sure to back up your inclination for Mertons Theory. In the final sentence transition from Mertons Theory to Labelling Th eory of DevianceIn third paragraph you need to expand on Labelling Theory of Deviance. Write one sentence summarizing Labelling Theory of Deviance. Then write two sentences exhibition on Labelling Theory of Deviance. Be sure to back up your argument for Labelling Theory of Deviance. In the final sentence transition from Labelling Theory of Deviance to Comparions contrast.In fourth paragraph you need to expand on Comparions contrast. Write one sentence summarizing Comparions contrast. Then write two sentences expounding on Comparions contrast. Be sure to back up your argument for Comparions contrast. In the final sentence transition from Comparions contrast to your So in short, both theories try to explain crime from a complaisant perspective but one explains why crime begins while the separate one explains why crime continues..In the fifth and final paragraph, summarize Mertons Theory again. Summarize Labelling Theory of Deviance again. Summarize Comparions contrast again. Then write two sentences stating your So in short, both theories try to explain crime from a social perspective but one explains why crime begins while the other one explains why crime continues..Outline and assess the structionalist themes of crime and departureStructural theories of aberrancy are similar to Mertons theory. They explain the origins of deviance in terms of the position of individuals or groups in the social structure.In the thirty- whateverthing Robert k Merton wrote an article entitled Social Structure and Anomie. It became one of the more or less influential explanations of crime and deviance. He offered a social rather than mental or biological explanation. In particular, it was a structionalist theory as it cut the structure of community shaping battalions behaviour.According to Merton, American culture attaches owing(p) importance to success and success is measured in terms of bullion and material possessions. There are norms which define dewhitlo wize substance for achieving success. These coherent means include gaining skills and qualifications and career advancement. The American dream states that anybody can be given it to the top if they try gruelling enough. So much emphasis is set on material success that many people experience compress to deviate from accepted norms and values. Deviance occurs when they disavow the goals of success and/or the legitimate means of reaching that goal. For example, some people are tempted to use nay means of getting to the top-even if that involves criminal behaviour. Merton refers to this pressure as a course to anomie. Anomie means normlessness it refers to a situation where norms no longer guide behaviour, where anything goes.Despite what the American dream says, non everybody has an equal chance at success. The social structure prevents equal opportunity. In particular, the strain to anomie is close potently felt by those at the bottom of the class structure. They are le ss likely to acquire skills and qualifications mandatory to reach the top. As a result, they are more likely to seek resource routes to success.Merton identifies five possible adaptions or responses to the strain to anomie in American society, conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion. Conformity jibe to Merton, most people conform despite the strain to anomie. Even if they dont sack it, they continue to strive for success and comply the normative means of getting there. Innovation, people who adopt the pervert adaptation accept the goals of success but, in Mertons words, they have little access to stodgy and legitimate means to adequate successful. As a result, some innovate-they turn to legitimate means, to crime. The pressure to submarinemit this adaptation is greatest for those in the lower levels of the class system. Ritualism, people who follow this deviant route abandon the goal of success, but stick bang to the rules- for example, people in dead end , white collar occupations that follow their labor descriptions to the letter. Retreatism, this deviant adaptation involves a rejection of both the goal of success and the normative means of achieving it. It applies to people who drop out- tramps, drug addicts and habitual drunkards. Rebellion, this involves a rejection of conventional goals and means and their replacement with alternatives. The revolutionary who seeks to change society illustrates this type of deviant adaptation.Mertons strain theory was an early attempt to explain crime and deviance in terms of culture and structure of society. It provided a sociological alternative to biological and psychological theories. In particular, it offered an explanation for working class crime. any(prenominal) its weaknesses, Mertons work provided a spur for the development of further theories of crime and deviance.Mertons theory does raise a number of unanswered questions. First, why do people but not others adopt deviant adaptations? For example, why do some people in the lower levels of the class system turn to crime but others do not? Secondly, Mertons theory focuses on individuals rather than groups. crime and deviance are often collective activities. How can this be explained in terms of strain theory? Thirdly, crime and deviance are not always motivated by a desire for monetary gain. How can activities such as vandalism and fighting between rival gangs be explained in terms of Mertons theory? In search for these answers subculural theory was formed.Subcultural theories explain deviance in terms of the subculture of a social group. They argue that authentic groups develop norms and values which to some extent protestent from those held by other members of society. For example, some groups of criminals or delinquents might develop norms that encourage and reward criminal activity. Other members of society may regard such activities as immoral, and strongly disapprove of them.Subcultual theories claim that deviance is the result of individuals conforming to the norms and values of the social group to which they belong. Members of subcultures are not completely different from other members of society they may speak the similar language, wear similar clothes, and attach the same value to family life. However, their subculture is sufficiently different from the culture of society as a whole to lead to them displumeting acts that are generally regarded as deviant. Often, structural and sub cultural theories are combined, as in Albert Cohens psychoanalysis of delinquency. The development of subcultures is explained in terms of the position of groups and individuals in the social structure.Cohen was the first sociologist to develop a subcultual theory of working class crime and deviance. He examined delinquent gangs in low-income, inner city areas. Delinquency refers to the criminal and anti social acts of early days people.Cohen agreed with Merton that the mainstream value of success creates problems for young working class males. galore(postnominal) do badly at school and fail to acquire the skills and qualifications needed for success.Employing Durkheims concept of anomie, Robert K Merton, an American sociologist, developed his theory of deviance by analysing the American reward system. Mertons argument is that in a well-regulated society, goals and the means of achieving these goals are integrated in that they are available to all in society. In some societies the accepted means of achieving these goals are not available to all, wherefore those who wish to carry out the goals, but are not able to do so through legitimate means, must adapt to the situation. Merton presented a typology describing the modes of adaptation. The weighty aspect of the typology is the relationship between the cultural goals and the send means of achieving them. I willing describe the typology in the following paragraphs.Howard S. Beckers labelling theory of deviance asserts tha t deviance and conformity result, not so much from what people do, but from how others resolve to those actions. It analyses how definitions for deviant behaviour are created by social groups.Merton then sets out a typology of modes of adaptation in terms of conformity, or non-conformity, to cultural goals and institutionalised means1. Innovation pass judgment cultural goals but employing illegitimate means, for example, proportion theft, cheats.2. Ritualism adherence to means whilst ignoring the goals, for example, bureaucratic adherence to routine going through the motions.3. Retreatism withdrawal, opting out of socially defined desirable behaviour, for example, alcoholics, addicts.4. Rebellion not single rejection of goals and means, but a positive attempt to replace them with alternative values, for example, governmental revolutionaries, religious prophets.Mertons analysis suggests that deviant behaviour is functional. First, for the individuals involved, since it enab les them to adapt to the circumstances in which they find themselves. And second, for society as a whole since modes of individual adaptation help to maintain the boundaries between acceptable and non-acceptable forms of behaviour.Criticisms1. Non conformity, such as ritualism, is not really the same as deviance (indeed with ritualism you do the actions, but have the wrong thoughts its nearer blasphemy). It does not convey the same stigmatising quality as in the label deviant.2. The assumption of cultural consensus is implicit in the paper of cultural goals, and ignores the possibility of sub-cultures and a pluralistic culture, where cultural goals might differ considerably.3. It does not really provide a causal theory as to why some groups might adapt via rebellion and others by retreatism. ostensibly some form of socialised commitment and differential associations becomes crucial for influencing perceptions of the alternatives to conformity. It does not explain movement into d eviant careers.4. It does not take into account that equitable as legitimate means to success are limited, that so excessively are the illegitimate opportunities. Not everyone has equal access to criminal sub-cultures. An analysis of the opportunities for deviant activity is required.However, Merton never claimed that his typology was a total theory of deviance and many of the criticisms of his work were picked up on and improvements attempted by sub-cultural theorists. conclusionMertons strain theory is basically an explanation of why people commit crime. His approach involves looking at how people accept reject or redefine our cultural goals according to the means available to them in accepting those goals. So for example, success is the goal, the appropriately accepted way to achieve success in America is through the belief that hard work will get us success. But many people work hard and are not successful. So one adjustment would be to reject the idea that hard work is how to become successful and replace that means of achieving success with an alternative method such as selling drugs. You achieve monetary success without hard work.Labeling theory is also an effort to explain crime from a sociological position. However labeling theory explains why a person continues committing a crime but does not explain why they committed a crime in the first place.So in short, both theories try to explain crime from a social perspective but one explains why crime begins while the other one explains why crime continues.