FACULTY OF HUMANITIES SOCIAL SCIENCES AND LAW

NAME : ZIKHONA

SURNMAE : DIPHU

STUDENT NUMBER : 218167059

MODULE NAME : THEORIES OF CRIME 2

MODULE CODE : THC48M1

DUE DATE : 18/06/2021

ASSIGNMENT TOPIC : DISCUSS THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF DURKHEIM

AND MERTON TO ANOMIE THEORY.
TABLE OF CONTENT

Introduction………………………………………………………………1

Anomie according to Durkheim…………………………………….2-3

Robert merton’s contribution to anomie theory……………….3, 4 &5

Conclusion………………………………………………………………….6

References………………………………………………………………….7
INTRODUCTION

The French sociologist Émile Durkheim was the first to discuss the concept of
anomie as an analytical tool in his 1890s seminal works of sociological theory and
method. In these works, anomie, which refers to a widespread lack of commitment
to shared values, standards, and rules needed to regulate the behaviours and
aspirations of individuals, is an intermediate condition by which social
(dis)organization impacts individual distress and deviant behaviour. An observant of
the massive social changes of 19th-century Europe, Durkheim argued that anomie
resulted from rapid social change and the weakening of traditional institutions, in
particular the reduced authority of such institutions in the economic sphere, as well
as changes in the principles underlying social inequality. A few decades later, the
American sociologist Robert Merton re-formulated anomie theory, arguing how a
particular malintegration of the culture-structure constitution of modern society
produces high rates of crime. Echoing selected themes in Durkheim’s work, and
discussing the United States as a prime example, Merton argued how a shared
overemphasis on monetary success goals undermines individual commitment to
social rules, and generates a particularly acute strain on individuals in disadvantaged
social positions
ANOMIE ACCORDING TO EMILE DURKHEIM

Emile Durkheim (1858-1917), a French sociologist, did not formulate a theory of

crime causation, but he is credited with advancing two important postulates
concerning crime and deviance. The first is significant because it presented a
conception of crime as a normal and functional part of society (Durkheim 1938).
Rejecting the thesis that crime is pathological, Durkheim suggested that crime is an
inevitable aspect of all healthy societies. It is one of the prices we pay for freedom,
which permit innovation – the basis for social progress. However, in order to provide
an environment in which the creativity of the inventor is capable of flourishing, we
also need to make allowances for the originality of the criminal to be realised. Both
the scientific and the criminal are innovators; in order to furnish an environment in
which scientific creativity is encouraged, we must also tolerate a certain amount

That is some crimes may reflect a new, though not completely acceptable, type of
behaviour. Durkheim’s second contribution, the one directly to the development of
subcultural perspective, was his introduction of the term anomie, which he used to
refer to a condition in which the rules governing behaviour ate not sufficiently clear
to permit people to anticipate the actions of others or provide guidelines for their
own behaviour in specific situations. “Normlessness” probably best describes the
sense in which Durkheim employed the term anomie. While he cannot be credited
with originating the concept of anomie, for there are indications that it was used in
approximately the same sense three centuries earlier.

ANOMIE AND SUICIDE

Durkheim illustrated his concept of anomie in a discussion, not of crime, but of

suicide. He suggested several reasons why suicide was more common in some
groups than in others. He called it anomic suicide when he analysed statistical data,
he found that suicide rates increased during times of sudden economic change,
whether that change was major depression or unexpected prosperity. In periods of
rapid change, people are abruptly thrown into unfamiliar situations. rules that once
guided behaviour no longer hold. Durkheim believed that human desires are
boundless, an insatiable and bottomless abyss.” Since nature does not set such strict
biological limits on the capabilities of humans as it does on those of other animals,
he argued, we have developed social rules that put a realistic cap on our aspirations.
These regulations are incorporated into the individual conscience and thus make it
possible for people to feel fulfilled. But with a sudden burst of prosperity,
expectations change. When the old rules no longer determine how rewards are
distributed among members of society, there is no longer any restraint on what
people want. Once again, the system breaks down. Thus, whether sudden change
causes great prosperity or great depression, the result is the same.

ROBERT MERTON’S CONTRIBUTIONS TO ANOMIE

Durkheim's theory of anomie proved influential to American sociologist Robert K.

Merton, who pioneered the sociology of deviance and is considered one of the most
influential sociologists in the United States. Building on Durkheim's theory that
anomie is a social condition in which people's norms and values no longer sync with
those of society, Merton created the structural strain theory, which explains how
anomie lead to deviance and crime. The theory states that when society does not
provide the necessary legitimate and legal means that allow people to achieve
culturally valued goals, people seek out alternative means that may simply break
from the norm or may violate norms and laws. For example, if society does not
provide enough jobs that pay a living wage so that people can work to survive,
many will turn to criminal methods of earning a living. So, for Merton, deviance, and
crime are, in large part, a result of anomie, a state of social disorder.

Merton’s aim was to discover how social structures exert definite pressures on
certain persons in society to engage in non-conforming rather than conforming
conduct. It was his contention that if we could identify certain social groups which
had fairly high rates of deviant behaviour as a result of being subjected to pressures,
this nonconforming behaviour could not be attributed to distinctive biological
tendencies among this group but instead would be best explained by the fact that
group members were responding to the social situation in which they found
themselves.
Merton identifies two characteristics that are common to all social structures: (1)
cultural growth, which provide the direction for individual behaviour; and (2) Socially
approved means or allowable procedures for achieving these goals. However, these
regulatory norms do not necessarily represent the most direct or efficient method of
achieving these objectives. There are many ways which specific individuals would
find far more efficient for securing these desired objectives including among them
fraud, theft, and violence, but these methods of achieving the goals are considered
outside the realm of accepted behaviour. In all cases, the choice of means is limited
by regulatory norms. Societies vary over time as well as among themselves
regarding the extent to which there is agreement on the goals as well as the socially
accepted means of achieving them.

Modes of Personality Adaptation

Merton describes five possible modes of personality adaptation that represent types
of adjustments to societal means and goals: the conformist, the innovator, the
ritualist, the retreatist, and the rebel. All except the conformist are deviant
responses. The conformist accepts the goal of success in society and also the
societally approved means of achieving this status, such as through hard work, The
innovator accepts the goal of success, but rejects or seeks illegitimate alternatives to
the means of achieving these aims. Criminal activities such as theft and organized
crime could serve as examples, although societally encouraged activities such as
inventing could also provide illustrations. An interesting example is the case of Fred
Demara, Jr., well known through the book The Great Imposter (Crichton, 1959). A
high school graduate, Demara was disappointed that people had to spend much of
their lives preparing usually for only one occupation. Forging credentials and
identities, he launched into careers as a college professor, Trappist monk,
penitentiary warden, and surgeon in the Canadian Navy, to mention just a few. The
ritualist is illustrated by the “mindless bureaucrat” who becomes so caught up in
rules and means to an end that he or she tends to forget or fails to place proper
significance on the goal. This individual will compulsively persist in going through the
motions with little hope of successful achievement of goals. The retreatist represents
a rejection of both societally approved means and ends. This adaptation might be
illustrated by the advice of Timothy Leary, the prophet of psychedelic drugs in the
sixties, who preached, “tune in, turn on, and drop out.” Chronic alcoholics and drug
addicts may eventually reject societal standards of jobs and success and choose the
goal of “getting high” by means of begging, borrowing, or stealing. The rebel rejects
both means and goals and seeks to substitute alternative ones that would represent
new societal goals as well as new methods of achieving them, such as through
revolutionary activities aimed at introducing change in the existing order outside
normal, societally approved channels.
CONCLUSION

Durkheim suggested that anomie is caused by the undefined presence of social

bonds. This undefined presence causes a decline of social cohesion therefore
individuals become detached from society and recognise no limits to their behaviour.
People who lived during periods of anomie typically feel disconnected from their
society because they no longer see the norms and values that they hold dear
reflected in society itself. This leads to the feeling that one does not belong and is
not meaningfully connected to others. For some, this may mean that the role they
play (or played), and their identity is no longer valued by society. Because of this,
anomie can foster the feeling that one lacks purpose, engender hopelessness, and
encourage deviance and crime.
REFERENCES

1. Tim Newburn, 2009. key readings in criminology. tim newburn ed. New
york: Willan publishing.

2. 2. Deflem, Mathieu, ed. (2006). Sociological Theory and Criminological

Research: Views from Europe and the United States. Elsevier. 
3. Miller, Joshua D.; Lynam, Donald (2001). "Structural Models of Personality
and Their Relation to Antisocial Behavior: A Meta-Analytic
Review*". Criminology.
4. Mestrovic, Stjepan (1993). Emile Durkheim and The Reformation of
Sociology.