Two contrasting views of the general nature of deviant behavior have been discussed in readings for the first part of this
The post Contrasting views of the general nature of deviant behavior first appeared on COMPLIANT PAPERS.
Two contrasting views of the general nature of deviant behavior have been discussed in readings for the first part of this course. On the one hand, early sociologists and many contemporary researchers in psychology, psychiatry, and criminology have viewed deviant behavior as a product of individual pathology. In this view, the causes of deviant behavior are typically attributed to psychological disorders or dysfunctions, genetic defects, or other abnormal traits or conditions of individuals.
On the other hand, most sociologists have followed the view of Merton and Sutherland that deviant behavior is created through normal social processes. For instance, this view is reflected in the idea that criminal behavior is a “rational” means to obtain material success for members of the lower class (Merton) or that deviant behavior is learned through normal processes of social interaction in primary groups (Sutherland). A central implication of this position is that virtually any person could become deviant under the “right” social circumstances.
Where do you stand? Do you see most forms of deviant behavior as (a) manifestations of individual pathology or as (b) normal responses to social conditions?
Indicate which view makes the most sense to you and discuss the reasons and evidence that lead you to prefer that position. Feel free to refer to readings or other literature, but avoid lengthy quotes—state your argument in your own words.
The post Contrasting views of the general nature of deviant behavior first appeared on COMPLIANT PAPERS.
