Essay About Understanding Of Crime And Robert Merton

Criticallt Discuss the Contribution of a Theoretial Tradition to the Understaning F Crime
Essay Preview: Criticallt Discuss the Contribution of a Theoretial Tradition to the Understaning F Crime
Report this essay
Critically discuss the contribution of one of the following theoretical
traditions to our understanding of crime:
Radical Criminology,
Interactionism&Labelling theory,
Sub-Cultural Theory.
What is crime? According to Pease (1994) Crime comprises those actions which
are deemed so damaging to the interests of the community, that the state
determines that it must take a direct role in identifying and acting against the
criminal.
This definition of crime is rather simplistic and defines crime as an infraction
of criminal law. It does not comment on how some forms of crime may be
positively or negatively sanctioned, furthermore whether certain crimes may
simply be accepted or tolerated.
So how does a society distinguish whether an act is regarded as criminal or
not? Within every society there are collective sentiments. It is these shared
values and moral beliefs of a society, which will inevitably deem whether an act
is portrayed as criminal or not. Consequently, How does a society discern
between crimes that have been committed by numerous members of society, each of
a different societal status?
For Example, murdering another member of society is believed to be a criminal
offence and the punishment resulting from this act is presumed to be negative.
However, say for instance if a soldier in a war murders multiple people, as a
result of saving his own life and taking orders from his seniors, would murder
in this sense be termed deviant and would it be positively or negatively
sanctioned? Within our society the soldier would be seen as heroic, fighting for
his country and risking his own life beyond the call of duty, the soldier would
most definitely be positively sanctioned say by a medal or such reward.
Conversely, if an ordinary member of society shoots somebody and as a result of
the act the victim dies, this would also be seen as murder; however the person
who committed the criminal act would not be positively sanctioned instead they
would be negatively sanctioned and discredited from the society in which they
stemmed from. But dont you find this extremely contradicting? Both persons
intent was to kill so arent they both committing the same criminal act but just
in different circumstances?
And if murder is seen as a criminal act should it matter about the context in
which it was committed? From this example it is apparent that a murder not only
deviates from societys norms and expectations, but also from its values and in
this case the value placed on human life.
In general, arent we all criminals? Many of us have watched a film when
underage, purchased cigarettes, alcohol and even had sex when under the legal
age limit. All of which are considered to be a criminal offences, but are they
considered to be as criminal as murdering another person? The question raised
here is not what crime is, but how we can distinguish between the numerous
hierarchal levels and severity of the crime committed?
Emile Durkheim was a Functionalist and therefore sees crime as functional. He
argued that crime is inevitable and a normal aspect of social life. He stated
that without crime society would stagnate. Durkheim imagines a society of
saints, populated by perfect individuals. In such a society Durkheim states
that there may be no murder or robbery but deviance would still exist. He also
amplifies the fact that society will only progress with the aid of crime and
deviance. Durkheim argued that crime will only become dysfunctional when its
rate is abnormally high or low.
The theory which I will be focusing on to try and explain crime within our
society is Sub-Cultural Theory. Sub-cultural theories derived as an internal
critique of Robert Merton. They question his assumption of consensual values
and his view that deviance is an individual response. Cloward and Ohlin (1961)
also built there theory which was named Opportunity Structures on Mertons
(1938) Strain Theory.
Merton as well as Durkheim stemmed from the functionalist perspective.
He based his Strain Theory on United States of America.
Merton focuses largely upon the main backbone of his theory, value consensus
that is, all members of society are placed in different positions in the social
structure they do not have the same opportunity of realizing the shared values.
It is this which can generate deviance.
Merton argues that both human goals and constraints on behaviour are socially
based,