Deviation in society serves only dysfunction. Social deviation. Merton's Anomie Theory

Introduction……………………………………………………………………………….…………3

1. Nature and social characteristics of deviation.................................................... ......................4

1.1 Social control………………………………………………………………...…………………..5

2. Social effects of deviation…………………………………………..………….………7

2.1 Sociological theories of deviation and the study of deviant behavior…………......8

Conclusion…………………………………………………………………………………...12

Bibliography…………………………………………………………………....13

Introduction

People's lives flow in communication with each other, so they need to unite and coordinate their actions. A person can satisfy any need - for food, clothing, work, education, friendship, fame - only through other people by interacting with them, occupying a certain position in complex and organized groups and institutions: in the family, school, enterprise team, political parties, sports team. Of course, the world exists solely because the actions of a huge number of people are coordinated, but for this they need to understand who is supposed to do what and when. The first condition for organized social life is the existence of certain agreements between people, which take the form of social expectations expressed in norms. Without norms that determine behavior, interactions in a social group would be impossible. We would be deprived of guidelines that would tell us what is permissible and what goes beyond what is permissible. Interaction between people would become a real problem because we wouldn't know what to expect from other people. It is customary to associate reward and punishment with norms. In modern society, the state plays the role of a mechanism for implementing a large number of norms - laws. Laws are far from neutral: they tend to reflect the interests of a particular group and embody its core values. Let us consider in detail the problem of deviation (deviation from the norm).

1. Nature and social characteristics of deviation

In all societies, human behavior sometimes goes beyond what is acceptable by norms. Norms only indicate what a person should do and what he should not do; but they are not a reflection of actual behavior. The actual actions of some people often go beyond what others consider acceptable behavior. Social life is characterized not only by conformism, but also by deviation. Deviation is a deviation from the norm, considered by most members of society as reprehensible and unacceptable. Typically, we evaluate behavior as deviant depending on whether it receives a negative evaluation and causes a hostile reaction.

Deviation cannot be said to be inherent in certain forms of behavior; rather, it is an evaluative definition imposed on specific behavior patterns by various social groups. In everyday life, a person makes judgments about the desirability (or undesirability) of a particular style of behavior. Society translates such judgments into positive (or negative) consequences for those who follow (or do not follow) such behavior patterns. In this sense, we can say that deviation is what society considers to be a deviation.

Relativity of deviation. Comparison of different cultures shows that the same actions are approved in some societies and unacceptable in others. The definition of behavior as deviant depends on the time, place and group of people.

If ordinary people break into crypts, they are branded as desecrators of ashes, but if archaeologists do it, then they are spoken of with approval as scientists pushing the boundaries of knowledge. However, in both cases, strangers invade the burial sites and remove some objects from there. Supporters of the Baha'i faith in Western countries have complete freedom of religion, but in Iran, the regime of Ayatollah Khomeini imprisoned and executed thousands of Baha'is without trial. Baha'is advocate gender equality, universal education, the elimination of intergroup prejudice and a one-world government, but Muslim clergy in Iran consider these views heretical. Also, the sociable behavior, modern clothing and “open” face of a European woman are unacceptable in many traditional Muslim countries.

These examples indicate that deviations cannot be inherent in human behavior. Society decides whether or not to consider some behavior deviant from the norm. This does not mean that such phenomena as murder, theft, sexual perversion, mental deviations, alcoholism, gambling and child abuse, etc., could not have occurred if social definitions had not been given to them. Rather, what matters is how people define behavior and in what specific ways they respond to it.

Mechanism for securing definitions. People have different definitions of what should and should not be considered deviant. The question therefore arises as to which individuals and social groups will be able to give their definitions prevailing meaning.

For example, in 1776, the British branded George Washington a traitor; 20 years later he became the President of the United States of America and “the founding father of his country.” In the 1940s British authorities in Palestine called Menachem Begin a Zionist terrorist (he led an underground military organization that very skillfully forced the British government to abandon its mandate for Palestine). Thirty years later, Begin led the state of Israel and enjoyed great popularity. But if America and Israel had lost their wars of independence, it is likely that both Washington and Begin would have been executed or at least given long prison sentences.

Who and what is defined as disruptive and deviant depends largely on who made the definition and who has the power to enforce it. In recent years, styles of behavior such as homosexuality, alcoholism, and drug use, traditionally considered deviant in Russia, have been subject to revision. There is a growing belief that such behavior styles are medical problems, i.e. are considered diseases along with physical diseases such as ulcers, diabetes, hypertension. People suffering from these disorders (alcoholics, drug addicts) are placed in medical institutions, where they are called patients and where they receive treatment as prescribed by doctors.

Some social groups (homosexuals, lesbians, people with disabilities and single mothers living on social benefits, etc.) enter the political arena and successfully resist official definitions that present them as the source of social problems. Indeed, individuals who bear a social “stigma” or who are victims of dominant social definitions have their own view of their life situations, different from the view of those who enforce the norms that reflect their moral principles. It is worth remembering that in the XIV-XVII centuries. in Europe, approximately 200 to 500 thousand people (85% of them women) were executed on charges of serving the devil.

Zone of acceptable variations. Norms may not be represented as a fixed point or a straight line, but rather as a zone. Even quite specific and strictly controlled norms have a zone of acceptable variations, not to mention practice, where norms have a whole range of acceptable styles of behavior, which, however, may not deviate from the letter of the law.

For example, it is believed that a university professor is supposed to behave formally with students. But one professor at a large university has the habit of climbing up onto the lectern or sitting on its lid during a lecture. Undoubtedly, in Russian culture it is not customary to consider the pulpit a suitable place to sit. Therefore, it is not surprising that most students at the professor’s first lecture greet his eccentricities with giggles. However, the professor, possessing a talent for communication and being a recognized authority in his field, soon wins over the audience. When evaluating a professor's course of lectures, students typically report that they were initially taken aback by his casual manner, but soon discovered that his demeanor was part of an effective teaching technique.

Consequently, a norm usually presupposes some type of behavior that is new or different from normative behavior, but does not go beyond what is acceptable.

In general, no behavior style is a deviation in itself. Deviation is a subject of social definitions. The same behavior can be considered by one group as a deviation, and by another as the norm. Moreover, much depends on the social context in which the behavior occurs.

For example, appearing drunk at work causes discontent among others, but at a New Year's party, such behavior of its participants is quite natural. Premarital sex and divorce, which were highly frowned upon in society just a generation ago, are now generally accepted as the norm.

1.1 Social control

In order for everything to go as usual in the world, people must follow the rules. Social order requires adherence to general norms, at least from the majority of people. Without the existence of social order, people's interactions would become a real problem, and their expectations would become meaningless. Society seeks to ensure that the actions of its members conform to basic social norms through social control - methods and strategies that determine the behavior of people within society. Functionalists and conflictologists assess the role of social control differently. Functionalists view social control (primarily expressed in legal acts) as an inevitable requirement, without which the survival of society is impossible. If the population refuses to follow social standards of behavior, this will lead to the malfunctioning and breakdown of institutional systems. For this reason, functionalists consider chaos an alternative to effective social control. Conflict theorists argue that social control is exercised in the interests of powerful social groups to the detriment of all other groups in society, and no social structure can be neutral. These sociologists see their task in identifying and identifying mechanisms that allow institutional structures to unfairly distribute the benefits and responsibilities of social life, using methods and tools of social control for self-preservation.

There are three main types of social control processes in social life:

Processes that encourage individuals to internalize the normative expectations of their society;

Processes that organize the social experience of individuals;

Processes that apply various formal and informal social sanctions.

Members of a society continually undergo a process of socialization through which they acquire the systems of thinking, feeling, and behavior that are characteristic of the culture of their society. In childhood, conformity to other people's expectations is primarily a product of external control processes. As a person grows older, his behavior begins to be more and more controlled by internal regulators; the latter perform many functions that were previously (in childhood) performed by external control mechanisms. This is how the process of internalization occurs: individuals incorporate into their personality the standards of behavior that dominate in society. A person often accepts these standards without thinking or questioning as his “second nature.” As a person becomes immersed in the life of a group, he develops a self-image that regulates his behavior in accordance with group norms. By doing what the group members do, he gains his own identity and sense of well-being. The group becomes its group, and its norms become its norms. Thus, social control turns into self-control.

Social institutions also shape individual experiences. As a rule, a person unconsciously builds his own idea of reality under the influence of social problems and alternatives as they are formulated by society. We can say that a person lives in a somewhat limited world, to the extent that he finds himself closed within the framework of a social environment determined by culture. The possibility of alternative standards does not usually occur to him. A person is limited by the culture of his society and cannot follow non-conformist behavior patterns, since society does not know alternatives.

And finally, a person follows the norms of his society, because he knows that otherwise he will be punished. People who break the rules are treated unkindly, hostilely, slandered, and ostracized. The consequences of deviating from the norms can include imprisonment and even death. The conformist receives approval, popularity, prestige and other socially determined rewards. People very quickly realize the disadvantages of nonconformism and the advantages of conformity.

2. Social effects of deviation

Not all behavior, including deviant behavior, has a purpose. Most view deviant behavior as “bad,” as behavior that represents a source of “social problems.” Such assessments are common as a result of the negative or destructive consequences that most deviations from the norm entail. However, deviance can also have positive or integrative consequences for social life. Sociologists Lewis Coser, Albert Cohen, and Edward Sagarin have made significant contributions to understanding this phenomenon.

Dysfunctions of deviation. Undoubtedly, most societies are able to assimilate a considerable number of deviations from the norm without serious consequences for themselves, but persistent and widespread deviations can disrupt the organized life of society or even undermine it. The social organization of society consists of the coordinated actions of many people. If some individuals fail to carry out their actions at the appropriate time and in accordance with social expectations, significant damage may be caused to institutional life. Let's give examples.

When one parent leaves the family, this action usually complicates the task of providing for and raising a child. When, during a battle, a combat crew stops following the commander's orders and flees the battlefield, this can lead to the defeat of an entire army.

Deviation functions. Deviant behavior can also contribute to the effective functioning of society. First, deviations can increase compliance with norms. Sociologist E. Sagarin notes:

“One of the most effective methods of ensuring that most people follow norms is to label some people as norm violators. This allows you to keep others in subjection and at the same time in fear of being in the place of violators... By showing hostility towards people who are not good and right, a majority or a powerful group of people can strengthen the idea of \u200b\u200bwhat is good and right, and thus create a society of individuals , which will be more obedient and loyal to their ideology and rules of behavior.”

Secondly, norms are not expressed in hard rules or waters of laws. According to the position of E. Durkheim, whenever members of a group condemn a certain act as a deviation from the norm, they more clearly outline the contours of what is considered the norm. Their negative reaction clearly indicates what behavior is unacceptable to the “collective consciousness.” American sociologist Kai T. Erickson notes that one of the remarkable features characteristic of control bodies is the advertising of their activities. Once upon a time, violators of law and order were punished in the market square in front of a crowd of people. Now the same results are achieved with the help of the media, which widely cover criminal trials and court verdicts:

“Why are such reports considered newsworthy and why do they attract increased public interest? Perhaps... they satisfy a certain psychological perversion characteristic of the mass audience, but at the same time they constitute the main source of information about the boundaries of what is acceptable in our society. These are the lessons by which we teach each other what norms mean and how far they extend. In a figurative sense, the clash between morality and unprincipledness is put on public display, and society indicates where the line between them should be drawn... [The Violator] seems to warn us about what evil is, what guises the devil can take. In doing so, he makes us feel the difference between experiences that are permissible within the group framework and experiences that go beyond those boundaries.” (K. Erickson).

Third, by calling attention to norm violators, the group can strengthen itself. A common enemy evokes common feelings and strengthens group solidarity. At the same time, the emotions that arise ignite passions and strengthen connections between people of “our type.” Frictions and antagonisms between ingroups and outgroups help to emphasize boundaries between groups and group affiliation. In the same way, campaigns against witches, traitors, perverts, and criminals consolidate social ties between “good people.” For example, Erickson showed that members of the Puritan community, sensing a threat to their safety, deliberately initiated “crime waves” and witch-hunt hysteria to avert harm from their community and redraw group boundaries.

Fourth, deviance is a catalyst for social change. Each violation of a rule serves as a warning that the social system is not functioning correctly. Of course, the political elite cannot view high levels of robbery as a signal that robbery should be legalized and public goods redistributed. However, this fact suggests that there are many dissatisfied people in society, that the institutions for the socialization of youth are not coping with their task, that the balance of social forces is in question, and the moral principles of society need to be revised. Thus, deviation often serves as an impetus for recognizing the need to make changes in the social system. We can say that this is a call for a revision of old norms and at the same time a new model.

For example: Martin Luther King Jr. and his supporters sought to draw attention to the undemocratic nature of the segregation laws of the southern states of the United States through mass disobedience to these laws; The civil rights movement for black Americans led to these laws being revised.

2.1 Sociological theories of deviation and the study of deviant behavior

Why do people violate social norms? Why are certain actions characterized as deviant? Why is the behavior of some individuals called deviant when they commit essentially the same actions as other individuals who manage to avoid punishment, and sometimes even gain recognition? And why does the number of deviations from the norm vary from group to group and from society to society? These are the questions that sociologists are interested in.

Other sciences also deal with the problem of deviant behavior, in particular biology and psychology. But biologists and psychologists are interested in slightly different questions: they focus on factors that deviate from the norm and try to determine what makes them “wrong” or, at least, different from others. They seek to explain rule-breaking in terms of the individuals themselves and their unique characteristics.

Scientists are primarily interested in sociological explanations of the causes of deviation. This does not mean ignoring or underestimating the contributions of other sciences. The problem must be studied from different angles. For example, both biology and psychology have made significant contributions to our understanding of the disorder schizophrenia, a serious form of mental illness characterized by hallucinations, disorganized and illogical thinking, inappropriate emotional reactions, personality degradation, odd behavior, and a gradual withdrawal from reality. Biologists and psychologists have proven that hereditary factors predispose individuals to certain forms of schizophrenia. The hereditary component may be due to genes for proteins that regulate brain activity, especially neurotransmitters (chemicals released by nerve cells that determine the levels needed to excite other nerve cells). However, understanding the biological and psychological factors involved in the development of schizophrenia does not provide a complete picture of this phenomenon. Social factors should also be taken into account.

For example, one person lived in the Ozark Mountains (USA). One day a vision appeared to him - the Lord himself spoke to him. After this, the man began to preach the word of God to his relatives and neighbors, and soon the entire community came to a state of religious ecstasy. They said about this man: “He heard the call.” His reputation as a prophet and healer grew. However, when the newly minted “prophet” tried to organize a prayer meeting in St. Louis, while blocking traffic on a busy city highway during rush hour, he was arrested. A man tells the police station about his conversations with God, and the police take him to an insane asylum, where psychiatrists diagnose the “prophet” with schizophrenia and hospitalize him.

So, we are once again convinced that deviation from the norm is not a property inherent in human behavior, but a property determined by social definitions. Let's consider the four most common sociological approaches to the problem of deviance: the theory of anomie, the theory of cultural transfer, the theory of conflict and the theory of stigmatization.

Anomie theory

E. Durkheim argued that deviation plays a functional role in society, since deviation and punishment of the deviant contribute to the awareness of the boundaries of what is considered acceptable behavior, and play the role of factors that encourage people to confirm their commitment to the moral order of society. Durkheim came up with the idea of anomie - a social condition that is characterized by the decomposition of the value system, caused by the crisis of the entire society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the declared goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority. People find it difficult to coordinate their behavior according to norms that are now weak, unclear, or contradictory. During periods of rapid social change, people cease to understand what society expects of them and experience difficulties in coordinating their actions with current norms. The “old norms” no longer seem appropriate, and the new, emerging norms are still too vague and ill-defined to serve as effective and meaningful guides to behavior. During such periods, one can expect a sharp increase in the number of cases of deviation.

American sociologist Robert Merton tried to apply Durkheim's concepts of anomie and social solidarity when analyzing the social reality of the United States. For most Americans, success in life, especially as expressed in material possessions, has become a culturally accepted goal. However, only certain factors, such as a good education and a well-paid job, were approved as means to achieving success. There would be no problem if all American citizens had equal access to the means to achieve material success in life. But poor people and minorities often have access to only lower levels of education and meager economic resources. If they have internalized goals of material success (which is not the case for all individuals), strong constraints may push them toward nonconformity and unconventional behavior because they are unable to achieve generally accepted goals through legitimate means. They try to achieve a prestigious goal by any means, including vicious and criminal.

Modern professional criminals, members of the organized mafia, and drug traffickers have much in common with Al Capone, the notorious smuggler and robber of the 1920s and early 1930s, who stated:

“My scams strictly follow American rules, and I intend to continue in the same spirit... This American system of ours... provides each and every one of us with a great chance, we just have to grab it with both hands and make the best of it.”

However, “lack of opportunity” and the desire for material well-being are not enough to create pressure towards deviation. A society with a rigid class or caste structure may not give all its members an equal chance to advance, but at the same time praise wealth; This was the case in the feudal societies of the Middle Ages. It is only when a society proclaims common symbols of success for the entire population, while limiting the access of many people to the recognized means of achieving such symbols, that the conditions for antisocial behavior are created. Merton identified five reactions to the ends-means dilemma, four of which represent deviant adaptations to conditions of anomie.

Table 5.1. Merton's typology of individual adaptation to anomie

Notes:

Adoption;

Negation;

± denial of the existing value system and replacing it with a new system.

Conformity occurs when members of a society accept as cultural goals the achievement of material success, as well as the means approved by society for achieving them. Such behavior forms the basis of a stable society.

Innovation occurs when individuals strongly adhere to culturally established goals but reject socially approved means of achieving them. Such people are capable of dealing drugs, forging checks, committing fraud, embezzling property, stealing, participating in burglaries and robberies, or engaging in prostitution, extortion, and buying symbols of success.

Ritualism occurs when members of a society reject or downplay cultural goals, but mechanically use socially approved means to achieve such goals. For example, the goals of the organization cease to be important to many zealous bureaucrats, but they cultivate the means as an end in themselves, fetishizing rules and paperwork.

Retreatism consists of individuals rejecting both cultural goals and recognized means of achieving them, without offering anything in return. For example, alcoholics, drug addicts, tramps and degenerate people become outcasts in their own society; “They live in society, but do not belong to it.”

Rebellion consists of rebels rejecting the cultural goals of society and the means to achieve them, but at the same time replacing them with new norms. Such individuals break with their social environment and join new groups with new ideologies, such as radical social movements.

Merton's types of individual adaptation characterize role behavior, not personality types. A person can change his mind and move from one type of adaptation to another.

Using the theory of anomie. Some sociologists have applied the theory of anomie to the study of juvenile delinquency. Thus, A. Cohen suggested the following: boys belonging to the lower strata of society are attracted to gang groups by the fact that they are constantly judged by middle-class standards, and they find themselves failing in their school environment, where good speech, neatness are valued. appearance and ability to deserve praise. In response to these demands, boys “flock” into teenage groups, where “cool”, arrogant guys, troublemakers are held in high esteem - the standards that allow teenagers from the lower classes to achieve success. According to research by Delbert S. Elliott, juvenile delinquents who drop out of school are less likely to commit offenses than those who continue to attend school. Obviously, leaving the hated school represents for these children a temporary solution to the problems that they faced in a school environment where they were approached with inflated standards.

An assessment of the theory of anomie. Merton's theory of anomie focuses on those processes of establishing accepted cultural goals and means through 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 among white collar and corporate crimes, crimes of “warmongers” and crimes of representatives of power structures and those who strives for power.

However, critics of Merton's theory point out, first, that 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 predominantly self-sufficient, developing solutions for themselves to get out of stressful situations without taking into account the actions of others. Secondly, not all deviant behavior can be explained by a gap between ends and means. Merton paints a picture of American society in which he believes there is a consensus among core values and goals. But his critics argue that American society, with its many subcultures, is characterized by pluralism. The life of American society provides many examples when an individual’s deviant behavior can be explained by the unacceptability for him of certain norms that are prevalent in most groups of the population. Thus, the Indians violate the laws of hunting and fishing; representatives of some ethnic minorities enter into common marriages; people from southern rural areas are fond of cockfighting; some groups of the population make moonshine; teenagers use drugs.

Conclusion

Deviation cannot be understood in isolation from social norms. If behavior is not deviant until it has received such an assessment, then how then to classify such secret and unsolved crimes as embezzlement of public money or non-payment of taxes? Moreover, many criminals lead this lifestyle, convinced that crime “pays.” One study found that a third of crimes against private property are committed because the perpetrators believe that this way they can get much more than through honest, legal work, and another third of crimes are committed by the unemployed. Thus, no sociological theory is capable of providing a complete explanation of deviant behavior. Each highlights one important source of behavior deviation from the norm. And deviant behavior can take many forms. Therefore, each form of deviation should be carefully analyzed to determine the specific factors involved.

Bibliography

1. Gorelov, A. A. Sociology [Text]: textbook / A. A. Gorelov. – M.: Eksmo,

2006. – 496 p.

2. Gorelov, A. A. Sociology in questions and answers [Text]: textbook. allowance /

A. A. Gorelov. – M.: Eksmo, 2005. – 320 p.

3. History of political and legal doctrines [Text]: textbook / ed.

V. S. Nersesyants. – M.: Legal. lit., 1983. – 720 p.

4. Kravchenko, A.I. General sociology [Text]: textbook. manual for universities /

A. I. Kravchenko. – M.: UNITY-DANA, 2001. – 479 p.

5. General sociology [Text]: textbook. allowance / under general ed. prof. A. G. Efendieva. –

M.: INFRA-M, 2004. – 654 p.

6. Radugin, A. A. Sociology [Text]: course of lectures / A. A. Radugin, K. A. Radugin. – M.:

Library, 2004. – 224 p.

7. Internet resources

8. Sociology [Text]: textbook. for universities / ed. prof. V. N. Lavrinenko. – M.:

UNITY-DANA, 2001. – 407 p.

9. Sociology [Text]: textbook. manual / ed. D. S. Klementyeva. – M.: Eksmo, 2004. –

10. Sociology. Fundamentals of general theory [Text]: textbook. for universities / otv. ed. Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences

V. Osipov. – M.: Norma, 2005. – 912 p.

11. Encyclopedic Sociological Dictionary [Text] / general. ed. Academician of the Russian Academy of Sciences G.V.

Osipova. – M.: ISPI RAS, 1995. – 939 p.

1. The concept of deviation.

2. Theories explaining deviation

3. Types of deviations

4. Social control

The concept of deviation.

Deviance is determined by the compliance or non-conformity of actions with social expectations. Due to these difficulties, it is likely that the same act can be considered both deviant and non-deviant; Moreover, the same act (for example, the challenge posed by Joan of Arc to the Catholic Church) could be considered both a serious crime in the era in which it was committed and a great feat that evoked the universal admiration of subsequent generations.

Should be considered, that deviation cannot be identified with crime (delinquent behavior), although analysis of deviance often focuses on criminal behavior. Crime, or behavior prohibited by criminal law, is a form of deviation.

Deviant (deviant) behavior – an act, human activity or social phenomenon that does not correspond to officially established or actually established norms in a given society, which entails isolation, treatment, imprisonment or other punishment for the violator.

Based on this definition, we can distinguish three main deviation component: Human, which is characterized by a certain behavior; expectation, or norm, which is a criterion for assessing deviant behavior, and some other person, a group or organization that responds to behavior.

Theories explaining deviation

BIOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

At the end of the 19th century. Italian doctor Cesare Lombroso found a connection between criminal behavior and certain physical traits. He believed that people are predisposed to certain types of behavior by their biological make-up. He argued that the "criminal type" is the result of a degradation to earlier stages of human evolution. This type can be identified by such characteristic features as a protruding lower jaw, a sparse beard and decreased sensitivity to pain. Lombroso's theory became widespread, and some thinkers became his followers - they also established a connection between deviant behavior and certain physical traits of people.

William H. Sheldon(1940), a famous American psychologist and physician, emphasized the importance of body structure. In humans, a certain body structure means the presence of characteristic personality traits. Endomorph(a person of moderate obesity with a soft and somewhat rounded body) is characterized by sociability, the ability to get along with people and self-indulgence. Mesomorph(whose body is strong and slender) tends to be restless, active and not overly sensitive. And finally, ectomorph, characterized by the subtlety and fragility of the body, is prone to introspection, endowed with increased sensitivity and nervousness.

Based on a study of the behavior of two hundred young men in a rehabilitation center, Sheldon made conclusion, What Mesomorphs are most prone to deviation, although they do not always become criminals.

Although such biological concepts were popular at the beginning of the 20th century, other concepts gradually replaced them.

More recently, biological explanations have focused on sex chromosome (XY) abnormalities of the deviant. Normally, a woman has two type X chromosomes, while a man typically has one type X chromosome and one type Y chromosome. But sometimes individuals have additional type X or Y chromosomes (XXY, XYY, or, which is very common). rarely, XXXY, XXYY, etc.).

PSYCHOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

The psychological approach, like the biological theories discussed above, is often applied to the analysis of criminal behavior. Psychoanalysts proposed a theory that linked deviant behavior with mental disorders. For example, Freud introduced the concept of “criminals with a sense of guilt”- we are talking about people who want to be caught and punished because they feel guilty about their “destroy drive”, they believe that imprisonment would somehow help them overcome this drive. (Freud, 1916-1957). Concerning sexual deviation, then some psychologists believed that exhibitionism, sexual perversion and fetishism were caused by an unresolved fear of castration.

Thorough research has shown that the essence of deviation cannot be explained solely on the basis of an analysis of psychological factors. It is more likely that deviance results from a combination of many social and psychological factors.

SOCIOLOGICAL EXPLANATION

Sociological explanation takes into account the social and cultural factors on the basis of which people are considered deviants.

Anomie theory.

The term " social disorganization"(anomie) refers to a state of society where cultural values, norms, and social relationships are absent, weakened, or contradictory.

Merton's Anomie Theory

Robert K. Merton(1938) made some changes to the concept of anomie proposed by Durkheim. He believes that the cause of deviance is the gap between the cultural goals of society and the socially approved means of achieving them. According to Merton, when people strive for financial success but become convinced that it cannot be achieved through socially approved means, they may resort to illegal means, such as racketeering, horse racing, or drug dealing. We will return to discuss Merton's views on the consequences of anomie later.

CULTUROLOGICAL EXPLANATIONS

So-called cultural theories of deviance are essentially similar to the above, but emphasize the analysis of cultural values that favor deviance.

Sellin And Miller They believe that deviation occurs when an individual identifies himself with a subculture whose norms contradict the norms of the dominant culture. Edwin Sutherland(1939) argued that crime (the form of deviation that interested him primarily) are being trained. People perceive values that promote deviation in the course of communication with the bearers of these values. If most of a person's friends and relatives are involved in criminal activities, there is a possibility that he will also become a criminal.

Criminal deviation (delinquency) is the result of preferential communication with carriers of criminal norms. Moreover, Sutherland carefully described the factors that combine to promote criminal behavior. He emphasized that everyday communication at school, at home or at regular “street hangouts” plays an important role in this. The frequency of contacts with deviants, as well as their quantity and duration, influence the intensity of a person’s assimilation of deviant values. Age also plays an important role. The younger a person is, the more readily he assimilates patterns of behavior imposed by others.

Stigma theory(labeling or branding) On one's own.

Howard Becker proposed a concept opposite to those discussed above. "The Outsiders" (1963).

Conflictological approach On one's own.

Austin Turk, Queenie (1977)

Recently, less importance has been attached to the biological or psychological factors that “push” people to deviant behavior. Recent theories, especially "new criminology", emphasize the character of society and seek to reveal the extent to which it is interested in creating and maintaining deviance.

The newest theories are much more critical of the existing social structure; they prove the need to correct not individual people, but the entire society as a whole.

TYPES OF DEVIATIONS

The typologization of deviant behavior is associated with difficulties, since any of its manifestations - abortion, addiction to alcoholic beverages, eating pork, etc. - can be considered both deviant and non-deviant; everything is determined by the regulatory requirements against which they are assessed. Therefore, there is probably no point in trying to make a precise classification of types of completely deviant behavior, although some of them, such as rape and incest, are considered deviant by most people (but not all).

The classification of deviant acts proposed by Merton is the most successful of all those developed so far. According to Merton, deviance results from anomie, a gap between cultural goals and socially approved means of achieving them.

Deviation functions.

Deviant behavior can also contribute to the effective functioning of society.

First, deviations can increase compliance with norms.

Secondly, they are not expressed in fixed rules or codes of law. According to the position of E. Durkheim, whenever members of a group condemn a certain act as a deviation from the norm, they more clearly outline the contours of what is considered the norm. Their negative reaction clearly indicates what behavior is unacceptable to the “collective consciousness.” American sociologist Kai T. Erickson notes that one of the remarkable features characteristic of control bodies is the advertising of their activities. Once upon a time, violators of law and order were punished in the market square in front of a crowd of people. Now the same results are achieved with the help of the media, which widely cover criminal trials and court verdicts.

Dysfunctions of deviation.

Undoubtedly, most societies are able to assimilate a considerable number of deviations from the norm without serious consequences for themselves, but constant and widespread deviations can disrupt the organizational life of a society or even undermine it. The social organization of society consists of the coordinated actions of many people. If some individuals fail to carry out their actions at the appropriate time and in accordance with social expectations, significant damage may be caused to institutional life.

Deviance also undermines the willingness of a member of society to fulfill his social roles and contribute to the functioning of the social system. If some individuals receive rewards, and disproportionate ones, by “playing” not by the rules (this applies to so-called slackers, malingerers, sycophants and parasites, etc.), others develop a feeling of resentment and bitterness. At the same time, morality, self-discipline and loyalty to duty suffer. Social life dictates the need to trust each other. A person must have confidence that others also live by accepted standards. By accepting an obligation to the collective, a member of society invests certain funds, refuses some alternatives and harbors certain hopes for the future, and expects the same actions from other people. But if these others do not live up to the trust, the person feels that his efforts are meaningless, vain and naive, and is no longer so eager to “play by the rules.”

Directly related to the problem of social control is the problem deviant behavior, because society has always sought to suppress undesirable forms of human behavior. Sharp deviations from the average norm threaten the stability of society.

- Deviation – in a broad sense, implies any deviation from social norms accepted in society. In this sense, “deviance” can be used both in negative(crime, drug addiction), and positive sense (genius, heroism). 2. In a narrow sense, deviation means minor offenses that are not approved by society, but are not illegal and do not fall under an article of the Criminal Code. When describing more serious violations, experts use additional terms: "delinquency" and "crime"(criminal behavior). It is advisable to designate deviance in a broad sense as “deviant behavior”, and use the narrow meaning of this term to designate minor deviations, i.e. actual deviations. The main forms of deviant behavior in a broad sense include:

1) drunkenness and alcoholism;

2) drug addiction;

3) crime;

4) suicide;

5) prostitution;

6) homosexuality.

Highlight primary deviation which is observed when the individual only breaks the rule from time to time, but those around him They turn a blind eye to this, and he himself does not consider himself a deviant at all. Secondary deviation characterized by the fact that a person is labeled as a deviant, those around him treat him differently from ordinary people, and gradually he begins to consider himself a deviant. See further “Stigmatization”

All diverse forms of deviant behavior (a set of illegal actions) are divided into three groups: deviant, delinquent(minor violations falling under the Administrative Code), criminal(criminal, i.e. falling under the Criminal Code). The most widespread type of violation is deviant behavior, i.e. numerous violations of public and administrative order.

Deviation includes three main components:

a) a person who is characterized by a certain behavior;

b) a norm or expectation, which is a criterion for assessing behavior as deviant;

c) another group or organization reacting to the behavior.

Let's consider the main difficulties definitions deviations:

1. The first difficulty is related to relative nature of deviations. The same act can be considered deviant and non-deviant.

For example, murder: in war it is justified and rewarded. Even if murder cannot be considered deviant in an absolute sense, it is even more difficult to decide whether other types of behavior are deviant. For example, in a small town in Kansas, prostitution is considered illegal and deviant; in Reno it is legal, but not approved; in Paris, it is legal and not condemned.

Moreover, the expectations that define deviant behavior change over time. This is evidenced by data regarding smoking. During the Civil War, cigarettes were included in the regular rations issued to soldiers. But at the beginning of the 20th century. Opposition to smoking on moral and religious grounds was so strong that 14 states passed laws prohibiting smoking. After the Second World War, smoking not only became widespread, but also gained social approval. However, by 1957, after scientists had proven that smoking is the cause of many diseases, including lung cancer, a new wave of opposition to this habit arose (Newaring and Markle, 1974). Since then, health leaders, environmental activists and government organizations have lashed out at the tobacco industry, and smokers have become the target of growing global condemnation. In fact, smoking has now begun to be considered a deviant behavior. Smokers began to be identified with “drug addicts, neurotics, as well as air polluters and fire makers” (Markle, Troyer, 1979, p. 622)

2. Uncertainty expected behavior: the rules are not entirely clear.

Can crossing the road in the wrong place be considered a deviation? It is illegal, but widespread and considered semi-legal as long as traffic is not disrupted and no one is harmed. The same uncertainty applies if you park your car in the second row without disrupting traffic, or ride a bicycle on the sidewalk.

3. Disagreement on the issue of rules on the part of society: For example, from 1919 to 1933. The sale of alcohol was prohibited in the USA, but not everyone agreed with this and violated them. Or another example.

On November 5, 1986, two prisoners made a daring escape from a federal prison in Pleasanton, California. We are talking about 42-year-old Ronald McIntosh, convicted of fraud, and 37-year-old Samantha Lopez, guilty of bank robbery. They were lovers, they were immediately dubbed "lovebirds" as soon as the news of the elopement appeared in the press.

Here's how it happened. McIntosh managed to hijack a helicopter. A former military pilot, he boldly rushed down into the prison yard, landed, grabbed Lopez in his arms and the helicopter sped away. The guards did not dare to shoot at the helicopter; it could have crashed into the yard and killed many people. The lovers hid from the police for 10 days. But they were eventually caught trying to cash a check at a shopping center in suburban Sacramento. They were heading to a yacht anchored off the coast of Washington State; probably wanted to escape to Canada.

Obviously, the described case is a vivid example of deviation: two criminals, whom the court found guilty, escape from prison.

Reports of this truly dramatic event created a sensation in the press of California and throughout the country. But when reporters interviewed prison officials, crime experts and passersby, vastly different opinions were expressed about the "deviant" act.

Some considered the fugitives to be cunning, intelligent people who managed to outwit the law. One, who did not identify himself, said he would willingly do the same, while another expressed hope that the lovers would never be caught. Some even perceived them as folk heroes of sorts. Other commentators have criticized Pleasanton Federal Penitentiary for lax security and lenient treatment of inmates; they compared the prison to a “country club”, and even to some extent believed that people were doing the right thing by escaping from there.

One of the lawyers who defended the criminals after they were caught near Sacramento told a judge that the escape was "justified."

Explanations of deviation.

The first attempts to explain crimes and other forms of deviation were mainly

A) biological nature . Italian criminologist Cesare Lombroso, working in the 70s of the nineteenth century, came to the conclusion that some people are born with criminal tendencies, and they belong to a more primitive human type. In his opinion, criminal types can be identified by the shape of the skull. He did not deny the influence of social experience on the development of criminal behavior, but his basic idea was that most criminals are biologically degenerate or defective.

William H. Sheldon (1940), a famous American psychologist and physician, emphasized the importance of body structure. He believed that certain breeds of dogs tended to follow certain behavior patterns. Also in humans, a certain body structure means the presence of characteristic personality traits . Endomorph(a person of moderate obesity with a soft and somewhat rounded body) is characterized by sociability, the ability to get along with people and self-indulgence. Mesomorph(whose body is strong and slender) tends to be restless, active and not overly sensitive. And finally, ectomorph, characterized by the subtlety and fragility of the body, is prone to introspection, endowed with increased sensitivity and nervousness.

Based on a study of the behavior of two hundred young men in a rehabilitation center, Sheldon concluded that those most prone to deviation mesomorphs , although they do not always become criminals.

Although such biological concepts were popular at the beginning of the 20th century, other concepts gradually replaced them. There has been evidence that some mental disorders, especially schizophrenia, may be due to genetic predisposition. In addition, some biological characteristics can influence the psyche of an individual.

Some scientists associate the deviation with an abnormality of the sex chromosomes (XY) of the deviant. Normally, a woman has two type X chromosomes, while a man typically has one type X chromosome and one type Y chromosome. But sometimes individuals have additional type X or Y chromosomes (XXY, XYY, or, which is very common). rarely, XXXY, XXYY, etc.). Based on a study of male patients in a psychiatric hospital in Scotland, Price and his colleagues (1966, 1967) found that the presence of an extra Y chromosome was characteristic of men of above average height who were found to be severe psychopaths. Subsequently, based on a study of Danish crime, Witkin and his colleagues (1976) found that among men with the XYY chromosome composition there was a higher level of crime than among people who were part of the control group and did not have additional chromosomes. However, men with XYY chromosome composition were not above average height. In addition, this study confirmed the data that among men with chromosome type XYY, more were convicted not of murder, but of crimes related to the appropriation of someone else's property. Based on these findings, the researchers doubted that a genetic predisposition to aggression contributed to the criminality of men with XYY chromosomes. At the same time, they have significantly lower intellectual potential (which was confirmed by intelligence assessment tests).

Although these data are reassuring, some difficulties arise when we conclude that men with the XYY chromosome set have a greater biologically determined tendency toward criminal behavior than those with the XY chromosome set. It may be that the sometimes unusual, even frightening, appearance of such men contributes to some extent to the fact that they are arrested and convicted more often than people with ordinary appearance (Taylor, Walton, and Young, 1973). If we actually take into account the level of development of their intelligence, it can be assumed that those with XYY chromosomes are easier to catch at the scene of a crime, but this does not mean that they commit crimes more often than others.

b) Psychologically e theories of crime, like biological ones, associate criminal tendencies with a certain type of personality. Ideas Freud had some influence on psychological interpretations of crime, although Freud himself wrote practically nothing in the field of criminology. Later writers did not build on his ideas, suggesting that a small proportion of people develop an "immoral" or psychopathic personality. According to Freud, most of our moral qualities come from self-restraints that we learn in early childhood during the Oedipus phase of development. Due to the special nature of their relationships with their parents, some children do not develop such self-restraints and, accordingly, lack a basic sense of morality. Psychopaths can be described as self-absorbed people who find pleasure in violence itself.

Individuals with psychopathic traits sometimes commit serious crimes, but there are major problems with the very concept of psychopathy. It is not entirely clear whether such traits are necessarily criminal. Almost all studies of individuals with psychopathic characteristics have been conducted among convicts, so such characteristics must inevitably be viewed negatively. If we describe the same character traits from a positive side, we will get a completely different type of personality, and there will be no reason to claim that people of this type have an innate tendency to crime.

Thorough research has shown that the essence of deviation cannot be explained solely on the basis of an analysis of psychological factors. In 1950, Schuessler and Cressy conducted a critical review of many scientific works, the authors of which tried to prove that delinquents and criminals are characterized by certain psychological characteristics that are not characteristic of law-abiding citizens. However, no single psychological trait, such as emotional immaturity, mental instability, or anxiety, has been identified that could be observed in all criminals (Schuessler & Cressy, 1950). Currently, most psychologists and sociologists recognize that personality characteristics and the motives of its actions probably have an important influence on all types of deviant behavior. But, apparently, with the help of the analysis of any one psychological trait, conflict or “complex” it is impossible to explain the essence of crime or any other type of deviation. It's more likely that deviation occurs as a result of a combination of many social and psychological factors.

Biological and psychological explanations of deviation are associated mainly with an analysis of the nature of the deviant personality. Sociological explanation takes into account the social and cultural factors on the basis of which people are considered deviants

V) Cultural explanations

Concepts of the social emphasize the analysis of cultural values that favor deviance, in other words, the forces that “encourage” people to engage in deviant behavior.

Sellin (1938) emphasized that deviation arises as a result of conflicts between cultural norms. He studied the behavior of individual groups, norms which differ from the norms of the rest of society. This is due to the fact that the interests of the group do not correspond to the norms of the majority. For example, in subcultures such as street gangs or groups of prisoners, the police are more likely to be associated with a punitive or corrupt organization than with the service of maintaining order and protecting private property. A member of such a group internalizes it norms and thus becomes a non-conformist from the point of view of the wider society.

Miller (1958) deepened Sellin's idea of the relationship between culture and deviant behavior. He argued that there is a pronounced subculture the lower class of society, one of the manifestations of which is group crime. This subculture places great emphasis on qualities such as risk-taking, endurance, thrill-seeking, and “luck.” Because gang members are guided by these values in their lives, other people, and especially representatives of the middle classes, begin to treat them as deviants.

Sellin and Miller believe that deviation occurs when an individual identifies himself with a subculture, norms which contradicts the norms of the dominant culture. But why do only some people learn values"deviant" subculture, while others reject it? Edwin Sutherland (1939) tried to explain this in terms of differentiated association. He argued that crime (the form of deviation that interested him in the first place) is learned. People perceive values that contribute to deviation during communication with the bearers of these values. If most of a person's friends and relatives are involved in criminal activities, there is a possibility that he will also become a criminal.

Theory Sutherland is much more accurate and deeper than the common sense belief that deviation- this is the result of a person getting involved with bad company. Criminal deviation is the result of preferential communication with carriers of criminal norms. Moreover, Sutherland carefully described the factors that combine to promote criminal behavior. He emphasized that it is important role This is not influenced by contacts with impersonal organizations or institutions (for example, with legislative bodies or the church), but by everyday communication at school, at home, or at the place of regular “street hangouts.” Young men from the urban ghetto who associate with street gangs, drug dealers and prostitutes more often than with their law-abiding parents and young men looking to get good education, are more likely to approve of criminal behavior. The frequency of contacts with deviants, as well as their quantity and duration, influence the intensity of a person’s assimilation of deviant values. Important role Age also plays a role. The younger a person is, the more readily he assimilates patterns of behavior imposed by others.

Claward and Owlin (Clawward, 1959; Claward, Owlin, 1960), like Sutherland, believe that the causes of delinquency are not only in social disorganization and the collapse of ideals. They point to the favorable opportunities that deviant behavior opens up, especially if it promises real benefits. In some areas of activity, young men learn role models successful deviants - we are talking about people involved in organized or professional crime; they gained influence, prestige and high position in society. Often such people are involved in organized drug trafficking and other types of criminal activities, involving young people in it. Opportunities for prosperity tempt people who have limited access to legitimate means of achieving success.

G). Sociological explanation

takes into account social and cultural factors , on the basis of which people are considered deviants.

For the first time, a sociological explanation of deviation was proposed in theory anomie, developed Emile Durkheim. Durkheim used this theory in his classic study of the nature of suicide. He considered one of the causes of suicide to be a phenomenon called anomie (literally “disorder”). Explaining this phenomenon, he emphasized that social rules play an important role in regulating people's lives. Norms control their behavior, they know what to expect from others and what is expected of them. People's life experiences (that is, their pleasures and disappointments) more or less correspond to the expectations that are determined by social norms. However, during times of crisis or radical social change, such as a downturn in business activity and rampant inflation, life experiences no longer correspond to the ideals embodied in social norms. As a result, people experience a state of confusion and disorientation, which is typical for anomic society. To demonstrate the impact of anomie on human behavior, Durkheim showed that during unexpected economic downturns and booms, suicide rates tend to be higher than normal. . He believed that unexpected decline and prosperity were due to "disruptions of the collective order." Social norms are destroyed, people become disoriented and - all this contributes to deviant behavior (Durkheim, 1897).

Although theory Durkheim has been criticized, the main idea is that social disorganization is the cause of deviant behavior, and is now considered generally accepted. The term " social disorganization" denotes state of society when cultural values, norms and social relationships are absent, weakened or contradict each other. This may be, for example, the result of a mixture of religious, ethnic and racial groups with different beliefs, adherence to different ideals, in particular, different attitudes towards gambling, drinking and other types of behavior. This can be observed with a high level of migration of members of settlement communities, which also leads to heterogeneity and instability of social ties. In his classic study Shaw and Mackay (1942) found that official rates of juvenile delinquency were particularly high in urban areas where people from diverse backgrounds lived and there was a high degree of population turnover. Not only are such areas characterized by conflict between cultural values (leading to a lack of a unified set of expectations), but there are difficulties in monitoring compliance with any standards, and officials do not even try to implement it (Cohen and Short, 1961). Conflicting criteria for assessing people's behavior and weak control on the part of the authorities significantly contribute to the increase in crime.

Robert K. Merton(1938) made some changes to the concept of anomie proposed by Durkheim.

Anomie in the understanding of R. Merton means the gap between socially approved values, goals and social methods of achieving them.

An example is the contradictory attitude of Americans towards the problem of wealth. They admire financial success; achieving wealth is a common goal in American culture. Socially approved or institutionalized means of achieving this goal include traditional methods such as obtaining a good education and getting a job in a trading or law firm.

But when we are faced with the reality of American society, it becomes clear that these socially approved means are not available to the majority of the population. Many people can't pay for good things education, and the best enterprises hire only a limited number of specialists. According to Merton, when people strive for financial success but become convinced that it cannot be achieved through socially approved means, they may resort to illegal means, such as racketeering, horse racing, or drug dealing.

Merton identifies different reaction to anomia.

Total conformism– According to R. Merton, a state that presupposes the agreement of individuals with the goals of society and the use of legal means to achieve them. K. can lead to the loss of one’s own position by blindly following the rules, regardless of their essence, their harmfulness or unsuitability. In this case, we can talk about reasonable adaptation to social conditions. The reason for this behavior is the fear of possible punishment, sanctions, loss of recognition in the group to which the person belongs, and the threat of isolation.

Innovation –(in Merton's theory) acceptance of the goals and values of society, but the use of new ways to achieve them, different from the prescribed ones (even illegal or illegal). For example, an innovator student, instead of attending lectures or working in the library to get a high grade, prefers to copy the answer on an exam from his colleague. This category of deviations may also include a doctor who, in order to save the patient, risks using new means of therapy that are absolutely not accepted in the medical community. Or a scientist who, in search of truth, breaks with universally accepted theories, but thereby initiates a scientific revolution.

Ritualism– (in Merton's theory) assumes denial of the goals of a given culture, But agreement(sometimes taken to the point of absurdity) to use socially approved means. Stubborn adherence to traditional norms of behavior and rituals that do not contribute to achieving the goal. This is what a typical bureaucrat does, preparing lengthy reports that his superiors do not read. This is what the workers of a concern owned by private person who are organizing a demonstration at the government building, demanding higher wages. In the new market relations, these forms of protest turned out to be misdirected and lost their purpose.

Retrievism –(“refusal to participate”, “quitting the game”) is observed when a person simultaneously rejects both goals and socially approved means their achievements. This is what the marginalized, lumpen, drug addicts, and alcoholics do, who ignore such recognized values as wealth or education, and refuse such norms as work and study. Retreatists find themselves isolated, outside of society and the culture characteristic of a given society.

Mutiny (rebellion)– (according to Merton) active rejection of existing values and normative means and the desire to establish new values and transform the social system. The expression of rebellion is various countercultural movements, sects, communities; youth protests against hedonistic consumerism (the desire for pleasure), selfish careerism, the polarization of society and, instead, a proposal for the revival of solidarity between people, creative forms of self-realization, which means a break with the entire dominant capitalist culture. Sometimes such searches for an alternative go in a destructive direction, but sometimes they create the foundations of a new cultural system. As Merton notes, what is condemned as heresy today may become the basis of culture tomorrow.

Thus, a rebellion can lead to the replacement of old goals and means with new ones: a new one develops ideology(it can be revolutionary). For example, the revolutionary considers the socialist property system, which displaces private property, to be more legitimate than the existing one.

Merton's theory is important primarily because it views conformity and deviance as two sides of the same scale, rather than as separate categories. It also emphasizes that deviation is not a product of an absolutely negative attitude towards generally accepted standards, as many people often assume. The thief does not reject the socially approved goal of achieving material well-being. He may be as enthusiastic about this goal as a young man who is successfully moving up the career ladder. Bureaucrat personifying ritualism, does not abandon the generally accepted rules of work, but follows them too literally, which leads to absurdity. However, both of these people exhibit deviant behavior.

Social deviance is the social behavior of a person or group of people that, for any reason, differs significantly from socially accepted behavior in the society in question. Nowadays, there is both negative and positive deviation. Oddly enough, negative deviant behavior is accepted by society as an insult and formal and sometimes non-formal sanctions are applied to it. Such, for example, as: treatment, isolation, or even punishment of the offender.

Types of deviation

Mental and cultural deviations. As you know, sociologists are more interested in cultural deviations, but psychologists are more interested in mental deviations. By the way, the latter are still more dangerous. Often, cultural deviations are associated with mental ones, due to the fact that people suffering from alcohol addiction or drug addiction have personal disorganization, that is, mental deviations. Although the deviation of a person suffering from mental disorders is usually not noticeable. Such people often follow all the rules and norms laid down in society.
Group and individual deviation of behavior. Individual is the denial of the norms of one’s subculture by the only representative, and group is a group deviation from generally accepted norms. The latter often include teenagers from disadvantaged families.
Primary and secondary personality deviations. Primary psychological deviation is understood as a prank that an individual committed once. And under secondary – a systematic deviation from generally accepted norms.

Deviation in psychology also includes such concepts as: culturally approved and culturally condemned deviations. The former are characterized by the individual's super-abilities, which benefit society, while the latter manifest themselves in the form of extraordinary achievements and activity, usually leading to violation of moral standards and condemnation from society.

Causes of deviation

In the study of the causes of deviant behavior, there are three types of theory of deviation:

Perhaps the need to regulate people's behavior within certain norms will always remain relevant. However, we should not forget that each person is individual and, without knowing the exact reason for such unusual behavior of a person, do not rush to condemn him.

Deviation in society serves only dysfunction. Social deviation. Merton's Anomie Theory

Anomie theory

Types of deviation

Causes of deviation

Articles on the topic