Aimée Robinson
Deviance can be good for society. Explain, using sociological evidence, why some
sociologist hold this view [20]
Many functionalist sociologists may hold the view that deviance and crime is good for society.
Functionalists believe that a society functions best when all of its members have a shared set of
norms and values, known as value consensus, which allows for each person to work towards the
same goal. Durkheim is a key functionalist who suggested that crime and deviance is not only
inevitable but functional for a society. This is due to the fact that not everyone will be equally
committed to collective sentiments, and so there are members of society who will inevitably act
outside of the norm. Durkheim claimed that a low level of this deviance is functional for society, as
it allows for behaviours outside of the norm to be highlighted in multiple ways that in turn reinforce
the norms of a society. Therefore deviance can be good, due to the fact that it can prevent anomie
(a state of normlessness within society) and so reinforce value consensus.
Durkheim suggested that one way in which deviance can be good for a society is that it serves a
publicity function through marking out extremes of behaviour. This refers to the fact that when a
crime is committed, people are punished. This can be through degradation ceremonies, a
traditional example being public hanging. In contemporary societies, people are still publicly
punished, usually through shaming in the media. Durkheim argues that some deviance is therefore
good as “punishment serves to heal wounds done to the collective sentiments”. This means that
the punishment acts as a deterrent, and so extreme behaviour is less likely to be repeated. This
idea is supported by Erikson, who likewise suggested that when a member of society crosses the
societies “boundaries”, they are confronted usually in the form of public degradation. Both
sociologists would argue that as a result deviance can be good, because not only does it act as a
deterrent, but it can also reinforce norms that allow for social solidarity. In this case there is social
solidarity because the members of society feel a mutual horror and fear when a criminal is publicly
degraded.
Durkheim also suggested that deviance can be functional for a society due to the fact that it acts as
a “safety valve”. This refers to the idea that some crime and deviance can be a relatively harmless
expression of either discontent or even boredom, without threatening the society as a whole. For
example, crimes such as prostitution can be a release from the stress and pressure of some family
lifestyles. This may be seen as good because it allows for all institutions of a society to remain
functional - keep working together and not be threatened - which functionalists believe is a key part
of an overall functional society (known as the organism analogy; if one institution fails, the others
may too). This is ultimately good for society as it prevents discontents being expressed in ways
that may actually prove to be more harmful than low level acts of deviance and therefore negatively
affect social order.
Finally, Durkheim argues that deviance can be good for society as it acts as a warning device to
indicate that an aspect of society is malfunctioning. A contemporary example of this may be the
riots provoked by the death of George Floyd, in which racism was highlighted as a major issue that
causes societies to malfunction. This form of deviance is functional as is draws attention to the
problems and allows for opportunities for the problems to be addressed. This awareness of
injustices can therefore be good as it leads to social change and a move towards a value
consensus regarding the need for this change.
Deviance can be good for society. Explain, using sociological evidence, why some
sociologist hold this view [20]
Many functionalist sociologists may hold the view that deviance and crime is good for society.
Functionalists believe that a society functions best when all of its members have a shared set of
norms and values, known as value consensus, which allows for each person to work towards the
same goal. Durkheim is a key functionalist who suggested that crime and deviance is not only
inevitable but functional for a society. This is due to the fact that not everyone will be equally
committed to collective sentiments, and so there are members of society who will inevitably act
outside of the norm. Durkheim claimed that a low level of this deviance is functional for society, as
it allows for behaviours outside of the norm to be highlighted in multiple ways that in turn reinforce
the norms of a society. Therefore deviance can be good, due to the fact that it can prevent anomie
(a state of normlessness within society) and so reinforce value consensus.
Durkheim suggested that one way in which deviance can be good for a society is that it serves a
publicity function through marking out extremes of behaviour. This refers to the fact that when a
crime is committed, people are punished. This can be through degradation ceremonies, a
traditional example being public hanging. In contemporary societies, people are still publicly
punished, usually through shaming in the media. Durkheim argues that some deviance is therefore
good as “punishment serves to heal wounds done to the collective sentiments”. This means that
the punishment acts as a deterrent, and so extreme behaviour is less likely to be repeated. This
idea is supported by Erikson, who likewise suggested that when a member of society crosses the
societies “boundaries”, they are confronted usually in the form of public degradation. Both
sociologists would argue that as a result deviance can be good, because not only does it act as a
deterrent, but it can also reinforce norms that allow for social solidarity. In this case there is social
solidarity because the members of society feel a mutual horror and fear when a criminal is publicly
degraded.
Durkheim also suggested that deviance can be functional for a society due to the fact that it acts as
a “safety valve”. This refers to the idea that some crime and deviance can be a relatively harmless
expression of either discontent or even boredom, without threatening the society as a whole. For
example, crimes such as prostitution can be a release from the stress and pressure of some family
lifestyles. This may be seen as good because it allows for all institutions of a society to remain
functional - keep working together and not be threatened - which functionalists believe is a key part
of an overall functional society (known as the organism analogy; if one institution fails, the others
may too). This is ultimately good for society as it prevents discontents being expressed in ways
that may actually prove to be more harmful than low level acts of deviance and therefore negatively
affect social order.
Finally, Durkheim argues that deviance can be good for society as it acts as a warning device to
indicate that an aspect of society is malfunctioning. A contemporary example of this may be the
riots provoked by the death of George Floyd, in which racism was highlighted as a major issue that
causes societies to malfunction. This form of deviance is functional as is draws attention to the
problems and allows for opportunities for the problems to be addressed. This awareness of
injustices can therefore be good as it leads to social change and a move towards a value
consensus regarding the need for this change.
