Question

Merton believed that deviance was the result of tension between the cultural goals or aspirations held out to the larger society, and the approved means of attaining those goals.

Well when you think about our question, you should have asked yourself the question: who is it that dictates what the "cultural goals or aspirations held out to the larger society, and the approved means of attaining those goals" are? Who tells us that the white picket fence is something we should all want? OR being married? OR having children?

So I am asking you... what pillars in our societies plays a part in what is appropriate or achievable cultural goals? And how is it perpetuated?

Answer 1

Strain theory explains deviant behaviour as an unavoidable outcome of the strain individuals experience when society does not provide satisfactory and accepted means to achieve culturally valued goals. For example, when a society places cultural value on economic success and wealth, but only offers legally sanctioned means for a small share of the population to achieve these goals, those excluded may turn to eccentric or criminal means of attaining them.

Strain Theory: An Overview

Strain theory was developed by American sociologist Robert K. Merton. It is rooted in the functionalist perspective on deviance and linked to Émile Durkheim's theory of anomie.

In Merton's theory of strain, societies are composed of two core aspects: culture and social structure. It is in the monarchy of culture that our values, beliefs, goals, and identities are developed. These are developed in response to the existing social structure of society, which is supposed to provide the means for us to achieve our goals and live out positive identities. However, often, the goals that are popular within our culture are not in balance with the means made available within the social structure. When this happens, strain can occur, and according to Merton, deviant behaviour is likely to follow.

Merton developed this theory from crime statistics, using inductive reasoning. He examined crime statistics by class and found that people from lower socioeconomic classes were more likely to commit crimes that involve acquisition (stealing in one form or another). Merton then developed strain theory to explain why this is so.

According to his theory, when people cannot attain the "legitimate goal" of economic success through what society defines as the "legitimate means"—dedication and hard work—they may turn to other illegitimate means of attaining that goal. For Merton, this explained why people with less money and items that demonstrated material success would steal. The cultural value on economic success is so great that the social force of it pushes some to attain it or the appearance of it through any means necessary.

Merton argued that the cultural system of the USA was built on the ‘American Dream’ – a set of meritocratic principles which assured the American public that equality of opportunity was available to all, regardless of class, gender or society. The ‘American Dream’ encouraged individuals to pursue a goal of success which was largely measured in terms of the gaining of wealth and physical goods. People were expected to pursue this goal through legitimate means such as education and work. The dominant cultural message was if you are ambitious, talented and work hard, then revenue and prosperity should be your rewards.

However Merton pointed out that these goals were not attainable by all, that the structural organisation of the USA mean that the means to get on were not fairly distributed and it was difficult, if not impossible for some to compete an achieve financial success.

Merton developed the concept of ‘anomie’ to describe this imbalance between cultural goals and existing means. He argued that such an demanding society produces anomie – there is a strain or tension between the goals and means which produce unsatisfied aspirations.

Merton argued that when individuals are faced with a gap between their goals (usually finances/money related) and their current status, strain occurs. When faced with strain, people have five ways to adapt:

1. Conformity: pursing cultural goals through socially approved means.

2. Innovation: using socially unapproved or unconventional means to obtain culturally approved goals. Example: dealing drugs or stealing to achieve financial security.

3. Ritualism: using the same socially approved means to achieve less elusive goals (more modest and humble).

4. Retreatism: to reject both the cultural goals and the means to obtain it, then find a way to escape it.

5. Rebellion: to reject the cultural goals and means, then work to replace them.

Robert K. Merton's Deviance Typology Institutionalized Means accept reject CONFORMITY INNOVATION RITUALISM RETREATISM REBELLION

Illegitimate Opportunity Structures: Social Class and Crime

Illegitimate opportunity structures are the rules that operate within deviant subcultures.

American sociologists Richard Cowan and Lloyd Ohlin extended Robert K. Merton’s social strain theory to directly address juvenile delinquency and social class. If you recall, social strain theory develops a typology of deviance in which an individual can deviate on two planes. An individual can be deviant by refusing to accept social norms or an individual can deviate by accepting social norms but using deviant means to achieve their realization. In the context of the U.S., in which prosperity is a social value, one could deviate by rejecting the notion of wealth. Alternatively, one could deviate by aspiring to a wealthy lifestyle but earning one’s living as a pickpocket.

In 1960, Cowan and Ohlin published Delinquency and Opportunity: A Theory of Delinquent Gangs. In this work, they noted that the individuals who achieved social norms by deviant means frequently operated from within institutions that, similarly to those operating in normative institutions, had rules of behavior. A key to understanding Cowan and Ohlin’s theory is the notion of subculture. A subculture is a group of people with a culture that differentiates them from the larger culture to which they belong. Subcultures create a stacking or layering effect within a larger cultural context. While a pickpocket may deviate from American social norms, he adheres to social norms of a smaller group of individuals who identify as American pickpockets. Cowan and Ohlin asserted that subcultures have rules of their own. Illegitimate opportunity structures are the rules that operate within deviant subcultures. Cowan and Ohlin emphasized how the structures of these deviant subcultures paralleled the rules and operations of more socially acceptable institutions.

Cowan and Ohlin used juvenile delinquency as a case study to explore this theory of illegitimate opportunity structures. In a criminal subculture, youth learn to use crime for material gain. This subculture usually forms in areas where there is an established organization of adult crime that provides an illegitimate opportunity structure for youths to learn how to behave criminally for material success. In a conflict subculture, youth learn to form gangs as a way to express frustration about the lack of normative opportunity structures in their locality. New initiates into the gang will learn how to engage in conflict or gang activities to express frustrations by watching gang leadership. Thus, gangs become a subculture of their own, in contradistinction to the normative, peaceful model of youth behaviour. Finally, in a retreatist subculture youth learn to reject both legitimate and illegitimate opportunity structures. These individuals are thought to be “double failures” in that they engage in conduct that is neither normative nor accepted by society at large nor deviant but accepted by a subculture.

Criminal and conflict subcultures demonstrate that individuals can reject the normative means of the culture at large and still find a place within a smaller deviant subculture. The retreatist subculture is the exception that proves the rule of illegitimate opportunity structures. The extreme deviance and isolation of individuals affiliated with a retreatist subculture demonstrate that others who engage in deviant behaviour are able to find a subculture to which to subscribe.

WHITE-PICKET-FENCE

A state of mind where a person blindly holds on to the idea of their perfect lifestyle, regardless of the inevitable life factors that make it impossible for it to be true.

I have known Cris for so many years! I love how she has allowed God to write a story though her pain! You will be moved by the strength and compassion that God has formed in her though trials and hardships. Her story will encourage yours as you find yourself trying to build your white pickets and for every one you put up, another falls down. – Willow

The four pillars of sustainability

The term sustainability is broadly used to indicate programs, initiatives and actions aimed at the preservation of a particular resource. However, it actually refers to four distinct areas: human, social, economic and environmental - known as the four pillars of sustainability.

Human sustainability

Human sustainability aims to maintain and improve the human capital in society. Investments in the health and education systems, access to services, nutrition, knowledge and skills are all programs under the umbrella of human sustainability. Natural resources and spaces available are limited and there is a need to balance continual growth with improvements to health and achieving economic wellbeing for everyone. In the context of business, an organisation will view itself as a member of society and promote business values that respect human capital. Human sustainability focuses on the importance of anyone directly or indirectly involved in the making of products, or provision of services or broader stakeholders (the human capital of the organisation) (Benn et al., 2014). Communities around the globe may be positively or negatively affected by business activities, or impacted through methods used to source raw materials. Human sustainability encompasses the development of skills and human capacity to support the functions and sustainability of the organisation and to promote the wellbeing of communities and society.

Social sustainability

Social sustainability aims to preserve social capital by investing and creating services that constitute the framework of our society. The concept accommodates a larger view of the world in relation to communities, cultures and globalisation. It means to preserve future generations and to acknowledge that what we do can have an impact on others and on the world. Social sustainability focuses on maintaining and improving social quality with concepts such as cohesion, reciprocity and honesty and the importance of relationships amongst people. It can be encouraged and supported by laws, information and shared ideas of equality and rights. Social sustainability incorporates the idea of sustainable development as defined by the United Nations sustainable development goals. The principle of sustainable development addresses social and economic improvement that protects the environment and supports equality, and therefore the economy and society and the ecological system are mutually dependent (Diesendorf, 2000).

Economic sustainability

Economic sustainability aims to maintain the capital intact. If social sustainability focuses on improving social equality, economic sustainability aims to improve the standard of living. In the context of business, it refers to the efficient use of assets to maintain company profitability over time. As stated by the UK Government (Annual Report 2000, January 2001):

“Maintaining high and stable levels of economic growth is one of the key objectives of sustainable development. Abandoning economic growth is not an option. But sustainable development is more than just economic growth. The quality of growth matters as well as the quantity."

Critics of this model acknowledge that a great gap in modern accounting practices is not to include the cost of damage to the earth in market prices (Hawking, 2010). A more recent approach to economics acknowledges the limited incorporation of the ecological and social components in this model. New economics is inclusive of natural capital (ecological systems) and social capital (relationships amongst people) and challenges the mantra of capital that continual growth is good and bigger is better, if it risks causing harm to the ecological and human system (Benn et al., 2014).

Environmental sustainability

Environmental sustainability aims to improve human welfare through the protection of natural capital (e.g. land, air, water, minerals etc.). Initiatives and programs are defined environmentally sustainable when they ensure that the needs of the population are met without the risk of compromising the needs of future generations. Environmental sustainability, as described by Dunphy, Benveniste, Griffiths and Sutton (2000), places emphasis on how business can achieve positive economic outcomes without doing any harm, in the short- or long-term, to the environment. According to Dunphy et al. (2000) an environmentally sustainable business seeks to integrate all four sustainability pillars, and to reach this aim each one needs to be treated equally.

The principle of the four pillars of sustainability states that for complete sustainability problems to be solved in relation to all four pillars of sustainability and then need be maintained. Although in some cases these may overlap, it is important to identify the specific type of green business to focus on, as the four types present unique characteristics. Businesses need to make a strategic decision about it so as to effectively incorporate the chosen approach into their policies and procedures.