Name: Pratham Pratap Mohanty

Roll no.: 1806

Semester: III

Subject: Sociology
ANSWER 2
The question being researched by the said sociologist is on teen suicides in the upper middle
class families or households. Her hypothesis is based on the reasoning that the relation
between number of working parents and the probability of teen suicide is positively related.
In simpler words, it can be understood at, more the number, higher the chances of a teen
committing suicide. In the said research, the researcher has restricted her study to the upper
middle-class households which is a well-off section of the society, where the variable factor
focused upon is parental supervision.

The survey method being used by the researcher is a ‘Questionnaire’. In other words, A
questionnaire is a research instrument that consists of a set of questions or other types of
prompts that aims to collect information from a respondent. A research questionnaire is
typically a mix of close-ended questions and open-ended questions.

Below attached is a draft questionnaire for the purpose of gathering information, as required
by the researcher.

TEEN DEATH AND ITS RELATION WITH THE NUMBER OF WORKING PARENTS: A SOCIAL
RESEARCH

Disclaimer: All content that the researcher receives in this phase shall be preserved with the
utmost protection and privacy. The data so collected shall be accessed by the team of the
researcher and shall not be shared with any third party organizations. The researcher will use
the name of any respondent only with his/her prior approval and shall refrain to do so in any
other possibility.

1. What is your name?

__________________________________________________________

2. Please choose your appropriate age group.

a) 12-13
b) 14-15
c) 16-17
d) 18-19
3. Where do you live?
__________________________________________________________

4. What kind of category does your family fits in?

a) Joint Family
b) Nuclear Family
5. Are your both parents working?
a) Yes
b) No
6. What is profession of your Father?

__________________________________________________________

7. What is the profession of your Mother?

__________________________________________________________

8. Daily work hours of parents? (Both included)

a) 4-5 hours
b) 5-6 hours
c) 6-7 hours
d) Above 7 hours
9. Are your parents able to satisfy all your needs? (Necessities or luxurious)
a) Yes
b) No.
10. Please rate your interaction with your parents? (Going out)
a) Very often
b) Often
c) Rarely
11. Are you satisfied with the time you spend with them?
a) Yes
b) No
12. Do you prefer to spend time with family or friends or alone?

__________________________________________________________
 13. If the answer to above question is alone, do you think that lack of supervision of your
parents affects this decision of yours?
a) Yes
b) No
c) Maybe
14. If yes, then please cite your reason.

__________________________________________________________

15. Do you in support of the argument that lack of proper parental guidance can lead to
psychological issues in children?
a) Yes
b) No
16. Do you think that the increase in the number of working parents is proportionally
linked to the increased chances of a teen committing suicide?
a) Yes
b) No
17. If you are to suggest your parents something to improve your relationship with them,
what would it be?

__________________________________________________________

18. Have you ever had suicidal thoughts in your life?

a) Yes
b) No
19. If yes, what was the reason?

__________________________________________________________

20. Do you talk to your friends about your mental issues? (If any)
a) Yes
b) No

Advantages of Questionnaire:

A) As a large number of responses can be obtained in a period of less time, it is a rapid

process. It is a time saving strategy.
B) When the size of the respondents increases the importance of this quantitative method
increases as it becomes easy for the sociologist to generalize the study question in the light of
the answers. Generality is a force of the methodology of the survey, since it is assumed that
what is true for the representative population (the chosen sample) often applies to the general
population.

C) It increases reliability of the survey. In questionnaire there are standard questions which
are asked by the researcher and this increases the reliability as same questions are asked from
a number of respondents. This is often missing from an interview as it is a flexible tool and
the researcher might ask the questions as per the need of the respondent.

D) Another advantage is of versatility. The questionnaire is a tool that can be used in

different professions and disciplines and to study various issues.

Disadvantages of Questionnaire:

A) Like any other method, questionnaire also has some drawback in the form of validity. The
element of variation in interpretation of questions is missing in a questionnaire as the
questions are standardized. This is available in an interview. There might occur a situation
where come a question in which the researcher has provided options to choose from but the
respondent might not find his choice in those options.

B) The top questions which are available in an interview are missing from the questionnaire.
On the top questions, the researcher may add a new related question to an answer from a
respondent.

D) It might result in delay as the respondent might not be able to respond or give a late
response. Many times, respondents try to refrain from answering in the pretext of work or
some other work.

Appropriateness of the method used:

The above advantages and disadvantages clears the air on the usability of questionnaire as a
method for collecting data for the purpose of a social researchAs the sample size is too broad
and diversified, I think the questionnaire is a safe choice to go with in the current context.
Conducting an interview instead of a questionnaire can lead to a major rise in field work.
While the subject is obviously a sensitive topic, it is generally being surveyed, i.e. a particular
form is not being pointed out.
The generality of the topic gives an upper hand to questionnaire. In addition, it is correct to
conclude that the respondent is sufficiently literate and qualified to understand the questions
on their own and correctly answer them, since they all belong to the upper middle class. The
critical condition of the education and maintaining the respondent's anonymity are therefore
verified and I think it is an effective instrument in the current context and it will enable
sociologists to verify their hypothesis, which is the positive relationship between the number
of working parents and teenage death through suicides in upper middle class families.

ANSWER 3
Concept of Property and Evolution of Family

Family as an institution stands at the core of any society. It can be seen as the binding factors
between various elements or individuals in the society. However, the origin of the notion of
such an institution which went on to be called as family, has been widely discussed upon.
Apart from other factors, the notion of “private property” has widely been upheld as the
origin of family by various Sociologists.

1. People needed the institution of Family to overcome the chaos that was prevailing in
the state of nature. If everyone gets to do what they want to, they realized they need to
institutionalize the norms.
2. Sociologist argue that Family as an institution has emerged due to human Psyche of
wanting to have control on things, which has eventually developed with time.
3. In the early period, or when man was an hunter or gatherer, such concept did not
exist. However, gradually the concept of private property came up and people wanted
to protect what was theirs.
4. This is similar the notions parents have that a child is their product, so they should
have a control over him and protect him.
5. Thus Human nature of control is the reason behind this concept

Stages of Development

With the pace of time, the institution of family has undergone a sever change and these can
be seen as various stages of developments. These changes can be classified into 4 stages

1. Pre industrial family: This family was more deeply connected and worked together,
such as in the field of production or agriculture. The family consisted of man, woman
and child may be extended family.
 2. Industrial family: This kind of family came up during the industrial revolution.
Different job opportunities came up in major cities. Therefore, the men moved to
cities to work while the females lead the family back at the native place.

However, many sociologists believe that women headed family our of compulsion
rather than compassion. In that era, husband used to marry someone else and left the
previous wife, added to the fact that mortality rate among men was high. Thus,
women needed someone to lead the family and thus they took the seat of the head in
the family.

3. Symmetrical family: Towards this stage, men returned back home to their family.
Towards the middle of the twentieth century a new type of family began to emerge,
although mainly seen as a nuclear family with two generations of parents and
children, another view of this family was of a symmetrical family, because the women
of the house were beginning to be offered opportunities in education which led to
more women working outside the home in offices, factories and other places where
until previously only men were seen to work. This resulted in a change from
segregated roles to conjugal roles where the household chores and childcare were
shared among the family members.
Additionally, man also helped the women in household chores and thus a balance was
maintained. This was seen as the idealist model of a family by many sociologists.
4. Managing Family: Due to rapid industrialisation, the institution of family becomes
secondary for husband. He is more involved with his work and job. The independence
factors come in. Similarly, women too thinks she doesn’t need a family or husband
and want to make their own independent decisions.

Change in Structure and Function of a family

As families and households have started to change since the early industrial times, so has the
roles and functions within the structure of the family changed as well. Some of these changes
can be listed down as follows:

a) The Sexual Regulation Function of the family has not changed much. The family
through its agent, marriage, still regulates the sexual impulse of the people. Illicit
sexual behaviour is fairly uncommon. But it is true that in the Western societies pre-
marital and extra-marital sex relations are on the increase. Thus, the rate of divorce
has also gone up since the part century.
b) The Reproductive Function of the family has suffered particularly in the Western
societies. In the Western societies, it is said, parents no longer desire more children.
Absence of children has become the most glaring feature of the Western families.
However, it is impossible to take away this reproductive function of the family. The
very survival of the human race is based on reproduction.

c) In the past fifty years the Parental and the Educational Functions of the family have
been shifted to certain external agencies like hospitals, out-patient clinics for mothers,
maternity homes, the baby clinics, nurseries, kindergartens, etc. When families moved
to the cities to work, they lost the ability to share the domestic and childcare duties
among other family members. This function was taken over by the newly formed
specialised institutions which were being introduced within the cities to accommodate
the growing workforce.

d) The Protective Functions of the family have declined particularly in the West.
Families are no more the place of protection for the physically handicapped, mentally
retarded, aged, diseased, infirm and insane people. Other agencies have taken over
this function. But, for the young children it continues to provide physical and
emotional protection.

e) The Economic Function of the family has been disturbed a great deal. The family is
no longer the economic unit, neither is it self-sufficient. It is no longer united by
shared work, for its members work separately. It is more a consuming unit than a
producing centre. However, the family 1s not completely losing this function, but it is
transforming this function to some external agencies.

f) It seems that the Socialisation Function of the family is gaining increased attention
particularly in the Western Society. An earlier generation knew little about the
personality development. We know something today of the roleemotional
development, school progress, career success. physical well-being, and practically all
other aspects of the good life.

g) The Status-Ascription Function has been weakened since in modern society much
emphasis is laid on achieved status. Still, the ethnic, religious, class, residential,
nationality and other kinds of statuses are ascribed by the family 7. the individual at
least in the initial stages in some way or other.
 h) The Recreational Function of the family is losing importance. External agencies have
taken away this Modern function recreation is highly commercialised. Movies, dance
halls, night clubs, gambling centres have come into being. People leave home to seek
these commercialised recreations. But they tend to leave home as single adults or
married couples, as adolescents or children, rather than as a family unit. This has
affected the cohesion of family.

Thus, Society has had to readjust to continually evolving structures and new attitudes. It is
through this process of structural, value change and adaptation to these changes that the
modern 21st century family is emerging.

Legislative Methods as a factor

Apart from other factors affecting the institution of family, legislative measure is one such
factor which plays an essential role. Prohibition of early marriages and fixing the age of
marriage by the Child Marriage Restraint Act, 1929 and the Hindu Marriage Act, 1955, have
lengthened the period of education. The freedom of mate-selection and marriage in any caste
or religion without the parents’ consent, after a certain age has been permitted through by the
Spectal Marriage Act, l954. This legislation gave a blow to the parental authority to decide
their children's marriage. Additionally, various other legislations such as the Widow
Remarriage Act, 1856, brought upon the freedom of remarriage; the Hindu Marriage Act,
1955 which permits divorce; and the Hindu Succession Act, 1956 which gives share to
daughter in parental property, together, have modified inter- personal relations within the
family, the composition of the family and the stability of the joint family.

ANSWER 4
Distribution of activities in my family

I believe, in my family most of these works are equally divided among the male and female
members. Considering the fact that I come from a nuclear family and it only consists of my
mother, father and me, the household work is balanced out. Both my parents are working
officials and thus the burden of earning a livelihood is divided among them. Most of the
household and expenditure related decisions are mutually decided by my parents after
required discussions and my opinion is also taken, wherever needed. Coming to the daily
chores such as washing clothes, marketing, etc, they are mostly handled by my mother but
equally contributed to by me and my father. While my mother takes the duty of cooking and
washing clothes, my father looks after the purchasing, daily rituals and I take care of
mopping, cleaning and related activities.

Analysis: Considering my own family, I don’t believe there is any kind of gender disparity in
my household. However, the reason behind the same can be attributed to various factors such
as socialisation, education and upbringing by their respective parents or guardians.

Socialisation

Socialisation refers to the environment in which one is brought up or lives in throughout his
growth. For example, Mowgli was a human but didn’t have such behaviour because he was
brought up in a jungle by wild animals.

It is important to understand that whenever a new member comes, he is introduced to the

rules and norms of the society so as to bring harmony among the members. Learning about
the norms of society continues till one remains a part of the society.

Another definition of Socialisation can be seen as the process of learning by which value
system of society and various patterns of life are internalized in personality so that biological
being can convert into a social being.

Additionally, it is believed that this process starts with the birth of an individual and ends at
the death. The scientists believe that the majority of this training is done in the initial years of
the personality development. Physical maturity and social maturity goes on simultaneously
but are two different concepts. Social maturity depends more on social exposure.

Therefore, it can be rightly concluded that socialisation is a significant factor in deciding the
roles of individual in a house hold or society.

Gender Role Segregation

Gender socialization can be understood as the mechanism by which children learn about their
gender-related social expectations and behaviours. As children develop a sense of their own
gender identity, they pay greater attention to gender-related details and in particular, to same-
gender models.

Various stages of socialization

There are various stages of socialization, however, the primary 5 stages are as follows:
 1. Oral: When a child takes birth to the time he reaches the age of 1(one) can be
attributed as this stage. Even in this age, the child recognizes significant others, like
mother and father. Major learning is dependent on oral inputs and also communicates
using oral sounds, to express his wants.

2. Anal: This stage is attributed to the time period between 1 to 3 years of age. The child
starts to develop cognitive skills and also learns to judge on what is right or wrong.
The process of visualization also begins, as he starts to identify complex objects. The
most important learning is to distinct between reward and punishment, which follows
his actions.

3. Oedipus Stage: This stage continues with a child till he/she reaches puberty. He
learns the feeling of jealousy or inclination towards a person, such as towards his
father. Physical changes starts to develop and thus leads to important learning of
gender socialization. The child starts to understand the difference between gender and
sex.

4. Adolescence Stage: The stage is attributed to the age between 13 to 18 years. The
stage can be very complicated, as the person becomes aggressive, feels like changing
society and thus conflicts rises. However, these conflicts or issues may not persist
after this stage. The most important learning of this stage to balance social norms and
own impulses or desires. Several attempts are made to reconcile with them. Various
social agents helps in developing such a balance.

5. Adult Socialization: The stage is attributed to the period after 18 years of age, to
throughout life. A person has multiple roles in adulthood and he learns through all of
them. Various stages may bring complicacies, but the person ultimately learns from
them.

Therefore, a child in his Oedipus stage learns the gender role segregation. In conjunction with
early exposure to gender from various sources of socialization, such as parents, siblings and
peers, this gender sensitivity has immediate effects on the attitudes and actions of children
towards members of their own and other gender classes. Adolescence is a critical period in
which gender attitudes and behaviours intensify and new gender roles emerge.
However, Gender stereotypes can be a result of gender socialization. Girls and boys are
expected to act in certain ways, and these ways are socialized by the norms of the society.
These norms tend to mould a child in a certain way.

In this context Herbert Meade’s Role Play Theory also comes into play-

Role playing teaches social norms in younger ages. A child learns about the roles attached
with each status. For example, in each ghar-ghar game, the perception of the role of a mother
would be different and this perception would depend upon how the child views his own
mother. If the mother would be a housewife, the child would associate the roles of a
housewife with the status of a mother. Thus, the individuals learn from their significant
others, i.e., from those in primary, extremely close relationships. This teaches the person
about their roles. Nexus with idea of criminal socialization. Young criminals are found to
have picked up criminal tendencies from father, elder brothers, etc.

Thus, with time the, domain of interaction widens and eventually you become ready for
societal life

Theory of Socialisation and Gender Socialisation

The very question that this concept put forward is whether culture affects one’s personality?

a) The first view does not believe that personality is influenced by culture. It focuses on
biological makeup. Genetics determine how the personality of a person develops.
Only our genetic makeup can determine how hard we can work, and thus, this
biological criterion would decide our ability to become successful. This view stresses
on the nature of a person in deciding his personality rather than nurturing.
b) The other view believes that personality is not affected by biological factors and is
developed solely as a result of the culture that the person is exposed to. It does not
believe that personality traits can be derived by virtue of birth. Social conditioning,
develops and alters personality. People are born as blank papers and their experiences
determine how their personality pans out. This view believes that nurturing, and not
nature, determines personality.
c) A third view, striking a balance between these two extreme views, is perhaps the best
one. While certain fundamentals in a person’s personality are determined by
biological factors, social conditioning plays an important role as well. Both nature and
nurturing determine an individual’s personality.
In this discussion of effects of culture on one’s personality, the concept of gender
socialisation is important. Margaret Meade conducted a research to analyse whether the
common notion of men being naturally aggressive and women being naturally passive is true.
She researched three different communities for her work, which interalia included the
following:

 In one community, both men and women were found to be aggressive.

 In another, both were relatively passive.
 In the third community, dominated by women, she saw a role reversal.

In areas normally considered to be dominated by males, women served, while males confined
themselves to tasks typically associated with females. She therefore concluded that the
creation of personalities was not based on nature, but on culture.

Thus, it can be concluded that Personality is predominantly determined by culture. However,

if culture defines personality, then why are people within cultures different? This happens
due to three factors, primarily.

a) Subculture Influence

Subculture groups are groups with beliefs and norms within a larger cultural community that
set them apart from the larger group. People belong to distinct subgroups, even with a
common community. In India for example, diverse subgroups like Rajasthanis, Delhiites,
Bengalis, etc can be formed. Learning in the subgroup is greater than that in the larger culture
group. Thus, people are different.

Because of cultural alternatives, variations still occur. Sociological aspects common to all
cultures are called cultural universals, while cultural alternatives are called sociological
aspects that vary across cultures. Marriage as an institution is a universal cultural feature. Yet
various cultures have different kinds of marriages. Individuals get distinct cultural mouldings
because of those cultural alternatives. In essence, this leads to variations in personality
characteristics.

b) Biological Differences

As discussed above, biological factors influence personality. Thus, differences on an

individual to individual basis exist due to genetic differences.

c) Situational Differences
For each person, social environments differ. Different circumstances lead to various kinds of
interactions, leading to different personalities of different kinds. Thus, even though we
consider twins living within the same community with high levels of genetic similarities,
situational variations will result in differences in their personalities.

ANSWER 5
In the words of famous sociologist Sorokin, Social Stratification mean “the differentiation of
a given population into hierarchically superposed classes. It is manifested in the existence of
upper and lower social layers. Its basis and very essence consist in an unequal distribution of
rights and privileges, duties and responsibilities, social values and privations, social power
and influences among the members of a society.”

It stands on the logic that though people might be equal, not everyone is the same. People can
be differentiated on various grounds. Thus, sociologists have come round with a set of
grounds on which 'differentiation' institutionalized 'social inequality and stratification' in the
society'.

The most exhaustive list was coined by Parsons, which listed the grounds as follows:

a) Quality: These refer to inborn qualities shaped by society. Personality traits like
intellectual capabilities are included in this category.
b) Possession: Refers to possession of resources, money, for example. It may either be
acquired or ascribed. This determines the opportunities that the individual would have
access to.
c) Performance: This factor determines how well the individual actualises his qualities
and possessions in the society. Differentiation leads to stratification or layering.
Society places people in positions or statuses on the basis of criteria like class, caste,
race, gender, age, etc. on the basis of this, a hierarchy is formed. Though we feel
equality should exist, this layering is a fact. The caste system is a good example of
this.

Nimkoff, a famous sociologist, had also defined stratification as the process by which
individuals and groups are ranked in a more or less enduring hierarchy of status. Diverse
forms of stratification exist. Race based stratification and caste based stratification in India
are examples.

Open and Closed systems

In this context, Sociologists distinguish between two types of systems of
stratification. Closed systems are those, which accommodate little change in social position.
They do not allow people to shift levels and do not permit social relationships between
levels. Whereas, Open systems, are those, which are based on achievement, allow movement
and interaction between layers and classes. Different systems reflect, emphasize, and foster
certain cultural values and shape individual beliefs. Stratification systems include class
systems and caste systems, as well as meritocracy.

Social mobility

This can be understood through an example. If, I have a scope to change my social
stratification, then it is an open society, where class can be changed, but not caste. Some of
its types can be seen as follows: vertical or change in status in terms of group; horizontal or
where status doesn’t change, but position is slightly changed; Inter-generational or where a
person is born in a poor family, father was a cobbler, but now with efforts I became IAS
officer. Thus, from one generation to another, mobility is there; Intra-generational or can be
seen through an example where a clerk became an IAS officer with his own efforts or his
own generation, i.e. same life span.

Thus, Movement is both up to down and down to up.

Functionalist Approach

Largely speaking the hierarchical structure is functional to the society. It helps in the
identification of roles and statuses. This teaches how to live our lives and behave in the
various roles that we occupy, as a student, friend, son, etc. for example. Despite the negative
connotation, stratification helps in social interactions. In Ancient India, for example, concepts
of Swadharma and Swabhava existed. When an individual identified which Guna (trait)
dominated his personality, he would accept the reality and decide his status accordingly. The
determination of occupations was based on personality. Thus, the system was not rigid, but
actually allowed for mobility. Various sociologists have given their perspective on it. One
such important Sociologists it Talcott Parsons.

Talcott Parsons

His view revolves around American society, whose typical characteristic is to talk about
capitalists, development of society, what are qualities of a person, what he can achieve, merit,
etc. This society values universality or rational rules and regulations of society and achieved
status or doesn’t mean your ascribed status, unlike Indian where we focus on caste, kin, etc.,
of an individual at the same time. However, this is a theoretical perspective and we know as a
matter of fact that how racism exists in American society.

Parsons, to sum up, is tried to explain that somewhere stratification helps in understanding
what a person’s role and status is, which value consented by my society should I follow and
this will help me in functioning. This is why it is very important. When all individuals will
function, society as a whole will function and this stratification will lead to equilibrium in
society.

Another perspective if of renowned sociologists Kingsley Davis and Moore.

Kingsley Davis and Moore

The theory coined by the duo can be understood as a role allocation theory. Three
propositions are very important to understand in their theory. These are as follows:

a) First proposition: According to it, there are different roles in society (social
positions), which all accept. All roles must be filled.
b) Second proposition: According to it, the roles must be filled by those, who are best
able to perform them (based on qualities of the person). Some persons have different
qualities which are considered superior by society. These highly functional positions
of society should be held by highly specialized, qualified persons.
c) Third proposition: According to it, there has to be necessary training for the roles to
be undertaken.

The issue arises when we polarize the group in such a way in the name of caste/surname,
which contributes to conflict. Sub-culture influence is very strong in Indian society. This
implies that the society of which you belong has a greater effect than the broader/main
community to which you belong. Problems occur only when, due to deep seated wrong mind-
sets, these sub-cultures of two people collide. If we look at the past of society's evolution as
well as the current world of today, total equality is a utopian ideal in any form of structure.
There is a need for some form of stratification so that society can operate.

However, their perspective was widely criticized by a few sociologists.

Criticism of David & Moore by Tumin

Tumin was also a functionalist, but he countered David-Moore, saying that how can you say
that some positions are more valuable than others. How do you neglect the contributions of
employers and workers? He countered David-Moore’s distinction that this differentiation is
created because of power bargaining-who can negotiate more. The person/group who can
negotiate more control is considered superior. Due to this distinction, there is no motivation.
For example, if there are two groups in a plant, and one group negotiates well with the
leadership, greater roles would be gained.

He opposes the notion that people are driven by such a distinction. He says this ultimately
demoralizes individuals who are not in a position to achieve higher positions by power
bargaining (lower strata of society).In indian society for example, caste and other
differentiations act as a barrier in the motivation of people in terms of recruitment of talent.
In society you have unequal reward system because of power differentiations and not how
david-moore explain it.

Michael Young, a renowned sociologist, had coined the term meritocracy. This means that
everything must be decided on the merit of the person and not on the basis of which
caste/strata you belong to. Hierarchy is there, but it is to be based on merit. The social
positions must be allocated on the basis of higher merit. Different societies have different
meaning associated with merit. On the basis of merit a status is ascribed.

The Conflict Perspective

Conflict views stratification as a means of dividing society on the basis of control over means
of production. Thus, society is divided on the basis of economic determinants. Thus, from the
conflict perspective, stratification is viewed in a negative light. The conflict thinkers base
their idea on the concept of class which is a kind of stratification in society.

In this context, Marx’s perspective, was on how there is a polarization of the classes in
society. Class means some individuals share a relationship with means of production, form a
particular class. For eg. there are two individuals who are both cobblers. But one is the
factory owner and the other is a cobbler. They are in the same profession but their class is
different, which is determined on the basis of their relation with the means of production, i.e.
who controls the means of production. Those who control the means are owners and those
who don’t are workers, i.e. haves and have nots. Capitalists and workers – is a division
present in society.
There's a bond of dependence between these two classes in society. For their salaries and
livelihood, the workers are dependent on the owner, and the owners are often dependent on
the workers in some way or the other, since they need workers to complete the job, i.e. their
jobs. The system becomes a system of manipulation, despite this dependence.

Max Weber’s perspective

Weber’s explanation of class is different from what marx proposes. Class is determined,
according to marx, on the basis of control of means of production. Weber says that class is
determined by the market situation. This means that if we look at the contemporary
industrialized modern society, what we see is that some individuals have more skills than
other individuals. They are more trained and have qualities not present in others. This skill of
an individual determines his position in the market, where the sellers and buyers exchange
their goods and services, i.e. how well your skills are used in this market and paid in this
market. Based on this, class is determined.

Weber says there are four classes in modern society - upper class (owners), white collar
workers (more skilled middle class workers who are highly paid on the basis of their skill),
bourgeoises and the manual working class. This stratification is not based on relation with
modes of production but on market situation (whether market wants your skills or not). The
class situation is a market situation.

ANSWER 6
The Biological School of thought

The biological theories look into the criminal physiology. They think that the criminals are
physiologically different from non-criminals.

Lombroso gave his theory of physiological variations to the Biological School of Thought.
He said that biologically inferior beings are the criminal kind. He attributed the physical signs
such as high cheek bones, no pain reaction, etc. to criminals. This was seen in both males and
females, according to him.

However, he never contended that the probability of that person becoming a criminal is
absolute, but he believed that if get such socialization which is related to criminal activities,
he/she shall not be able resist themselves from becoming one criminal, i.e., the chances of
these people becoming a criminal is imminently high.

Sheldon extended Lombroso’s theory, and gave the distinction on the basis of body. He
categorized humans into three types for the convenience, which are as follows:

a) Endomorphic: People who are soft, fat.

b) Mesomorphic: People who are Athletic and in shape.

c) Ectomorphic: People who are tall, thin.

As per his analysis and theory, the people that lie in the Mesomorphic category have the most
chance of ending up as a criminal. Another aspect of the biological school is that is there a
heredity in crime.

Psychological School of Thought:

Opposite to the biological school, they tend to attribute the criminality of a person with his
psychological state. They believed that the problem lies within the individual which can be
biological or psychological. Basically, they speak about how a person acts among normal
people in an abnormal way. They decided to create a connection between crime and
intelligence. But it was later discovered that no positive relationship could be formed between
the two.

They brought to light aspects like psychopaths, schizophrenia, etc. Sigmund Freud
Psychoanalytic theory defined psychopath as a person who has difficulty making social
connections. They do not feel guilty doing anything wrong. They have deep scathed problems
and issues. There is no evidence that they could be cured using therapy. Another aspect is of
humanistic psychology which states that a connection has to be looked between human
psychology and social environment. Some people who are unable to satisfy their needs
through the legal means and thus taking into all these circumstances when such people are
exploited, they develop anti-social tendencies. The belief of these schools is that the deviance
that takes place at an individual level and that the society has no role to play in it whatsoever.

Sociological School of Thought:

This school of thought shifts the liability from individual being to the society as a whole and
society is sick and is the source of all such deviance. At the social group level, the
Sociological School finds the answer and says that the individual should not be blamed. In
order to find the cause of crime, elements such as constraints on an individual, sub-culture,
strain, etc. must be taken into account.

Thus, answering whether an individual is responsible solely for the crimes committed is not
true. It is the society that creates such adverse circumstances that a person is bound to take a
deviance from the socially acceptable norms. The criteria of goals and means defined in the
society is too restricted and it doesn’t take into consideration change which is bound to take
place by hook or crook.

The functionalist views on the causes of crime is a macro theory, i.e., considers element at
social level and looks at deviance as an inevitable thing.

Emile Durkheim’s slow shift from biological and psychological traits found in criminals of
the society. The truth is that society is the reason why a person commits a crime. He
gradually evolves into the type of person that society wants him to be the way in which
society treats the individual. He gives his theory of social facts in which he notes that your
behavior, which is society, is regulated by things external to you. He supports the view that
crime is inherent in nature, normal and practical, and that this is a social reality. Response
mechanisms to crimes will hang a social change in the society. It will always remain in the
society. These could probably be some problems in the individual’s personality or some
breakdown between the society and individual which leads to the individual committing the
crimes.

There is an integration between the community and the individual according to him. This
integration mainly implies that a state of normlessness is achieved, a sense of detachment is
achieved, a state of anomy that causes the person to commit a crime. He agrees that there is
deviance but it is for the greater good as some norms that are old, irrelevant have to be
broken and thus the deviance to such norms brings positive change in the society. Some
scholars have given an example of prostitution which is considered to have positive feature as
it releases the frustration of an individual and thus can act as a safety valve for the family.

Merton, gave theory in context of American Society, is another functionalist who extended
the theory of Anomaly given by Emile Durkheim.

He presents the notion of objectives and means to fulfill certain goals that have been
institutionalized by society. For eg., a goal to get a corporate job or crack UPSC is
institutionalized by society and even the means to achieve are institutionalized.
He gives 5 types of reactions when an individual tries to achieve this within impositions of
the society:

1. Innovators: Where he only accepts the goal (- +). In innovation one accepts the goals
but not the means. The chance of commitment of crimes is higher in this class of
people. When one does not accept the means which society gives, crime increases.
(Attaining social goals by certain innovative ways). Ex- When a person wants to get
good marks (goal) but doesn’t want to work hard for it (not accepting the means) then
he may innovate and use cheating to achieve the goal (Adhering the wrong methods).
2. Ritualists: Where he only accepts the means (+ -). They are not ready to
accommodate the goals set by the society. But the means are accepted by them.
3. Conformists: Where he accepts both (+). It is who confirms with the norms of the
society as well as the means to achieve such objectives. There is no scope where the
individuals go against the society. One internalizes the societal objectives and goals.
(Attaining Societal Goals by socially accepted norms).
4. Retreatism: Where he rejects both (- -): highest state of anomie. They might not be
harming the others. They would deviate from the society and form their own small
groups. (Rejection of both means and the goals).
5. Rebellion (X): Rebellious persons, rebellion is changing the goals and they are
changing the means. They will challenge both means and goals and changes the goals.
(Combination of rejection of societal goals and means and substituting it).

So, he believes that it is the fault of the rigidness with which these goals and means have
been institutionalized that deviance takes place.

Criticism of Merton has been given by Cohen who says that his theory fits more on
utilitarian crimes and forgets to explain the non-utilitarian crimes like murder. He says his
idea is sub-culture, and people take the sub-culture out of the broader culture, then turn it
upside down. This can be demonstrated by the gangs operating in society that since they don't
believe in it will do something contrary to the greater community. However, he too believes
that the individual simply responds to the problem that lie in the social system itself.

The interactionists theory is a micro level theory. It aims to explore the individual
relationship between individual and community and individual and society and to see how the
individual talks and society/group reacts.
Labelling theory by Baker: It states that if you label a person and repeatingly do it, it will be
reflected in their behaviour. For example, One person steals once and then the society labels
him as a thief. This label exerts a pressure on the person and might lead him to go down the
wrong path again. Another example is labelling a woman of a bad character.

In this context, Cicouren conducted a study called “Negotiation of Justice”. He conducted a

study in California on Juvenile delinquency & how justice system tags them as a juvenile. On
reporting of a crime, the investigation authorities look for these tagged juveniles or search the
people living in ‘Bad Areas’ (tagged by the system). They begin by identifying those
individuals who were convicted of a crime earlier. This is a standard process that is followed.
The police are attempting to take them to prison and interrogate them. Therefore these
stereotypical labels that exist in the social contract agencies lead to juvenile delinquency.
These individuals also undergo unfair punishments to appease society (for no serious
wrongs). These labels end up being a part of the identity of the individual who guides his/her
actions.

Both views thus simply lay the blame on the shoulders of the state, with macro and micro
levels of these theories being the main difference. Though he examples given while
explanation substantiates the same. Therefore, it is right to conclude that yes, the source of
deviance and crime inherent in the very nature of society.