Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Brief Introduction to Sociology
Chapter 1 sociology a brief introduction
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Medicalization of Sociology
Sociologist utilizes several perspectives to explain individual motivations of deviance with an emphasis on biological, psychiatric, psychoanalytic, and psychological terms. The emergence of these ideals temporarily displaced social disorganization theory, which stresses a rapidly changing environment as the cause of deviant behavior. Social pathology seeks to explain deviance by evaluating conditions or circumstances, uniquely, affecting the individual. Sociological theories recognize the existense of social conditions that produce deviant behavior and how society identifies it.
Sociological pathology uses medical terms to offer explanations for deviant behavior. Terms, such as, biological, psychiatric models, psychoanalytical, and psychological presents deviant behavior as a “social sickness” which needs to treated and through medicine and psychiatric counseling. Biological explanations, usually, views deviant behavior as being an inherited trait. Cesare Lombroso was highly criticized for his studies of atavism, his theory of identifying criminal behavior as a biological degenerate. William Sheldon established an idea of a certain body build would be more prone to deviant or criminal acts. The psychiatric model view deviance as a product of some character flaw within the individual such as personal disorganization or a maladjusted personality. Under the psychiatric model, deviance is a symptom of some psychological sickness that effect individuals unless it is, effectively, detected and treated. Childhood experiences produce effects that transcend s those of all other social and cultural experiences. When these experiences are troubling to the individual it will also manifest itself as deviant behavior. The psychoanalytic explanation of deviance is best explained by Sigmund Freud’s basic conflict between the conscious and unconscious self. Psychoanalytic theory supporters say that deviance occur when the superego cannot effectively balance the id, unconscious and instinctual drives, and the ego, the conscious self. Psychological explanations attribute certain personality traits and behavioral patterns cause deviant acts. Psychologist attempt to explain deviance as products of abnormalities in psychological structures of individual deviants. They believe that inadequacies in personality traits interfere with an individual’s adjustment to society.
Social pathology and social disorganization shared similar premises as well as contrasting means to evaluate deviance. Social pathologists believed that they have identified universal criteria for a healthy society. The theory made decline because sociologists recognized the concept of cultural relativity, the view that judges cultures as being different not worse than one another. Social pathology and social disorganization were both accepted by individuals came from similar backgrounds.
The social deviance anomie theory also known as strain theory is defined as means to an end. This means that if the goals that society holds for people are unreachable individuals may turn to illegitimate ways of getting there. Throughout this paper I will provide details as to why we should use anomie theory when defining deviance among brothel workers presented in Brothel Mustang Ranch and its Women written by Alexa Albert.
...., ISHAYA, L. D., SUMAN, K., BORKAR, U. A., PRUSTY, P. B., SRIVASTAVA, A., GUPTA, S., GUPTA, K., SREENIVASULU, S. E. & JANGUBHAI, N. M. A Conceptual Overview of Deviance and Its Implication to Mental Health: a Bio psychosocial Perspective.
...ightened by Erikson’s arguments. It is not often that I hear a sociological theory and think “AH HA! I get it.” But in this case I felt as though I could have a very clear understanding of what he was trying to say. However, although the evidence of deviance through our history as humans really does go to show that deviancy brings us together in a joint force for what we believe to be the common good and morality. Erikson’s evidence of mainly court records is not an adequate basis on determining a theory to explain the nature of society and its relationship with deviancy. I think if he had a true record of how the communities he studies reacted to deviance on every level. So far his study is without official statistics. It is my belief however this study could be more accurate if there were to be data collected on processes were enables to provide alternative data.
Crime causation began to be a focus of study in the rapidly developing biological and behavioral sciences during the 19th century. Early biological theories proposed that criminal behavior is rooted in biology and based on inherited traits. Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian army prison physician, coined the term “atavism” to describe “the nature of the criminal”...
Individuals' personalities and overall quality of living are significantly influenced by several interrelated sources ranging from one's upbringing and quality of relationships to their own feelings of self-esteem and worth. Though this may seem relatively easy and un-complex, countless people today are engaged in persistent antisocial, criminal behavior, and seem unable to find an alternative, legal, means of living. While many have tried to explain such behavior through various theories, the causes of criminal activity remain to be satisfactorily clarified. Essentially, antisocial criminal activity has two aspects to it. Antisocial behavior is that in which one shuns society and others, while criminal activity is the act of performing a deed that violates an established law of the community. Obviously, such actions have serious consequences, which can range from community service and a fine to prison time. Even though there are several reasons that one may become an antisocial criminal, two theories of personality that provide reasonable explanations of this phenomenon, each in their own way, are the psychoanalytic and phenomenological theories.
This all shows how different things in and around us can influence or cause us to behave in a certain manner. Whether it be, domestic violence or another criminal act. The sociological concept allows for blame to be taken away from some individuals, victims and or perpetrators and have it placed on society. This is a good thing as it allows us to look into ourselves, and see where we can be responsible for some of the evils of the world. It forces us to take some of the blame instead of always pointing fingers on the other person. Though not all criminal behavior follow along with this concept, many do, and it is therefore important for everyone to be familiar with it and be able to put it to use.
Goode, E. (2011). Constructionist Perspectives of Deviance. Deviant Behavior (Ninth Edition ed., ). Upper Saddle River, NJ : Prentice Hall, Inc..
Deviant behavior is sociologically defined as, when someone departs from the “norms”. Most of the time when someone says deviance they think against the law or acting out in a negative behavior. To sociologists it can be both positive and negative. While most crimes are deviant, they are not always. Norms can be classified into two categories, mores and folkways. Mores are informal rules that are not written; when mores are broken, they can have serious punishments and sanctions. Folkways are informal rules that are just expected to be followed, but have no real repercussions.
Goode, E 2006, 'IS THE DEVIANCE CONCEPT STILL RELEVANT TO SOCIOLOGY?', Sociological Spectrum, 26, 6, pp. 547-558, SocINDEX with Full Text, EBSCOhost, viewed 3 June 2014.
There exists conflicting theories among sociologists in the area of determining why a person is considered to be a deviant, and the reasons behind why he or she has committed a deviant act. From a positivistic perspective, deviance is based on biological or social determinism. Alternatively, from a constructionist perspective, deviance is created and assigned by society. Both perspectives seek to give a theory for why a person may become known as deviant. Although they both view similar acts as deviant, the basic differences between positivists and constructionists theories are clear.
After reviewing the article titles given for this first assignment, I believe they indicate that Sociology, generally speaking, is not only a study of diversity or commonality in traits among people; it is also a science about factors in a person’s life and how these factors culminate responses. Interestingly enough, its topics of concern seem to be directly determined by current and common events of the world. Through the invention and expansion of new ideas, popular trends and fashions through time, Sociology adapts to responsibly to service the very subjects of interest it studies; for, even the slightest change of a person’s daily experience can have an insurmountable impact on attitude, personal growth, family dynamics and basic group behavior.
The positivist view of deviance places emphasis on individual's behavior being manipulated by outside forces (Goode, 2007, p. 23). Individual's are unable to contend with these outside forces which are beyond their control. Criminals and other deviants are created through biological defects which were responsible for their behavior, as it was something inherently organic and passed on through birth. The self-control theory of crime was developed by Travis Hirshi and Michael Gottfredson, two famous criminologists. Self-control theory, also known as the General Theory of crime, portrays deviance as stemming from the criminal's lack of ...
Sociology of Health and Illness The sociological approaches focus on identifying the two sociological theories. We critically analysed the biomedical model and doctor-patient relationship. We also evaluated how the medical professionals exercise social control and the medical professional’s contribution to ill health. The difference between society and health is studied by sociologists in relation to health and illness.
The theoretical study of societal reaction to deviance has been carried out under different names, such as, labelling theory, interactionist perspective, and the social constructionist perspective. In the sociology of deviance, the labelling theory of deviant behaviour is often used interchangeably with the societal reaction theory of deviancy. As a matter of fact, both phrases point equally to the fact that sociological explanations of deviance function as a product of social control rather than a product of psychology or genetic inheritance. Some sociologists would explain deviance by accepting without question definitions of deviance and concerning themselves with primary aetiology. However, labelling theorists stress the point of seeing deviance from the viewpoint of the deviant individual. They claim that when a person becomes known as a deviant, and is ascribed deviant behaviour patterns, it is as much, if not more, to do with the way they have been stigmatized, then the deviant act they are said to have committed. In addition, Howard S. Becker (1963), one of the earlier interaction theorists, claimed that, "social groups create deviance by making the rules whose infraction constitute deviance, and by applying those rules to particular people and labelling them as outsiders". Furthermore, the labelling theoretical approach to deviance concentrates on the social reaction to deviance committed by individuals, as well as, the interaction processes leading up to the labelling.
These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown. The first theory to be explored is the hereditary theory, which stems from Cesare Lombroso (1876) father of criminology, (Feldman, 1993) whose studies were carried out by morphology.