The first attempts to explain the causes of deviations were made within the framework of biological and psychological theories, which looked for the cause of deviant and criminal behavior in the natural and mental deviations of individuals. And although such explanations have not yet been completely refuted, they have very few supporters today.
Biological theories of deviant behavior arose in abundance at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. C. Lombroso and H. Sheldon tried to prove the connection of criminal behavior with a certain physical structure of the body. Later, already in the 70s. The twentieth century, a number of geneticists tried to link the predisposition to aggression with the presence of an additional chromosome “X” or “Y” in the individual. Despite the fact that in some cases these theories were confirmed, so far it has not been possible to find a single universal physical or genetic trait that would be responsible for deviant behavior. The psychological fate of the deviation befell the same fate - here, too, it was not possible to find a single psychopathic trait that would be characteristic of all violators of public peace.
The weak point of biological and psychological theories of deviation is that, focusing all attention on the personality of the deviant, they lose sight of the social context of his behavior. But it is precisely this context that determines why one and the same act is considered the norm in one culture, and in another it is regarded as a deviation.
Social institutions set a benchmark for qualifying behavior as deviant, but individuals from different social classes have different attitudes to the same social norms and even violate them in different ways. So, petty theft or burglary is committed mainly by people from the poor, and financial fraud, embezzlement and tax evasion - this is the business of wealthy people.
Deviant behavior is a product of society. Following the well-known principle of E. Durkheim, according to which "the social must be explained as social," the main causes of deviant behavior should be sought using sociological theory.
The most well-known sociological theories of deviant behavior today are theories of social anomy, theories of subcultures, theories of conflict, the theory of stigmatization and the theory of rational choice.
Theory of Social Anomie originates from E. Durkheim, who believed that the cause of deviant behavior is the collapse of the system of social values. In periods of social crises, when familiar norms are crumbling, and new ones are not yet settled, people lose their guiding lines - they begin to feel anxiety, fear of uncertainty, cease to understand what society expects of them - all this leads to an increase in the number of cases of deviant behavior.
R. Merton modified the concept of social anomie and began to use it to denote the tension that arises as a result of the conflict between the individual’s desire to follow generally accepted life standards and the limited form of officially approved means of achieving them.
Modern industrial society proclaims life values \u200b\u200bcommon to all segments of the population - high social status, career, wealth, etc. It is assumed that the means of achieving success in life are intensive labor and self-discipline, regardless of the individual's starting life position.
In fact, a significant part of the population is in a disadvantage, because it does not have sufficient economic resources, neither to receive a good education, nor to start their own business. And here the temptation arises - to achieve life success by any means available, regardless of the law, and especially morality.
R. Merton called this situation “structural social anomie” and outlined five possible behavioral reactions of the individual to the dilemma of “life goals and means of achieving them” proposed by society.
Conformismtakes place when an individual adheres to generally accepted values \u200b\u200band socially approved means of achieving them, regardless of whether he succeeds in achieving success in life or not. Conformal behavior is typical of the majority of the population and ensures the stability of society.
Innovation observed when individuals accept the living standards of society, but use the means condemned by society to achieve them. In an effort to achieve life success at all costs, people start selling drugs, forging checks, cheating, misappropriating other people's property, stealing, participating in burglary and robbery, or engaging in prostitution, extortion, and buying symbols of success.
Ritualism occurs where people have lost the sense of meaning of life values, but continue to mechanically follow accepted rules, standards, instructions. Ritualists are usually busy with tedious and uninteresting work, with no prospects and with little reward.
Retreatism - departure, flight from reality - takes place when individuals reject the living standards of modern society and the means to achieve them, without offering anything in return. Alcoholics, drug addicts, tramps represent this type of behavior. Refusing the struggle for success in life and the struggle for existence itself, they gradually sink to the bottom of society.
Revolt - this is a type of behavior in which individuals reject existing values \u200b\u200bin society along with the means to achieve them, but at the same time put forward new ones in their place and actively seek to establish them in practice. Such behavior is usually characteristic of representatives of radical political and religious groups, revolutionaries and reformers who want to make happy all of humanity contrary to their own will.
The given typology of R. Merton reflects the realities of modern society, but it should not be applied mechanically.
First, the types of behavior indicated by R. Merton are precisely the types of adaptation, adaptive behavioral reactions, and not personality types. A person, depending on changes in life circumstances, can move from one type of adaptive behavior to another or simultaneously combine several types of adaptation.
Secondly, the contradiction between living standards and the means to achieve them in different classes and layers of society will look different, due to their different living standards and different living standards.
Thirdly, the mismatch of life aspirations and opportunities is characteristic not only for low-income groups of the population - it is also observed among representatives of the middle and upper class. On the one hand, the "rich also cry" (retritism, disappointment in life values), and on the other, the "rich" have much more opportunities for an innovative type of behavior than they widely use, violating all moral and legal norms.
Subculture Theories form the following group of sociological theories of deviation, which complement and refine the theory of social anomie. Such sociologists as Edwin H. Sutherland, Albert Cohen, Richard A. Cloward, Lloyd E. Olin, Walter B. Miller and others took part in the development of these theories.
The essence of the concept of subcultures is quite simple. In modern society, many differentiated associations or subcultures of a very different orientation coexist and interact, from socially positive subcultures to delinquent and criminal.
The type of subculture to which the personality is attached depends on its social environment. The mechanism of the person’s involvement in the subculture is the usual mechanism of socialization, which includes communication, imitation, identification, learning.
Communicating with a law-abiding environment - a person acquires skills of law-abiding behavior. Communicating with offenders - she masters the skills of a criminal subculture. The subculture of its primary social groups — the family, the training, labor collective, and the campaign of friends and peers — has the most powerful effect on the personality.
Theories of subcultures show that there is no impassable gap between normative (conformal) and deviant (criminal) behavior - both types of behavior are formed on the basis of the same mechanisms of personality socialization. Knowing the social environment of the personality and the circle of its communication, it is possible with a certain degree of probability to predict the nature of the personality’s behavior and its predisposition to commit deviant acts. At the same time, these theories cannot explain the mass cases of criminal acts committed by “non-professionals” - people who had no contact with criminal subcultures, communities, and who seemed to be deprived of any criminal experience and skills.
Theories of Conflict they offer a somewhat unusual interpretation of the causes of deviation, with the main emphasis not on violators of social and legal norms, but on the norms themselves, or rather, on the relationship of existing social norms with the interests of the "powers that be."
Conflict theories derive from orthodox Marxist theory, according to which the laws of bourgeois society express exclusively the interests of the ruling class and working people are forced to violate these laws in the struggle for survival. With this approach, the “deviants” are no longer violators of generally accepted rules, but revolutionaries, rebels, opposing capitalist oppression.
The American sociologist Richard Quinney came to the conclusion that the US legal system is more tied to the interests and value system of the ruling class than to the interests of the country's population as a whole. If we take crimes against property, then more severe sanctions are provided in the USA for burglary, robbery, car theft, which are usually committed by representatives of the poor. At the same time, most business offenses, which cause much more damage to property, are classified as administrative and are punishable only by a fine.
The political interpretation of deviation was further developed in theories of stigma (i.e. labeling or branding). Proponents of this theory do not focus on the personality characteristics of the deviant or his social environment, but on the process of imposing the status of deviant on the part of influential groups of society (legislators, judges, leaders, educators, seniors).
The main principles of the theory of stigma were developed by Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson and are as follows:
1. Not one act in itself is deviant - deviation is a consequence of a public assessment of the act.
2. All people have ever violated social norms (through inexperience, negligence, out of mischief, out of simple curiosity, in search of thrills, under the pressure of life circumstances, under the influence of others, etc.). These violations relate to primary deviation, elude the attention of others and remain without sanction from society.
3. Labeling of the deviant is not made on all violators, but only on some, depending on the personality of the violator, the specific situation and those who qualify the violation itself. Representatives of the less protected and wealthy segments of the population receive such labels much more often than representatives of the middle class.
4. The resulting stigma of a deviant (a loafer, a bully, a thief, a pervert, a drug addict, a criminal, etc.) and expectations from others provoke the individual to actions confirming his new status - a secondary deviation occurs.
5. The bearer of the label of a deviant, feeling alienation from others, begins to look for a society of his own kind and makes a deviant career inside him, moving from weak forms of deviation to stronger ones.
6. Thus, labeling the culprit of an often insignificant and non-hazardous event for society triggers a chain reaction mechanism that, after a relatively short period of time, can turn a recent immature and inexperienced deviant into a full-fledged representative of the criminal world.
The theory of stigmatization helps to understand what role assessments and the opinions of others play in the formation of deviant behavior and why the same act in some cases is considered by others as deviant, but not in others. At the same time, this theory ignores the processes that brought to life the deviant behavior itself and overestimates the role of stigma as the main the factor of the movement of the individual along the path of a deviant career. People have varying degrees of sensitivity to the opinions of others and respond differently to this opinion, and in addition to stigmatization, the individual’s involvement in criminal culture includes many other equally significant factors (acquisition of criminal experience, alternative status, new opportunities that are not available when law-abiding behavior, etc.).
Rational choice theory closes another “blank spot” in the understanding of deviant behavior. The fact is that the theories considered above do not analyze the actions of the individual. Deviant behavior in them appears either as a result of pressure on mandatory living standards, or as a result of interaction with the relevant subcultures, or as a form of protest against unfair public orders, or as a result of forcibly hanging the label of a deviant. However, people committing illegal actions are not mechanical robots or puppets and, apparently, should be aware of what they are doing. This side of deviant behavior is analyzed in the theory of rational choice.
Deviant behavior - this behavior deviates from generally accepted, socially approved, most common and established norms in certain communities at a certain period of their development. We can distinguish the deviation of the destructive orientation - human actions, which are radically different from the generally accepted socio-cultural expectations and norms in society. And you can highlight the creative deviation, which deviates from generally accepted behavior in a positive way and is socially significant.
In science worked out the conceptwho consider the problem of deviation. These include:
1) theory of conflict; 2) stigma; 3) cultural transfer; 4) anomie.
The founder theories of anomie was Emil Durkheim, who argued that deviant behavior is necessary for the normal functioning of society, since the punishment of the deviant creates boundaries, the violation of which is recognized as unacceptable, and encourages people to express their attitude to the need for order in society. E. Durkheim formulated the concept of "anomie" which means the state of society in which the decomposition of the value system occurs due to the crisis of the whole society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the declared goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority. At such a time, there is an increase in the number of situations in which deviant behavior is expressed.
Theory of cultural transfer.Gabriel Tarde, who at the end of the 19th century formulated the theory of imitation to explain deviant behavior. Tarde argued that criminals, like "decent" people, imitate the behavior of those individuals with whom they met in life, whom they knew or heard about. But unlike law-abiding citizens, they imitate the behavior of criminals.
Edwin G Sutherland designed differential association theory. According to Sutherland, individuals become delinquents because they fall into an environment that follows deviant patterns, motivations, and methods. Deviant behavior is acquired on the basis of not only imitation, but also learning.
Theory of conflict.its origin goes back to the Marxist tradition. According to Marxist theory, the ruling class of capitalists exploits and plunders the masses, and at the same time manages to avoid retaliation for their crimes. Workers — victims of capitalist oppression — are forced to do things in their struggle for survival that the ruling class stigmatizes as criminal. The modern Marxist approach to the problem of deviation was formulated by the American sociologist Richard Quinnie. According to Quinney, the US legal system reflects the interests and ideology of the ruling capitalist class. The law declares some acts illegal that offend the morals of those in power and pose a threat to their privileges and property. In the theory of conflict, much is true. It is clear that the laws are compiled and enforced by individuals and social groups vested in power. As a result, the laws are not neutral, but serve the interests of a particular social group and express its basic values.
Theory of stigma.Adherents: Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson.
According to the theory of stigma, deviation is not determined by the behavior itself, but by the reaction of society to such behavior. When human behavior is seen as deviating from accepted norms, this gives an impetus to a number of social reactions. Others define, evaluate behavior and put a certain label on it. The violator of norms begins to coordinate his further actions with such labels. In many cases, the individual develops a self-image that matches this label, as a result of which he is able to embark on the path of deviation.
Reasons for Deviation. Some scientists: poor genetic inheritance, others - the presence of "mental defects", "psychopathy". However, a significant part of criminologists and sociologists see the origins of deviant behavior in social reasons. This is the lack of clear rules in society, the existence of conflicts between the norms of individual institutional entities and the norms of the state.
The most common forms of deviant behavior:
1) crime;
2) alcoholism;
3) addiction;
Since deviation is a process caused by social factors, it is important to establish the social determination of deviant behavior. There are a number of theories that explain deviation for various reasons - physiological, psychological, sociocultural, socio-economic, etc.
Biological theories (theories of physical types)
Some of the first attempts to explain the deviant behavior (in the late XIX - early XX centuries) were primarily biological in nature. The reason for the tendency to various deviations was seen in the innate properties of man. That is, the basic premise of all theories of physical types is that certain physical personality traits predetermine various deviations from the norms that she performs. The idea itself is as old as human history. Expressions have long been rooted in societies: “the face of the killer”, “vicious facial features”, etc. Among the followers of theories of physical types can be called C. Lombroso, W. Sheldon.
So, created by the Italian psychiatrist and forensic scientist C. Lombroso in the 1870s. the theory explained the causes of deviation, mainly crime, with certain anatomical signs. Having studied the appearance and physical characteristics of the criminals, C. Lombroso concluded that the “criminal personality type” is characterized by a protruding lower jaw and a decreased sensitivity to pain, which are signs of degradation to earlier stages of human evolution. Lombroso acknowledged that social conditions can influence the development of criminal behavior, but considered most criminals to be degenerate and mentally retarded. Precisely because they allegedly have not reached full development as human beings, their actions usually do not correspond to the provisions of human society.
This direction was developed in the 40s. XX century in the concept of the American psychologist and physician W. Sheldon, according to which people with a certain physical constitution tend to make social deviations, condemned by society. W. Sheldon identified three main physical types of people: endomorphic (roundness of forms, overweight), mesomorphic type (muscularity, athleticism), ectomorphic type (slimness, thinness) and argued that the most prone to deviation are mesomorphs - individuals differing in physical strength , increased activity and decreased sensitivity.
Practice has proved the failure of theories of physical types. Everyone knows of numerous cases when individuals with the face of cherubs committed the most serious crimes, and an individual with gross, "criminal" facial features could not offend a fly.
Psychological theories
Like biological theories, psychological theories seek an explanation for behavioral abnormalities in the individual, not in society. The basis of psychological (psychoanalytic) theories of deviant behavior is the study of conflicts occurring inside the personality consciousness. According to the theory of 3. Freud, each person has a region of the unconscious under a layer of active consciousness. The unconscious is our psychic energy, in which all the natural, primitive, which knows no boundaries, knows no pity. The unconscious is the biological essence of a person who has not experienced the influence of culture. A person is able to defend himself from his own natural “lawless” state by forming his own “I”, as well as the so-called “Super-I”, determined exclusively by the culture of society. The human “I” and “Super-I” are constantly restrained by forces in the unconscious constantly limit our instincts and base passions. However, a state may arise when internal conflicts between the "I" and the unconscious, as well as between the "Super-I" and the unconscious, destroy the defense and our internal culturally unaware content breaks out. In this case, a deviation from the cultural norms developed by social the environment of the individual.
Obviously, in this point of view there is some truth, however, the identification and diagnosis of possible violations in the structure of the human "I" and possible social deviations are extremely difficult due to the secrecy of the object of study. In addition, although each person has a conflict between biological needs and cultural prohibitions, not every person becomes a deviant.
Some scientists in this area have suggested that a small number of people develop an immoral or psychopathic personality type. Such personalities are self-enclosed, emotionless personalities, acting impulsively and rarely feeling guilty. However, almost all studies examining people with similar characteristics were conducted among prisoners in prisons, which inevitably affected the image of such individuals in a negative light.
Thus, by analyzing any one psychological trait, conflict or complex, the essence of any kind of deviant behavior cannot be explained. Probably, the deviation arises as a result of the combined action of many factors (psychological, cultural, social).
Sociological Theories of Deviant Behavior
Sociological explanations of the causes of deviation originate from the works of one of the classics of sociology E. Durkheim (1858-1917), who formulated the concept of anomy, i.e. mass deviation from existing norms in society as the main cause of deviation.
Theory of Anomie
The presence in everyday practice of a large number of conflicting norms, the uncertainty in connection with this of a possible choice of a line of behavior, can lead to a phenomenon called by E. Durkheim an anomie (a state of lack of norms).
Anomie is a social condition characterized by the decomposition of the value system due to the crisis of the whole society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the declared goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority.
At the same time, Durkheim did not at all consider that modern society has no norms; on the contrary, society has many systems of norms in which it is difficult for an individual to navigate. Anomie, therefore, according to Durkheim, is a condition in which a person does not have a strong sense of belonging, no reliability and stability in choosing the line of normative behavior.
People find that it is difficult for them to coordinate their behavior in accordance with norms that are currently becoming weak, obscure or contradictory. During periods of rapid social change, people cease to understand what society expects of them, and experience difficulties in harmonizing their actions with current standards. Old norms no longer seem suitable, and new, nascent norms are still too vague and poorly formulated to serve as effective and meaningful guidelines in behavior. In such periods, a sharp increase in the number of cases of deviation can be expected.
According to E. Durkheim, deviant behavior is necessary for society, since it performs two important functions in it. First, deviation from the norms performs an adaptive function: introducing new ideas and problems into society, deviance acts as a factor in updating and implementing changes. Secondly, deviance helps to maintain the border between “good” and “bad” behavior in society: deviant behavior can cause such a collective reaction that will strengthen group solidarity and clarify social norms.
E. Durkheim's views on deviant behavior contributed to shifting the attention of scientists from explanations based on the individual to social factors.
The idea of \u200b\u200bsociety anomy was further developed in the works of American sociologists T. Parsons and R. Merton. According to T. Parsons, anomie is "a condition in which a significant number of individuals are in a position characterized by a serious lack of integration with stable institutions, which is essential for their own personal stability and the successful functioning of social systems. The usual reaction to this condition is unreliability of behavior." According to this approach, anomie increases due to the disorder and conflicts of moral standards in society. People begin to be limited by the norms of individual groups and as a result do not have a stable perspective, according to which they need to make decisions in everyday life. In this understanding, anomie looks like the result of freedom of choice without a stable perception of reality and in the absence of stable relationships with the family, state and other basic institutions of society. Obviously, the state of anomie most often leads to deviant behavior.
R. Merton modified the concept of anomie, referring it to tension arising in the behavior of a person who finds himself in a situation where generally accepted norms come into conflict with social reality. R. Merton believed that anomie does not arise from freedom of choice, but from the impossibility of many individuals to follow the norms that they fully accept. He sees the main reason for the difficulties in the disharmony between cultural goals and legal (institutional means) with which these goals are realized. For example, while society supports the efforts of its members to strive to increase well-being and a high social position, the legal means of society members to achieve such a state is very limited. Inequality existing in society serves as the impetus that forces a member of the society to seek illegal means and goals, i.e. deviate from generally accepted cultural patterns. Indeed, when a person cannot achieve prosperity with the help of legal socially approved means (traditional methods such as getting a good education and getting a job in a prosperous company are officially recognized as the latter), he can resort to illegal means that are not approved by society (such for example, drug trafficking, racketeering, fraud, forgery or theft) Thus, deviations are largely dependent on the cultural goals and institutional means that are adhered to and which one or another person uses.
However, the “lack of opportunities” and the desire for material well-being is not enough to create pressure towards deviation. Only when society proclaims common symbols of success for the entire population, while restricting the access of many people to the recognized means of achieving such symbols, are conditions created for antisocial behavior. Merton identified five responses to the goal dilemma - means, four of which are deviant adaptations to anomi conditions.
The first of them is conformism, i.e. passive adaptation to the existing order of things. Conformism occurs when members of a society accept as cultural goals the achievement of material success, as well as the means approved by society for their achievement. Most members of society who do not want to deviate from generally accepted norms of behavior are prone to conformal behavior, therefore such behavior is the backbone of a stable society.
Innovation occurs when individuals adhere to culturally defined goals, but reject socially accepted means of achieving them. Such people are capable of selling drugs, forging checks, cheating, appropriating other people's property, stealing, participating in burglary and robbery, or engaging in prostitution, extortion, and blackmail. Ritualism takes place when members of a society reject cultural goals or belittle their significance, but at the same time mechanically use publicly approved means to achieve such goals. For example, the goals of an organization are no longer important to many zealous bureaucrats, but they cultivate funds as an end in themselves, fetishizing rules and paperwork.
Retreatism consists in the fact that individuals reject both cultural goals and recognized means of achieving them, offering nothing in return. For example, alcoholics, drug addicts, tramps and deserted people become outcasts in their own society; "They live in society, but do not belong to it."
Rebellion consists in the fact that rebels reject the cultural goals of society and the means to achieve them, but at the same time replace them with new norms. Such individuals break with their social environment and join new groups with new ideologies, for example, radical social movements. Such a goal setting is characteristic of some youth subcultures, and revolutionary movements, it can be realized in political crimes.
Table 1. Typology of individual adaptation to anomie according to R. Merton
Type of adaptation | Cultural goals | Institutionalized these means |
| Conformism | ||
| Innovation | ||
| Ritualism | ||
| Retreatism | ||
| Revolt | + - | + - |
Notes: + acceptance;
- denial;
Denying the existing value system and replacing it with a new system.
Types of individual adaptation R. Merton characterize role behavior. A person can change his mind and move from one type of adaptation to another.
The theory of anomie R. Merton focuses on those processes of establishing recognized cultural goals and means by which society initiates deviant behavior. In particular, with the help of this theory it is possible to reveal the essence and causes of crimes related to money committed on the basis of profit and greed, crimes in the environment of “white-collar workers” and corporate crimes, crimes of representatives of power structures and those who seek power.
However, critics of Merton’s theory point out that, firstly, he overlooks the processes of social interaction through which people form their ideas about the world and plan their actions. Merton describes violators of social norms as individualists - people who are mostly self-sufficient, who develop solutions for themselves to overcome stressful situations without taking into account the actions of others. Secondly, not every deviant behavior can be explained by the gap between goals and means. Merton paints a picture of American society, in which, in his opinion, there is a consensus between basic values \u200b\u200band goals. But his critics argue that pluralism is inherent in American society with many subcultures. The life of American society gives many examples when deviant behavior of an individual can be explained by the unacceptability of certain norms that are prevailing in most groups of the population. So, the Indians violate the laws of hunting and fishing; members of some ethnic minorities enter into common marriages; people from southern rural areas are fond of cockfights; some populations make moonshine; teenagers use drugs. Additionally.
Explanations from the concept of subculture
In the theory of anomy, developed by R. Merton, in the determination of deviant behavior, serious attention is paid to cultural values, deviation from which can lead to deviant actions. This idea found more concrete embodiment in the theory of delinquent (from the English delinquency - offense) subcultures developed by the American sociologist A. Cohen. This theory proceeds from the fact that anomie leads large enough groups of individuals, primarily young, not settled in life, to search for new forms of behavior that do not correspond to the prevailing values \u200b\u200bof the dominant culture in society. This is how subcultures arise in which a deviation from previous social norms is not a deviation, but behavior that is fully consistent with the new values \u200b\u200bproclaimed by the new culture. In the new subcultures, everything that is denied and condemned by the dominant culture - sexual licentiousness, aggressiveness, petty theft, vandalism, etc. - is recognized as normal means of achieving self-expression and respect from other, at least members of this social group, for example hippies. Thus, in delinquent subcultures, those means of achieving goals that are rejected by the dominant culture as deviant, become specific norms, norms of justification of vandalism, aggressiveness, sexual illegibility, etc.
Theory of Cultural Transfer
A number of sociologists emphasize the similarity between the method of developing deviant behavior and the method of developing any other style of behavior. One of the first to this conclusion was the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde, who at the end of the XIX century. formulated a theory of imitation to explain deviant behavior. Working as a district magistrate and director of the criminal statistics department, he became convinced that repetition plays a significant role in human behavior. G. Tarde argued that criminals, like "decent" people, imitate the behavior of those individuals with whom they met in life, whom they knew or heard about. But unlike law-abiding citizens, they imitate the behavior of criminals.
In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago, trying to explain the high crime rate in several districts of Chicago, conducted a series of studies that found that crime levels remained stable for many years in several quarters of the city, despite changes in ethnic composition of the population. Scientists concluded that criminal behavior can be transmitted from one generation to another, i.e. youth living in high crime zones adopt criminal patterns of behavior. Moreover, when representatives of other ethnic groups enter these areas, deviant patterns of behavior are passed on to their children from local youth.
In other words, young people become delinquents because they communicate and make friends with those adolescents whose criminal behavior patterns are already rooted. Edwin G. Sutherland, using the findings of Chicago sociologists, developed the theory of differential association, which is based on the ideas of symbolic interactionism and emphasizes the role of social interaction in the formation of people's views and actions. In a society that includes many subcultures, some social environments usually encourage illegal activities, while others do not. Individuals become delinquent by communicating with people who are carriers of criminal norms. Basically, deviant behavior is taught in primary groups (for example, in peer groups). Thus, according to E. Sutherland, individuals become delinquents to the extent that they belong to the environment, following deviant ideas, motivations and methods. The sooner the contacts of the individual with the criminogenic environment begin, the more often, more intensively and longer these contacts are, the higher the likelihood that such an individual will also become an offender. But more than one simple imitation is involved in this process. Deviant behavior is acquired on the basis of not only imitation, but also learning; a lot depends on what exactly and from whom individuals learn. So, according to E. Sutherland's theory, deviations are taught.
The theory of differential association confirms the correctness of the old saying: "Good guys come out of good companies, and bad ones come out of bad ones." When parents move to a new place to take their son away from his hooligan friends, they, without realizing it, use the principle of differential association. The same principle is followed by guards in the prison, trying to limit the communication of prisoners whom they oversee. According to the same principle, imprisonment can lead to clearly negative consequences if you place young offenders in the same cell with hardened criminals
The hypothesis put forward by E. Sutherland was confirmed and experimentally substantiated in the early 80s of the 20th century, when the American sociologists R. Lindem and C. Fillmore established a determinant connection between environmental adaptability and deviation. They experimentally, on the basis of studies conducted in two Canadian cities (Edmonton and Richmond), found that the better the adaptability of young people to the social environment, the less they have connections with peers - offenders and the less prone to deviation. On the contrary, those individuals who experience serious difficulties in adapting to the conditions of their social environment are more likely to have delinquent friends and are more prone to deviant forms of behavior, including crimes.
So, the theory of cultural transfer shows that socially reprehensible behavior can be caused by the same processes of socialization as socially approved. This theory makes it possible to understand why the number of cases of deviant behavior varies from group to group and from society to society. However, with its help it is impossible to explain some forms of deviant behavior, especially those offenders who could not borrow from others either methods or suitable definitions and views. Examples of this are malicious violators of financial agreements; manufacturers of fake checks; people accidentally breaking the law; people committing crimes "on the basis of love." Individuals may fall into the same situations, but perceive them differently, with different results.
Conflict theory
Although many new directions of a conflictological approach to the problem of deviation have appeared in recent decades, its origin goes back to the Marxist tradition. According to the orthodox Marxist theory, the ruling class of capitalists exploits and plunders the masses and is able to avoid retaliation for their crimes. Workers — victims of capitalist oppression — are forced to do things in their struggle for survival that the ruling class stigmatizes as criminal. Other types of deviant behavior — alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, sexual licentiousness and prostitution — are products of moral degradation based on the unprincipled pursuit of profit and oppression of the poor, women, and ethnic minorities. Psychological and emotional problems are explained by the alienation of people from the means of production, with the help of which they get their livelihood, i.e. from the very basis of its existence.
The modern Marxist approach to the problem of deviation was formulated by the American sociologist Richard Quinnie. According to Quinney, the US legal system reflects the interests and ideology of the ruling capitalist class. The law declares some acts illegal that offend the morals of those in power and pose a threat to their privileges and property: “The law is an instrument of the ruling class. Criminal law, in particular, is a tool created and used by the ruling class to maintain the existing order. In the United States, the state - and its legal system - exists to protect and maintain the capitalist interests of the ruling class. ” In order to "understand the nature of crime, it is necessary to understand the development of political economy in a capitalist society." But if the state serves the interests of the capitalist class, then the crime ultimately is a class-driven political act, embedded in the structure of the capitalist social system.
Capitalism, in an attempt to survive in internal conflicts, undermining its foundations, commits crimes of power. One of the contradictions of capitalism is that some of its laws must be violated to ensure the security of the existing system. First of all, it should be called crimes committed by corporations, from setting fixed prices to environmental pollution. In contrast to such crimes, many criminal misconduct by ordinary people or violation of property rights - pickpocketing, burglary, robbery, drug trafficking, etc. - “made out of the need to survive” in a capitalist social system
Crimes against the person - murders, insults by action, rape "are committed by people who have already fierce living conditions in a capitalist society." In general, according to Quinney, crime is inherent in the capitalist system. When a society creates social problems and cannot cope with them naturally, it invents and introduces a population control policy. Consequently, crime and criminal justice are an integral part of the larger problems of the historical development of capitalism.
According to scientists, in the theory of conflict, much is true. It is clear that the laws are compiled and enforced by individuals and social groups vested in power. As a result, the laws are not neutral, but serve the interests of a particular social group and express its basic values. However, according to critics of the theory of conflict, such intuitive guesses do not satisfy the requirements of scientific research. Therefore, many wordings of conflict managers require clarification (for example, it is not always clear which specific individuals or groups are implied when referring to the "ruling elite", "ruling classes" and "interests of those in power") and, in general, the theory of conflict needs to be checked.
Stigma theory
Proponents of the theory of stigmatization (from the Greek stigmo - stigma) took as a basis the main idea of \u200b\u200bconflict management, according to which individuals often can not get along with each other, as they diverge in their interests and outlook on life; at the same time, those in power have the opportunity to express their views and principles in the rules governing institutional life, and successfully hang negative labels on violators of these norms. Researchers are interested in the process, as a result of which individual individuals get the brand of deviants, begin to consider their behavior as deviant.
Adherents of the theory of stigma, Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson argue that, firstly, not a single offense in itself is criminal or non-criminal in essence. The “negativity” of an act is not due to its internal content, but to how others evaluate such an act and react to it. Deviation is always the subject of social definition.
Secondly, all people are characterized by deviant behavior associated with the violation of some norms. Proponents of this theory deny the popular idea that people can be divided into normal and having some kind of pathology. For example, some exceed the driving speed, commit thefts in stores, cheat on homework, hide income from the tax office, get drunk, participate in acts of vandalism in honor of the victory of their favorite football team, violate private property rights or roll out their friend in the car without demand. Proponents of the theory of stigmatization call such actions primary deviation, defining it as behavior that violates social norms, but usually escapes the attention of law enforcement agencies.
Thirdly, whether specific actions of people will be considered as deviant depends on what these people do and how other people react to it, i.e. this assessment depends on what rules society prefers to strictly follow, in what situations and with respect to which people. Not everyone who exceeded the ride speed, shoplifted, withheld income, violated private property rights, etc., are condemned. So, blacks can be condemned for actions that are permissible for whites; and women - for actions that are permissible for men; some may be convicted of the same acts that their friends do with impunity; individual behavior can be defined as deviant, although it does not violate any norms, simply because they have been indiscriminately accused of acts that they may never have committed (for example, a person looks “effeminate” and has a homosexual label on him) . Of particular importance is the social environment and the fact that it stigmatizes a specific individual as a violator of norms or not.
Fourth, labeling people has certain consequences for such people. It creates the conditions leading to secondary deviation - deviant behavior developed by the individual in response to sanctions from others. Adherents of the stigmatization theory argue that such a new deviation from the norm is triggered by hostile reactions from the legislature and law-abiding citizens. The individual receives a public definition, which is stereotyped, and declared a delinquent, "abnormal", rapist, drug addict, lounger, pervert or criminal. The label helps to consolidate the individual in the status of an outsider. Such a “main” status suppresses all other statuses of an individual in the formation of his social experience and, as a result, plays the role of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Violators of norms begin to perceive their status as a specific type of deviance and form their own life on the basis of this status.
Fifthly, those who have received the stigma of offenders usually find that law-abiding citizens condemn them and do not want to “deal with them”; friends and family may turn away from them; in some cases, they may be imprisoned or placed in a mental hospital. Universal condemnation and isolation will push stigmatized individuals toward deviant groups of people whose fate is similar to their own. Participating in a deviant subculture is a way to cope with a critical situation, find emotional support and an environment where you are accepted for who you are. In turn, joining such a deviant group strengthens the individual's perception of himself as an offender, contributes to the development of a deviant lifestyle and weakens ties with a law-abiding environment.
So, according to the theory of stigma, deviation is not determined by the behavior itself, but by the reaction of society to such behavior. When human behavior is seen as deviating from accepted norms, this gives an impetus to a number of social reactions. Others define, evaluate behavior and “hang” a certain label on it. The violator of norms begins to coordinate his further actions with such labels. In many cases, the individual develops a self-image that matches this label, as a result of which he is able to embark on the path of deviation.
Thus, the theory of stigmatization helps to understand why the same act can be considered deviant or not, depending on the situation and characteristics of the individual.
The disadvantages of the stigmatization theory include, firstly, the fact that it does not show which underlying factors caused the deviant behavior. Indeed, in many forms of deviation, it is living conditions that are responsible for labeling such people. So, it seems obvious that the vast majority of people placed in mental hospitals experience acute disorders associated with internal psychological or neuralgic pathologies. Their confusion and suffering cannot be explained solely due to the reaction of other people. Labels, however, play an important role in shaping the perception of former patients of mental hospitals among other members of society, as well as among former patients themselves.
Secondly, deviation cannot be understood in isolation from social norms. If the behavior is not deviant until it has received such an assessment, then how to classify such secret and unsolved crimes as embezzlement of state money, tax evasion or secret sexual violence?
Summarizing the main conclusions of the above theories of deviation, as well as the results of recent studies by sociologists and criminologists of various types of deviant behavior, we can identify the main causes of behavior that deviate from existing social norms in society.
1) the gap between the values \u200b\u200bof culture and the existing social structure in society;
2) the deepening contradiction between the culture prevailing in society and the various delinquent subcultures - the subculture of criminal groups, the subculture of groups serving prison sentences, etc .;
3) the wide gap in a transforming society of a transitional type, the gap between the social status of the individual and his social expectations, which can push individuals who have not found a worthy application, the professional, cultural level of individuals, to different types of deviant behavior;
4) the alienation of the individual from the value-normative system of regulation that exists in society, when officially recognized goals and values \u200b\u200bbecome inaccessible to those people who would like to achieve their legitimate, in any case, ways and means approved by society;
5) the loss of a person’s moral-value orientations when the division into moral and immoral, socially approved and socially unacceptable, good and evil, permitted and forbidden, disappears. In this case, a moral crisis sets in, and the person becomes a victim of permissiveness;
6) occurring in real life, especially when ideals and value guidelines collapse, the individual senses the senselessness of his life, leading to suicide;
7) anomie - violation of moral precepts, legal norms, laws, etc., transforming in crisis conditions of the development of society from individual to mass forms of behavior.
In every society there are people - outstanding and “simple” - who violate the norms existing in it - moral, legal, aesthetic. (deviant) behavior is social behavior that deviates in its motives, value orientations and results from those adopted in a given society, social layer, group of norms, values, ideals, i.e. normative standards. In other words, deviant behavior has deviant motivation. Examples of such behavior are lack of greeting at a meeting, hooliganism, innovative or revolutionary actions, etc. Deviant subjects are young ascetics, hedonists, revolutionaries, the mentally ill, saints, geniuses, etc.
Human actions are included in social interactions and systems (family, street, team, work, etc.) with general regulatory regulation. therefore deviant is the behavior that violates the stability of processes. Equilibrium (stability) of social interaction involves the integration of the actions of many, which is violated by the deviant behavior of one or more people. In a situation of deviant behavior, a person, as a rule, focuses on a situation that includes (1) other people and (2) general norms and expectations. Deviant behavior is caused by both dissatisfaction with others and the norms of relationships.
For example, consider the social connection of a student with parents while studying at a university. Parents expect him to study well, which is difficult to combine with the roles of an athlete, lover, employee, etc. The student begins to study unsatisfactorily, i.e. deviantly. There are several possibilities for overcoming this deviance. First of all, you can change your needs, which will affect the assessment of other people and the norms of regulation. So, a student can refuse motivation for excellent study and be satisfied with a satisfactory one. Further, you can change the subject of your needs and thereby ease the tension in social communication. For example, he can convince parents that his work mitigates the burden of family expenses on his studies at the university. And finally, a student can leave home, stop focusing on his parents and start focusing on his friends and girlfriends.
Deviation and - two opposite types of behavior, one of which is focused only on the actor, and the other is also on the society in which he lives. Between conformal and deviant motivation of people’s actions is indifferent. It is distinguished by the absence of both a conformal and alienated orientation toward objects and the situation, which in this case turn into neutral ones.
Deviation includes three elements: 1) a person with values \u200b\u200b(focus on others) and norms (moral, political, legal); 2) the evaluating person, group or organization; 3) human behavior. The criterion of deviation of behavior are moral and legal standards. They are different in different types of societies, therefore behavior that is deviant in one society will not be so in another.
For example, in a bourgeois society focused on personal success, actions such as the exploits of Pavka Korchagin or Alexander Matrosov are considered deviant. And in Soviet society, focused on the interests of the state, they were officially considered heroic. The contradiction between orientation toward an individual and orientation toward society is characteristic of the whole history of mankind; it found expression in two opposite types of personalities: collectivist and individualistic.
Depending on the relationship to people distinguishes two types of deviant behavior:
1. Personality cares on establishing and maintaining relationships with other personalities. She may seek to prevail over another, put him in a subordinate position. This is often due to deviant motivation and behavior. So often do members of criminal groups.
2. Personality inferior to others, obeys them. In these cases, she can take the path of deviant motivation and behavior, especially in relation to an active and strong personality. Thus, in the Bolshevik leadership, passive adaptation to Stalin and the Stalinist hierarchy caused the deviance of many people.
Classification of deviant behavior according to attitude to standards (needs, values, norms) in society was developed by Merton (in 1910), who distinguished the following types of deviant behavior:
Total conformism (normality) behavior, the adoption of cultural norms. Such is the behavior of a person who has received a good education, has a prestigious job, moves up the career ladder, etc. Such behavior realizes both one's own needs and is focused on others (the norms are observed). Strictly speaking, this is just the only type of non-deviant behavior in relation to which different types of deviation are distinguished.
Innovative behavior, on the one hand, means agreement with the goals of one’s life that are approved in a given society (culture), but, on the other hand, does not follow socially approved means of achieving them. Innovators use new, non-standard, deviant means of achieving socially useful goals. In post-Soviet Russia, many innovators engaged in the privatization of state property, the construction of financial "pyramids", extortion ("racketeering"), etc.
Ritualism brings to absurdity the principles and norms of this society. Ritualists are a bureaucrat demanding compliance with all formalities from the petitioner, and strikers working "according to the rules", which leads to a halt in the work itself.
Retreatism (escape from reality) is a type of deviant behavior in which a person rejects the goals approved by society and the ways (means, time, costs) of their achievement. Such deviant behavior is inherent in homeless people, drunkards, drug addicts, monks, etc.
Revolution (rebellion) is a form of deviant behavior that not only denies obsolete goals and behaviors, but also replaces them with new ones. The Russian Bolsheviks, headed by Lenin, rejected the goals and means of a bourgeois-democratic society that took shape in Russia in 1917 after the overthrow of the autocracy, and restored the latter on a new ideological, political, economic and social basis.
It can be seen from the foregoing that conformism and deviation are two opposing behaviors that mutually assume and exclude one another. From the description of the types of deviation it follows that it is not an exclusively negative type of human behavior, as it might seem at first glance. Yuri Detochki n in the film "Watch Out for the Car" for noble purposes - the fight against speculators and "shadow workers" - stole cars from them, and transferred proceeds from the sale to orphanages.
The formation of deviant behavior goes through several stages: 1) the emergence of a cultural norm (for example, orientation toward enrichment in post-Soviet Russia); 2) the emergence of a social layer that follows this norm (for example, entrepreneurs); 3) transformation into deviant forms of activity that do not lead to enrichment (for example, in our case, the miserable life of many workers and employees); 4) recognition of a person (and social layer) as deviant by others; 5) revaluation of this cultural norm, recognition of its relativity.
The concept, theory and form of deviant behavior
In the broad sense, (deviating) behavior is understood as any actions or actions of people that do not correspond to written and unwritten norms, both positive and negative. These can be culturally approved deviations, for example, super genius, heroism, self-sacrifice, altruism, workaholism, etc., as well as culturally disapproved deviations, from stowaways, ending with murders and other serious crimes.
In a narrow sense, deviant behavior means such deviations from the norm (from the law) that entail criminal punishment. The set of illegal acts received in sociology the name - delinquent behavior. Deviant behavior is relative, since it relates to moral standards, the values \u200b\u200bof this group, delinquent behavior is absolute, since it violates the absolute norm expressed in the legal laws of society.
It is customary to distinguish between primary and secondary deviation. Primary call it deviation, which generally corresponds to the norms accepted in society and is so insignificant and tolerant that the individual’s environment does not qualify him as a deviant, and he does not consider himself to be such. Under secondary deviation they understand behavior that deviates significantly from the existing norms in the group and therefore is defined as deviant, and the person is already identified as deviant.
What are the causes of deviation?
More than a hundred years ago, biological and psychological interpretations of the causes of deviation were common. So, an Italian doctor C. Lombroso (1835-1909) proposed phrenological theory of deviationtrying to identify a direct relationship between the criminal behavior of a person and his biological characteristics. In his opinion, the “criminal type” is the result of degradation in the earlier stages of human evolution. In 1940, a follower of Lombroso, an American psychologist and doctor W.H. Sheldon emphasized the importance of body structure. In his typology - endomorph (a person of moderate fullness with a soft and somewhat rounded body) is sociable, knows how to get along with people; mesomorph (whose body is distinguished by strength and harmony) is prone to anxiety, he is active and not too sensitive: ectomorph different delicacy and fragility of the body, prone to introspection, endowed with increased sensitivity and nervousness. Based on the studies, Sheldon concludes that they are most prone to deviation of mesomorphs.
Psychological Theory of Deviation develops 3. Freud. He explains it by the insufficiently developed "Super-Ego" and substantiates it with "mental defects", "degenerativeness", "dementia" and "psychopathy", as if the programmed deviations.
The basics sociological theory of deviation were laid E. Durkheim. In his opinion, the main cause of deviation is anomy - a state of disorganization of society, when values, norms, and social ties are absent, weakening, or contradict each other. All this violates the stability of society, disorganizes people, and as a result, various types of deviations appear.
Further development theory of anomie gets from R. Merton. He considered the gap between cultural goals of society and socially approved means of achieving them. Based on a dilemma “The end is the means” R. Merton identified five types of behavior, four of which are related to deviation (Appendix, Scheme 18):
- conformity - type of behavior, assuming compliance with the goals and means of their implementation accepted in society;
- innovation - the individual shares the socially approved goals of society, but chooses unapproved means of achieving them, and the means do not have to be criminal, they are simply unusual at a given time for a given society;
- ritualism - involves the denial of the goals proclaimed by society, with conditional agreement with the approved means of achieving them (for example, in the Brezhnev era, when no one believed in communism, but the rituals associated with it, by the way, were still preserved in society);
- retricism - rejection of the goals and means accepted by society as “escape from reality”, a kind of social nihilism (tramps, drug addicts, alcoholics living in society, but not belonging to it);
- rebellion, rebellion - denial of old socially accepted goals and means, while replacing them with new ones (revolutionaries, radical extremists).
When using this typology, it must be remembered that people living in a society can never be completely conformal to a normative culture or be complete innovators.
In each person, to one degree or another, all of these types are present, but one prevails.
We note one more interesting phenomenon of manifestation of deviant (deviant) behavior - norm-justification. These are cultural patterns with which people justify the implementation of any forbidden desire and action without openly challenging existing moral standards.
Among other theories that explain the origin of deviations, we can distinguish:
- imitation theory French sociologist G. Tarde. In his opinion, people become criminals because they get into a criminal environment from an early age, and it is precisely for them that they are a reference group;
- the theory of differential association E. Sutherland. Developing the thought of G. Tarde, he emphasized that much in the deviant behavior of an individual depends on his environment, i.e. from who exactly teaches him and what. Therefore, the longer an individual stays in a criminal environment, the greater the likelihood that in the future he will become a deviant. These two theories are combined under the general name "The theory of the cultural transfer of deviation";
- stigma theory (from Grech, stigma- brand), or labeling sponsored by American sociologists E. Lemert, G. Becker. According to this theory, deviation is determined not so much by the behavior or content of specific actions as by a group assessment, “hanging” on a person a label of a “violator” of established norms and applying sanctions against him.
These are the main research approaches to studying the causes of the emergence and spread of deviant behavior.
Types and forms of deviation
The main forms of deviant behavior in a broad sense include:
- heavy drinking and;
- drug use;
- crime;
- suicide;
- prostitution.
According to experts, the existence in modern society of some people of deviant behavior is inevitable, it is simply impossible to eradicate. At the same time, they note that deviations naturally occur in societies undergoing a transformation, where amid increased crisis phenomena, people are dissatisfied with their position, which causes a feeling of social dissatisfaction, lack of demand and estrangement from society. This feeling deprivation in some cases, it can lead to the appearance of pessimistic sentiments among the population and its demoralization (loss of spirit, confusion).
According to sociologists, today 85% of the country's population is characterized to one degree or another by demoralization. The typical reactions to anomie are indifference to the means of achieving the goal, corruption, cynicism, extremism. The mechanism of deviant behavior is revealed through the analysis of the interaction of normative regulation, personality traits, its relationship to the norm and the real life conflict situation.
41. Concepts of deviant behavior.
Since deviation is a process caused by social factors, it is important to establish the social determination of deviant behavior. There are a number of theories that explain deviation for various reasons - physiological, psychological, sociocultural, socio-economic, etc.
Biological theories (theories of physical types)
Some of the first attempts to explain the deviant behavior (in the late XIX - early XX centuries) were primarily biological in nature. The reason for the tendency to various deviations was seen in the innate properties of man. That is, the basic premise of all theories of physical types is that certain physical personality traits predetermine various deviations from the norms that she performs. The idea itself is as old as human history. Expressions have long been rooted in societies: “the face of the killer”, “vicious facial features”, etc. Among the followers of theories of physical types can be called C. Lombroso, W. Sheldon.
So, created by the Italian psychiatrist and forensic scientist C. Lombroso in the 1870s. the theory explained the causes of deviation, mainly crime, with certain anatomical signs. Having studied the appearance and physical characteristics of the criminals, C. Lombroso concluded that the “criminal personality type” is characterized by a protruding lower jaw and a decreased sensitivity to pain, which are signs of degradation to earlier stages of human evolution. Lombroso acknowledged that social conditions can influence the development of criminal behavior, but considered most criminals to be degenerate and mentally retarded. Precisely because they allegedly have not reached full development as human beings, their actions usually do not correspond to the provisions of human society.
This direction was developed in the 40s. XX century in the concept of the American psychologist and physician W. Sheldon, according to which people with a certain physical constitution tend to make social deviations, condemned by society. U.S. Sheldon identified three main physical types of people: endomorphic (roundness of forms, overweight), mesomorphic type (muscularity, athleticism), ectomorphic type (slimness, thinness) and argued that the most prone to deviation are mesomorphs - individuals characterized by physical strength , increased activity and decreased sensitivity.
Practice has proved the failure of theories of physical types. Everyone knows of numerous cases when individuals with the face of cherubs committed the most serious crimes, and an individual with gross, "criminal" facial features could not offend a fly.
Psychological theories
Like biological theories, psychological theories seek an explanation for behavioral abnormalities in the individual, not in society. The basis of psychological (psychoanalytic) theories of deviant behavior is the study of conflicts occurring inside the personality consciousness. According to the theory of 3. Freud, each person has a region of the unconscious under a layer of active consciousness. The unconscious is our psychic energy, in which all the natural, primitive, which knows no boundaries, knows no pity. The unconscious is the biological essence of a person who has not experienced the influence of culture. A person is able to defend himself from his own natural "lawless" state by forming his own "I", as well as the so-called "Super-I", determined exclusively by the culture of society. The human "I" and "Super-I" constantly restrain forces in the unconscious, constantly limit our instincts and base passions. However, a state may arise when internal conflicts between the “I” and the unconscious, as well as between the “Super-I” and the unconscious, destroy the defense and our internal culturally unaware content breaks out. In this case, a deviation from the cultural norms developed by social the environment of the individual.
Obviously, in this point of view there is some truth, however, the identification and diagnosis of possible violations in the structure of the human "I" and possible social deviations are extremely difficult due to the secrecy of the object of study. In addition, although each person has a conflict between biological needs and cultural prohibitions, not every person becomes a deviant.
Some scientists in this area have suggested that a small number of people develop an immoral or psychopathic personality type. Such personalities are self-enclosed, emotionless personalities, acting impulsively and rarely feeling guilty. However, almost all studies examining people with similar characteristics were conducted among prisoners in prisons, which inevitably affected the image of such individuals in a negative light.
Thus, by analyzing any one psychological trait, conflict or complex, the essence of any kind of deviant behavior cannot be explained. Probably, the deviation arises as a result of the combined action of many factors (psychological, cultural, social).
Sociological Theories of Deviant Behavior
Sociological explanations of the causes of deviation originate from the works of one of the classics of sociology E. Durkheim (1858-1917), who formulated the concept of anomy, i.e. mass deviation from existing norms in society as the main cause of deviation.
Theory of Anomie
The presence in everyday practice of a large number of conflicting norms, the uncertainty in connection with this of a possible choice of a line of behavior, can lead to a phenomenon called by E. Durkheim an anomie (a state of lack of norms).
Anomie is a social condition characterized by the decomposition of the value system due to the crisis of the whole society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the declared goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority.
At the same time, Durkheim did not at all consider that modern society has no norms; on the contrary, society has many systems of norms in which it is difficult for an individual to navigate. Anomie, therefore, according to Durkheim, is a condition in which a person does not have a strong sense of belonging, no reliability and stability in choosing the line of normative behavior.
People find that it is difficult for them to coordinate their behavior in accordance with norms that are currently becoming weak, obscure or contradictory. During periods of rapid social change, people cease to understand what society expects of them, and experience difficulties in harmonizing their actions with current standards. Old norms no longer seem suitable, and new, nascent norms are still too vague and poorly formulated to serve as effective and meaningful guidelines in behavior. In such periods, a sharp increase in the number of cases of deviation can be expected.
According to E. Durkheim, deviant behavior is necessary for society, since it performs two important functions in it. First, deviation from the norms performs an adaptive function: introducing new ideas and problems into society, deviance acts as a factor in updating and implementing changes. Secondly, deviance helps to maintain the border between “good” and “bad” behavior in society: deviant behavior can cause such a collective reaction that will strengthen group solidarity and clarify social norms.
E. Durkheim's views on deviant behavior contributed to shifting the attention of scientists from explanations based on the individual to social factors.
The idea of \u200b\u200bsociety anomy was further developed in the works of American sociologists T. Parsons and R. Merton. According to T. Parsons, anomie is "a condition in which a significant number of individuals are in a position characterized by a serious lack of integration with stable institutions, which is essential for their own personal stability and the successful functioning of social systems. The usual reaction to this condition is unreliability of behavior." According to this approach, anomie increases due to the disorder and conflicts of moral standards in society. People begin to be limited by the norms of individual groups and as a result do not have a stable perspective, according to which they need to make decisions in everyday life. In this understanding, anomie looks like the result of freedom of choice without a stable perception of reality and in the absence of stable relationships with the family, state and other basic institutions of society. Obviously, the state of anomie most often leads to deviant behavior.
R. Merton modified the concept of anomie, referring it to tension arising in the behavior of a person who finds himself in a situation where generally accepted norms come into conflict with social reality. R. Merton believed that anomie does not arise from freedom of choice, but from the impossibility of many individuals to follow the norms that they fully accept. He sees the main reason for the difficulties in the disharmony between cultural goals and legal (institutional means) with which these goals are realized. For example, while society supports the efforts of its members to strive to increase well-being and a high social position, the legal means of society members to achieve such a state is very limited. Inequality existing in society serves as the impetus that forces a member of the society to seek illegal means and goals, i.e. deviate from generally accepted cultural patterns. Indeed, when a person cannot achieve prosperity with the help of legal socially approved means (traditional methods such as getting a good education and getting a job in a prosperous company are officially recognized as the latter), he can resort to illegal means that are not approved by society (such for example, drug trafficking, racketeering, fraud, forgery or theft) Thus, deviations are largely dependent on the cultural goals and institutional means that are adhered to and which one or another person uses.
However, the “lack of opportunities” and the desire for material well-being is not enough to create pressure towards deviation. Only when society proclaims common symbols of success for the entire population, while restricting the access of many people to the recognized means of achieving such symbols, are conditions created for antisocial behavior. Merton identified five responses to the goal dilemma - means, four of which are deviant adaptations to anomi conditions.
The first of them is conformism, i.e. passive adaptation to the existing order of things. Conformism occurs when members of a society accept as cultural goals the achievement of material success, as well as the means approved by society for their achievement. Most members of society who do not want to deviate from generally accepted norms of behavior are prone to conformal behavior, therefore such behavior is the backbone of a stable society.
Innovation occurs when individuals adhere to culturally defined goals, but reject socially accepted means of achieving them. Such people are capable of selling drugs, forging checks, cheating, appropriating other people's property, stealing, participating in burglary and robbery, or engaging in prostitution, extortion, and blackmail. Ritualism takes place when members of a society reject cultural goals or belittle their significance, but at the same time mechanically use publicly approved means to achieve such goals. For example, the goals of an organization are no longer important to many zealous bureaucrats, but they cultivate funds as an end in themselves, fetishizing rules and paperwork.
Retreatism consists in the fact that individuals reject both cultural goals and recognized means of achieving them, offering nothing in return. For example, alcoholics, drug addicts, tramps and deserted people become outcasts in their own society; "They live in society, but do not belong to it."
Rebellion consists in the fact that rebels reject the cultural goals of society and the means to achieve them, but at the same time replace them with new norms. Such individuals break with their social environment and join new groups with new ideologies, for example, radical social movements. Such a goal setting is characteristic of some youth subcultures, and revolutionary movements, it can be realized in political crimes.
The theory of anomie R. Merton focuses on those processes of establishing recognized cultural goals and means by which society initiates deviant behavior. In particular, with the help of this theory it is possible to reveal the essence and causes of crimes related to money committed on the basis of profit and greed, crimes in the environment of “white-collar workers” and corporate crimes, crimes of representatives of power structures and those who seek power.
However, critics of Merton’s theory point out that, firstly, he overlooks the processes of social interaction through which people form their ideas about the world and plan their actions. Merton describes violators of social norms as individualists - people who are mostly self-sufficient, who develop solutions for themselves to overcome stressful situations without taking into account the actions of others. Secondly, not every deviant behavior can be explained by the gap between goals and means. Merton paints a picture of American society, in which, in his opinion, there is a consensus between basic values \u200b\u200band goals. But his critics argue that pluralism is inherent in American society with many subcultures. The life of American society gives many examples when deviant behavior of an individual can be explained by the unacceptability of certain norms that are prevailing in most groups of the population. So, the Indians violate the laws of hunting and fishing; members of some ethnic minorities enter into common marriages; people from southern rural areas are fond of cockfights; some populations make moonshine; teenagers use drugs. Additionally.
Explanations from the concept of subculture
In the theory of anomy, developed by R. Merton, in the determination of deviant behavior, serious attention is paid to cultural values, deviation from which can lead to deviant actions. This idea found more concrete embodiment in the theory of delinquent (from the English delinquency - offense) subcultures developed by the American sociologist A. Cohen. This theory proceeds from the fact that anomie leads large enough groups of individuals, primarily young, not settled in life, to search for new forms of behavior that do not correspond to the prevailing values \u200b\u200bof the dominant culture in society. This is how subcultures arise in which a deviation from previous social norms is not a deviation, but behavior that is fully consistent with the new values \u200b\u200bproclaimed by the new culture. In the new subcultures, everything that is denied and condemned by the dominant culture - sexual licentiousness, aggressiveness, petty theft, vandalism, etc. - is recognized as normal means of achieving self-expression and respect from other, at least members of this social group, for example hippies. Thus, in delinquent subcultures, those means of achieving goals that are rejected by the dominant culture as deviant, become specific norms, norms of justification of vandalism, aggressiveness, sexual illegibility, etc.
Theory of Cultural Transfer
A number of sociologists emphasize the similarity between the method of developing deviant behavior and the method of developing any other style of behavior. One of the first to this conclusion was the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde, who at the end of the XIX century. formulated a theory of imitation to explain deviant behavior. Working as a district magistrate and director of the criminal statistics department, he became convinced that repetition plays a significant role in human behavior. G. Tarde argued that criminals, like "decent" people, imitate the behavior of those individuals with whom they met in life, whom they knew or heard about. But unlike law-abiding citizens, they imitate the behavior of criminals.
In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago, trying to explain the high crime rate in several districts of Chicago, conducted a series of studies that found that crime levels remained stable for many years in several quarters of the city, despite changes in ethnic composition of the population. Scientists concluded that criminal behavior can be transmitted from one generation to another, i.e. youth living in high crime zones adopt criminal patterns of behavior. Moreover, when representatives of other ethnic groups enter these areas, deviant patterns of behavior are passed on to their children from local youth.
In other words, young people become delinquents because they communicate and make friends with those adolescents whose criminal behavior patterns are already rooted. Edwin G. Sutherland, using the findings of Chicago sociologists, developed the theory of differential association, which is based on the ideas of symbolic interactionism and emphasizes the role of social interaction in the formation of people's views and actions. In a society that includes many subcultures, some social environments usually encourage illegal activities, while others do not. Individuals become delinquent by communicating with people who are carriers of criminal norms. Basically, deviant behavior is taught in primary groups (for example, in peer groups). Thus, according to E. Sutherland, individuals become delinquents to the extent that they belong to the environment, following deviant ideas, motivations and methods. The sooner the contacts of the individual with the criminogenic environment begin, the more often, more intensively and longer these contacts are, the higher the likelihood that such an individual will also become an offender. But more than one simple imitation is involved in this process. Deviant behavior is acquired on the basis of not only imitation, but also learning; a lot depends on what exactly and from whom individuals learn. So, according to E. Sutherland's theory, deviations are taught.
The theory of differential association confirms the correctness of the old saying: "Good guys come out of good companies, and bad ones come out of bad ones." When parents move to a new place to take their son away from his hooligan friends, they, without realizing it, use the principle of differential association. The same principle is followed by guards in the prison, trying to limit the communication of prisoners whom they oversee. According to the same principle, imprisonment can lead to clearly negative consequences if you place young offenders in the same cell with hardened criminals
The hypothesis put forward by E. Sutherland was confirmed and experimentally substantiated in the early 80s of the 20th century, when the American sociologists R. Lindem and C. Fillmore established a determinant connection between environmental adaptability and deviation. They experimentally, on the basis of studies conducted in two Canadian cities (Edmonton and Richmond), found that the better the adaptability of young people to the social environment, the less they have connections with peers - offenders and the less prone to deviation. On the contrary, those individuals who experience serious difficulties in adapting to the conditions of their social environment are more likely to have delinquent friends and are more prone to deviant forms of behavior, including crimes.
So, the theory of cultural transfer shows that socially reprehensible behavior can be caused by the same processes of socialization as socially approved. This theory makes it possible to understand why the number of cases of deviant behavior varies from group to group and from society to society. However, with its help it is impossible to explain some forms of deviant behavior, especially those offenders who could not borrow from others either methods or suitable definitions and views. Examples of this are malicious violators of financial agreements; manufacturers of fake checks; people accidentally breaking the law; people committing crimes "on the basis of love." Individuals may fall into the same situations, but perceive them differently, with different results.
Conflict theory
Although many new directions of a conflictological approach to the problem of deviation have appeared in recent decades, its origin goes back to the Marxist tradition. According to the orthodox Marxist theory, the ruling class of capitalists exploits and plunders the masses and is able to avoid retaliation for their crimes. Workers — victims of capitalist oppression — are forced to do things in their struggle for survival that the ruling class stigmatizes as criminal. Other types of deviant behavior — alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, sexual licentiousness and prostitution — are products of moral degradation based on the unprincipled pursuit of profit and oppression of the poor, women, and ethnic minorities. Psychological and emotional problems are explained by the alienation of people from the means of production, with the help of which they get their livelihood, i.e. from the very basis of its existence.
The modern Marxist approach to the problem of deviation was formulated by the American sociologist Richard Quinnie. According to Quinney, the US legal system reflects the interests and ideology of the ruling capitalist class. The law declares some acts illegal that offend the morals of those in power and pose a threat to their privileges and property: “The law is an instrument of the ruling class. Criminal law, in particular, is a tool created and used by the ruling class to maintain the existing order. In the United States, the state - and its legal system - exists to protect and maintain the capitalist interests of the ruling class. ” In order to "understand the nature of crime, it is necessary to understand the development of political economy in a capitalist society." But if the state serves the interests of the capitalist class, then the crime ultimately is a class-driven political act, embedded in the structure of the capitalist social system.
Capitalism, in an attempt to survive in internal conflicts, undermining its foundations, commits crimes of power. One of the contradictions of capitalism is that some of its laws must be violated to ensure the security of the existing system. First of all, it should be called crimes committed by corporations, from setting fixed prices to environmental pollution. In contrast to such crimes, many criminal misconduct by ordinary people or violation of property rights - pickpocketing, burglary, robbery, drug trafficking, etc. - “made out of the need to survive” in a capitalist social system
Crimes against the person - murders, insults by action, rape "are committed by people who have already fierce living conditions in a capitalist society." In general, according to Quinney, crime is inherent in the capitalist system. When a society creates social problems and cannot cope with them naturally, it invents and introduces a population control policy. Consequently, crime and criminal justice are an integral part of the larger problems of the historical development of capitalism.
According to scientists, in the theory of conflict, much is true. It is clear that the laws are compiled and enforced by individuals and social groups vested in power. As a result, the laws are not neutral, but serve the interests of a particular social group and express its basic values. However, according to critics of the theory of conflict, such intuitive guesses do not satisfy the requirements of scientific research. Therefore, many wordings of conflict managers require clarification (for example, it is not always clear which specific individuals or groups are implied when referring to the "ruling elite", "ruling classes" and "interests of those in power") and, in general, the theory of conflict needs to be checked.
Stigma theory
Proponents of the theory of stigmatization (from the Greek stigmo - stigma) took as a basis the main idea of \u200b\u200bconflict management, according to which individuals often can not get along with each other, as they diverge in their interests and outlook on life; at the same time, those in power have the opportunity to express their views and principles in the rules governing institutional life, and successfully hang negative labels on violators of these norms. Researchers are interested in the process, as a result of which individual individuals get the brand of deviants, begin to consider their behavior as deviant.
Adherents of the theory of stigma, Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson argue that, firstly, not a single offense in itself is criminal or non-criminal in essence. The “negativity” of an act is not due to its internal content, but to how others evaluate such an act and react to it. Deviation is always the subject of social definition.
Secondly, all people are characterized by deviant behavior associated with the violation of some norms. Proponents of this theory deny the popular idea that people can be divided into normal and having some kind of pathology. For example, some exceed the driving speed, commit thefts in stores, cheat on homework, hide income from the tax office, get drunk, participate in acts of vandalism in honor of the victory of their favorite football team, violate private property rights or roll out their friend in the car without demand. Proponents of the theory of stigmatization call such actions primary deviation, defining it as behavior that violates social norms, but usually escapes the attention of law enforcement agencies.
Thirdly, whether specific actions of people will be considered as deviant depends on what these people do and how other people react to it, i.e. this assessment depends on what rules society prefers to strictly follow, in what situations and with respect to which people. Not everyone who exceeded the ride speed, shoplifted, withheld income, violated private property rights, etc., are condemned. So, blacks can be condemned for actions that are permissible for whites; and women - for actions that are permissible for men; some may be convicted of the same acts that their friends do with impunity; individual behavior can be defined as deviant, although it does not violate any norms, simply because they have been indiscriminately accused of acts that they may never have committed (for example, a person looks “effeminate” and has a homosexual label on him) . Of particular importance is the social environment and the fact that it stigmatizes a specific individual as a violator of norms or not.
Fourth, labeling people has certain consequences for such people. It creates the conditions leading to secondary deviation - deviant behavior developed by the individual in response to sanctions from others. Adherents of the stigmatization theory argue that such a new deviation from the norm is triggered by hostile reactions from the legislature and law-abiding citizens. The individual receives a public definition, which is stereotyped, and declared a delinquent, "abnormal", rapist, drug addict, lounger, pervert or criminal. The label helps to consolidate the individual in the status of an outsider. Such a “main” status suppresses all other statuses of an individual in the formation of his social experience and, as a result, plays the role of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Violators of norms begin to perceive their status as a specific type of deviance and form their own life on the basis of this status.
Fifthly, those who have received the stigma of offenders usually find that law-abiding citizens condemn them and do not want to “deal with them”; friends and family may turn away from them; in some cases, they may be imprisoned or placed in a mental hospital. Universal condemnation and isolation will push stigmatized individuals toward deviant groups of people whose fate is similar to their own. Participating in a deviant subculture is a way to cope with a critical situation, find emotional support and an environment where you are accepted for who you are. In turn, joining such a deviant group strengthens the individual's perception of himself as an offender, contributes to the development of a deviant lifestyle and weakens ties with a law-abiding environment.
So, according to the theory of stigma, deviation is not determined by the behavior itself, but by the reaction of society to such behavior. When human behavior is seen as deviating from accepted norms, this gives an impetus to a number of social reactions. Others define, evaluate behavior and “hang” a certain label on it. The violator of norms begins to coordinate his further actions with such labels. In many cases, the individual develops a self-image that matches this label, as a result of which he is able to embark on the path of deviation.
Thus, the theory of stigmatization helps to understand why the same act can be considered deviant or not, depending on the situation and characteristics of the individual.
The disadvantages of the stigmatization theory include, firstly, the fact that it does not show which underlying factors caused the deviant behavior. Indeed, in many forms of deviation, it is living conditions that are responsible for labeling such people. So, it seems obvious that the vast majority of people placed in mental hospitals experience acute disorders associated with internal psychological or neuralgic pathologies. Their confusion and suffering cannot be explained solely due to the reaction of other people. Labels, however, play an important role in shaping the perception of former patients of mental hospitals among other members of society, as well as among former patients themselves.
Secondly, deviation cannot be understood in isolation from social norms. If the behavior is not deviant until it has received such an assessment, then how to classify such secret and unsolved crimes as embezzlement of state money, tax evasion or secret sexual violence?
Summarizing the main conclusions of the above theories of deviation, as well as the results of recent studies by sociologists and criminologists of various types of deviant behavior, we can identify the main causes of behavior that deviate from existing social norms in society.
1) the gap between the values \u200b\u200bof culture and the existing social structure in society;
2) the deepening contradiction between the culture prevailing in society and the various delinquent subcultures - the subculture of criminal groups, the subculture of groups serving prison sentences, etc .;
3) the wide gap in a transforming society of a transitional type, the gap between the social status of the individual and his social expectations, which can push individuals who have not found a worthy application, the professional, cultural level of individuals, to different types of deviant behavior;
4) the alienation of the individual from the value-normative system of regulation that exists in society, when officially recognized goals and values \u200b\u200bbecome inaccessible to those people who would like to achieve their legitimate, in any case, ways and means approved by society;
5) the loss of a person’s moral-value orientations when the division into moral and immoral, socially approved and socially unacceptable, good and evil, permitted and forbidden, disappears. In this case, a moral crisis sets in, and the person becomes a victim of permissiveness;
6) occurring in real life, especially when ideals and value guidelines collapse, the individual senses the senselessness of his life, leading to suicide;
7) anomie - violation of moral precepts, legal norms, laws, etc., transforming in crisis conditions of the development of society from individual to mass forms of behavior.