Comparing Functionalist and Traditional Marxist Perspectives on Crime E

there are many theories on why offensive exists as well has who is inductting the shames and the underlying reasons behind it The two main perspectives world Traditional Marxist and Functionalist both with different views they share very bittie in common, however they do chord that society shapes the individual and non the individual that shapes society. What is meant by that is that we are all products of our upbringings and learn through socializing what our looks are, what we agree on personally and often shared beliefs and the understanding of what is the average through our primary interaction with others beginning at home and act onto schooling and work. Our beliefs arent always set in stone and can transmute through time and growth and the interaction with others once outside the family domain. There are many explanations beginning with Durkheim who was a functionalist, there is Merton who doesnt totally agree with Durkheim but adopte d his theory on Anomie and made it his own. In accessory there is Hirschi whose theories mirrored that of Durkheims and before concluding, Marxist view on crime will be looked at. The Functionalist view on crime and society is consider it to the human body to explain it functions. The body has it organs whereas society has it institutions. Functionalists fool an interest in the functions of crime, hence the name and are interested in how crime contributes to society as a whole. There is a belief that society is based on consensus or agreement of shared beliefs and set of what is considered to be the norm, the views hare then passed on through socialisation. Share determine and beliefs o... ... be deviant within a corporate structure although should it go on it is highly unlikely the public would be made aware of it. save the question of mental state of an individual hasnt even been raised by any of the sociologists to explain why a person may offend . Merton seemed to mold a lot of sense but there seemed to be something absentminded in his explanations on why crime exists why some commit and others dont, perhaps the reality is there is no definite answer on why it exists. BIBLOGRAPHY Durkheim, E (1985/1987) Suicide A Study in Sociology, capital of the United Kingdom Routledge Erikson, K J. (1966) Wayward Puritans, New York Wiley Hirschi, T. (1969) Causes of delinquency, Berkeley, CA University of California Press Merton, R. (1938) amicable Structure and Anomie, American Sociological Review, Vol 3, 672-683