Sociological Perspectives On Crime

A collection of rules authorised by a political body and enforced by those with authoritative power (Open Education Sociology Dictionary, 2017), law is a prevalent part of every society, no matter its size. However, with rules, there are always those who will violate them - an act which we refer to as crime. In this essay I aim to compare two differing sociological perspectives towards crime, the Functionalist and Marxist perspectives, its significance within society, and also if the relevancy they held at the time of writing translates into today’s society.

Firstly, however, it is important to make clear the difference between common sense and sociological explanations. These are often argued to be the same thing, though this is not
A fundamental point to his work on crime is the concept of ‘collective conscience’. In his own words, Durkheim (1960, p79) describes this as “the totality of beliefs and sentiments common to the average citizens of the same society”; or simply the shared norms and values which are considered the general standards of all members of a society. It is through this collective conscience that deviance advocates social cohesion (Marsh et al, 2006), a term which alludes to a stable society through the bringing together of its peoples. For example, the mutual social resentment which occurs in response to a crime, especially one which is observed to be despicable. For example, a murder. Such a response underlines not only the universally understood norms and values of that society, but also the perimeters of what is understood to be ‘good’ and ‘bad’, or acceptable, behaviour - something which aids in the redrawing of moral boundaries. This is referred to as ‘boundary maintenance function’ (Tierney & O’Neill, 2013), and it blends somewhat into Durkheim’s second argument regarding the breaking of laws: that it is an essential and normal part of