Three Perspectives on Social Organization

630 Words2 Pages

Law and social order constitute important elements of social change and theories of criminology (Schmalleger, 2012). Understanding the interplay between them, law and social order, gives us important insights into how and why governments either work or fail. Three different perspectives outline the interplay between the two and help us understand what is happening behind the scenes in various forms of government. These three perspectives are the consensus, pluralist, and the conflict perspectives. The consensus perspective has a very naïve view of social organization. Within this view members of society generally share the same core values (Schmalleger, 2012). Laws, according to the consensus perspective, result from a “consensus” of the people and it serves each individual equally (Schmalleger, 2012). Those who violate the law are seen as being mentally unstable, or socialized ineffectively (Schmalleger, 2012). The champion of the consensus perspective is Roscoe Pound who was the dean of Harvard Law School. He is seen by some as one of the greatest scholar of law (Schmalleger, 2012). Interesting to note about Pound is that some of his ideas roughly reflect those of Thomas Hobbes. For example; Pound believed that for a civilized society to exist, men and women must believe that others would not commit violent acts on them, and would deal with them honestly. Furthermore, Pound wrote that members of a civilized society must be able to trust that those who maintain things will do their job and, well, maintain things (Schmalleger, 2012). This is similar to Hobbes’ idea that men form social contracts with each other and with a central authority figure in order to escape fears of death and wrongdoing and allow them to pursue culture a... ... middle of paper ... ...gainst this over the short term, one would suspect that in the long term of constant pressure from wealthy groups, the law would develop biases since poor groups are less likely to afford lobbyist acting in their own interest. Through this process, one can imagine how the law would end up a tool for the powerful incrementally over time. The symptoms of which seem to mirror a commonly known fact about the USA; the rich get richer and the gap between rich and poor continually increase. Works Cited Baird, F. E. (Ed.). (2011). From Plato toDerrida. Upper Sadle River: Prentice Hall. Dwyer, J. (2010, July 20). A Smell of Pot and Privilege in the City. Retrieved from The New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/21/nyregion/21about.html?_r=3&ref=todayspaper& Schmalleger, F. (2012). Criminology Today: An Integrative Introduction. Upper Saddle River: Prentice Hall.

Open Document