Question

1. Compare and contrast the view of crime as pathological - that is, as harmful to social life, with Durkheim's view of crime as normal, because it is part of all societies. 2. Explain Durkheim's claim that crime makes important contributions to the operation of a social system.

Answer 1

• Durkheim rejected the definition of crime, which would constitute the commonsense of any society, that crimes are acts that are harmful to society. He pointed to the enormous variations between societies in the acts, which have been regarded as criminal in order to reboot the claim that conceptions of crime are rooted in the social evil represented by particular actions. The only attribute applicable to crimes in general is that they are socially proscribed and punished.
• Crime, argues Durkheim, is a universal feature of all societies. This is because crime serves a vital social function. Through the punishment of offenders, the moral boundaries of a community are clearly marked out, and attachment to them is reinforced. The purpose of punishment is not deterrence, rehabilitation nor retribution.
• Punishment strengthens social solidarity through the reaffirmation of moral commitment among the conforming population who witness the suffering of the offender. Durkheim also argues that the elimination of crime is impossible; this is because there are, and always will be, differences between people.
• Just because Durkheim pointed out that crime was functional doesn't mean that governments cannot try to be tough on crime so the fight is to keep a balance and to try not to let criminals escalate to more violent crimes- You have a hard task because crime covers such a wide base of issues from crimes agains the person - murder to financial crimes.
• Jock Youngs view was that we could decriminalise a lot of behaviours which we have at least around suicide and small quantities of low class drugs but that we could easily prune the stature book further or have different penalties as locking people up in prison is not helpful when it serves to make them better at their chosen career.
• According to Durkheim, social facts are relative in nature which means they vary from society to society. Normal social facts at one place may be regarded as pathological at another.An important point to remember is that, for Durkheim, what constitutes a crime is something culturally relative rather than universal. A crime is a crime because it offends values, not because it is something fundamentally wrong.