Sociological Positivism and the Criminal Behaviour - Report Example

What are the main features of Durkheim's and Merton's sociological positivism in explaining the criminal behaviour Introduction to positivistic criminology. Positivistic criminology studies crime and criminal behaviour through the application of the scientific method without taking into account any kind of metaphysics or spiritual causation (O'Connor, 2006). It only considers as valid any kind of data that can be gathered through experience, observation and experiments. It is a product of modernity since it appeared as a consequence of the Enlightment, and it is greatly influenced by the theory of Evolution of Charles Darwin. Positivistic criminology can take as a starting point different fields of knowledge like biology, psychology, and sociology. So there are biological positivism, psychological positivism, and sociological positivism in criminology depending of the field of knowledge that is taken as reference. 2. Sociological positivism as a new school and the reasons of the emergence. Sociological positivism in criminology makes a strong emphasis in the study of crime and criminal behaviour as a social phenomenon that is explained through the critical analysis of social structures, functions, and agents. Since criminology is an interdisciplinary science, sociological positivism also takes into account biological and psychological data when undertaking the study of crime and criminal behaviour. The study of deviance or abnormality in society belongs to the field of criminology, too. Sociological positivism attempts to explain crime and deviance from different angles trying to find valid and reliable theories that can help in its prevention and deterrence. Sociological positivism emerged as a scientific effort to fill the gap of other criminological studies based on biological and psychological perspectives, which were mostly centred on the individual. It also emerged in opposition of the Classical School of Criminology that was grounded on the standpoints of classical Greek philosophers, especially stressing the importance of free will (O'Connor, 2006). It was also based on utilitarian/hedonistic premises and the concept of social contract to whcih Durkheim was opposed (Hopkins Burke, 2005:91). Positivistic criminology takes a different position, and its main features are the following: 'The demand for facts, for scientific proof (determinism). There are body and mind differences between people (of these, the mens rea, or reasons for committing crime are important). Punishment should fit the individual criminal, not the crime (indeterminate sentencing, disparate sentencing, parole). The criminal justice system should be guided by scientific experts (rule by scientific elite, technocracy). Criminals can be treated, rehabilitated, or corrected (if not, then they are incurable and should be put to death). (O'Connor, 2006). The most influential figures in the field of sociological positivism in criminology are Quetelet, Guerry, Comte, Durkheim, Ferri, Garofalo, Merton and Agnew. 3. Durkhiem's and Merton's main features of sociological positivism. The main features of Durkheim's sociological positivism in criminology are the distinction between mechanical solidarity and organic solidarity, his views about the division of labour as a signal of social progress, his idea that crime and deviance are necessary for change and progress in society, and the introduction of the concept of anomie in the social structure for explaining the causes of crime and deviance (Hopkins Burke, 2005:91-95; Greek, 2005). For Durkheim, simple societies before the industrialisation process were formed by people that behaved and thought in similar ways since they performed similar work tasks with group-oriented goals (Greek, 2005). They were characterised by having mechanical solidarity. They had 'an intense and rigid collective conscience invariabley reinforced by sacred religious belief' (Durkheim paraphased by Hopkins Burke & Pollock, 2004:10). In this kind of society 'Repressive and summary punishments are used against those that transgress against the collective will and in this way commitment to the moral consensus -or worldview- of the group is encouraged with the downside of severely restricting any potential for social progress' (Hopkins Burke & Pollock, 2004:10). On the other hand, according to Durkheim, in complex societies that were formed after industrialisation there is organic solidarity as a consequence that work becomes more complex and specialised and social bonds become impersonal because people are no longer tied to one another (Greek, 2005). In these new societies there is a specialised division of labour. Durkheim considers that the emergence of these complex and diverse societies is a sign of progress (Hopkins Burke & Pollock, 2004:10-11). In these societies 'Social solidarity now relies less on the maintenance of uniformity between individuals and more on the management of the diverse functions of different groups. Nevertheless, a certain degree of uniformity remains essential' (Hopkins Burke, 2005:93). Durkheim held the idea that crime and deviance are not only inevitable but necessary (Mason, 2003). He argues that individual differences -hereditary and environmental- imply that there should be different levels of strength in moral consciousness that make inevitable the emergence of criminal behaviour (Mason, 2003). He also states that crime and deviance are necessary for change and progress in society since innovation should not be hindered in order to meet internal and external changes in the environment (Mason, 2003). So 'Durkheim holds that crime is the necessary concomitant of a free society. Attempts to repress all crime will have negative consequences for social diversity' (Mason, 2003). Durkheim introduced the concept of anomie in his explanations of crime and deviance in society. Anomie is a situation of deregulation or 'a state where norms (expectations on behaviors) are confused, unclear or not present' (Greek, 2005). In other words, anomie is a condition of normlessness that leads to deviant behaviour (Greek, 2005). Anomie is defined by Hopkins Burke (2005:94) as 'a breakdown in norms and common understandings'. Anomie implies that 'Changing conditions as well as adjustment of life leads to dissatisfaction, conflict, and deviance' (Greek, 2005). Durkheim stated that a sudden change in the social structure -a great prosperity or a great depression- caused a state of anomie (Greek, 2005). For Durkheim, there are two reasons behind the emergence of crime and deviance in modern complex societies. First, those societies 'encourage a state of unbridled 'egoism' that is contrary to the maintenance of social solidarity and conformity to the law' (Hopkins Burke, 2005:94; see also Hopkins Burke & Pollock, 2004:11). Second, the strength of anomie arises in the face of rapid change in society that cannot be appropriately controled due to the fact that the means of control for maintainig solidarity have not evolved sufficiently in those societies (Hopkins Burke, 2005:94; Hopkins Burke & Pollock, 2004:11). On the other hand, the main features of Merton's sociological positivism are his slightly different concept of anomie from that of Durkheim's, his theory of strain to explain crime and deviance in society, his enumeration of the five ways of adaptation or reaction to strain, and his concept of opportunity structures. For Merton, there are cultural goals and institutional means for achieving those goals, and anomie results as a consequence that society cannot provide the necessary opportunity structures in order that the individuals can achieve the cultural goals through institutionalised means. Hopkins Burke states that 'Merton observes that it is possible to overemphasise either the goals or the means to achieve them and that it is this that leads to social strains or 'anomie' (2005:100). So Merton considers that anomie is not produced by sudden change in the social structures like Durkheim proposed but the problem lies in the fact that society establishes goals without providing the necessary opportunities for its members to achieve them (Sociology At Hewett, 2001; see also Featherstone & Deflem). At the same time, Merton presents five ways that people can choose in order to adapt or react to the strain produced by the social system. The forms of adaptation or reaction are conformity, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion and innovation (Sociology At Hewett, 2001). More recently Agnew presented three major types of "deviance-producing strain": failure to achieve positively valued goals, removal of positively valued stimuli, and confrontation with negative stimuli (Collins, 2003). Collins paraphrases Calhoun in order to explain the difference between anomie and strain according to Merton in the following terms: 'Anomie can be separated into two specific categories: macroside and microside. The former is caused when society fails to establish clear limits on goals and is unable to regulate the conduct of members in the society. The latter, more commonly referred to as strain, stresses its attention towards the breakdown of society and the increase in deviance associated with this declining change that produces a stronger pressure among members of society to commit crimes' (2003). 4. Criticisms on their school of thought and limitations. Sociological positivism has been critised for the lack of empirical evidence to support its claims (Marwah & Deflem, 2006) and for its limited scope that does not allow for any metaphysical considerations. Durkheim has been critised for 'apparently unassailable methodological collectivism, or over-determinism' (Hopkins Burke, 2005:95). So Durkheim is considered to be methodologically and politically conservative (Hopkins Burke, 2005:95). Merton has been critised because he 'assumes that cultural goals and values are known and shared by all members of society' (Hopkins Burke, 2005:103). Besides that Merton is critised because 'anomie theory predicts both too few deviant activities among the more privileged members of society and too many among those potentially most subject to strain' (Hopkins Burke, 2005:103). On the other hand, Blake and Walker (2001) explain the theological theory of crime according to Christianity and argue that criminologists have been reluctant to take into account the concept of sin when they study crime and deviance. 5. Conclusion. Sociological positivism in criminology according to Durkheim and Merton proposes many interesting and valuable ideas that can be used to fine-tune other criminological perspectives in order establish a valid theory of crime and deviance taking into account metaphysical and spiritual views. There is a real need of acquiring a better understanding of criminal behaviour so it can be prevented and deterred as much as possible in a modern society characterised by complexity, unequality, and diversity among its members. References. Blake, A., and Walker. (2001, March 14). 'The theological theory of crime.' (Online). Bethel College. Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Collins, K.M. (2003). 'Anomie and Strain Theory'. (Online). International Encyclopedia of Justice Studies (IEJS). Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Featherstone, R., and Deflem, M. (2003). 'Anomie and strain: Context and consequences of Merton's two theories.' (Online). Sociological Inquiry, 73(4):471-489. College of Arts and Sciences, University of South Carolina. Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Greek, C.E. (2005). 'Durkheim's anomie'. (Online). Florida State University (FSU). Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Hopkins Burke, R., and Pollock, E. (2004). 'A tale of two anomies: Some observations on the contribution of (sociological) criminological theory to explaining hate crime motivation' (Online).. Internet Journal of Criminology (IJC). Available from: . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Hopkins Burke, R. (2005). 'An Introduction to Criminological Theory.' (Online). Willan Publishing. 300 pp. Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Marwah, S., and Deflem, M. (2006). 'Revisiting Merton: Continuities in the Theory of Anomie-and-Opportunity-Structures.' (Online). Sociological Theory and Criminological Research: Views from Europe and the United States, pp. 57-76, edited by Mathieu Deflem. Amsterdam: Elsevier/JAI Press. Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Mason, T. (2003). 'Deviance and delinquency.' (Online). Universit de Paris 8. Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. O'Connor, T. (2006, Dec. 2). 'MegaLinks in Criminal Justice.' (Online). Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Sociology At Hewett. (2001). 'Merton's Strain Theory'. (Online). Available from . [Accessed November 6, 2008]. Read More