SOCIAL STRUCTURE AND ANOMIE
Merton’s remarkable work is “Social Structure and Anomie.” It first published in 1938 in an article form. Later, it is included in his book Social Theory and Social Structure. Merton’s theory of ‘anomie is also known as theory of deviance. The central aim of this theory is what causes deviance, its rate and type in a society?
In fact, he expands Durkheim’s concept of ‘anomie’ in his theoretical analysis. Unlike Durkheim who emphasized man’s overweening ambition to achieve unattainable goals, Merton sought “to discover how some social structures exert a definite pressure upon certain persons in the Society to engage in non-con forming rather than conforming conduct . Durkheim believes that anomie is a product of lack of regulation. On the other hand, Merton emphasises on that anomie occurs due to discontinuity between cultural goals and the institutional means available for reaching them. In this way, he firstly makes distinction between cultural goals in a society and the institutional norms that regulate them.
Although every society has some norms that regulate social behaviour of the individuals, they differ, in the degree to which these norms are integrated with the hierarchy of values or cultural goals that appear to them. Deviant behaviour, therefore, occurred due to lack of integration. As Merton puts it, “It is, indeed, my central hypothesis that aberrant behaviour may be regarded sociologically as a symptom of Association between culturally prescribed aspirations and socially struck(oared avenues for realising these aspirations”. Merton, in fact, emphasizes that deviance or aberrant behaviour is a result of malintegration between institutionalised means and cultural goals.
Social Structure and Anomie
Society is not an undivided entity. It has many parts. But only the accumulation of parts does not constitute a society just as mere accumulation of bricks, iron-bars, cement, etc., does not make a house, unless and until these constituent parts are systematically arranged. As a result of this arrangement of the different social units, an outer pattern or shape comes into being this pattern is known as social structure.
Merton has clarified. Analysed and elaborately discussed social structure. Among several elements of social and cultural structures. Two of which are of immediate importance are analytically separable, although they merge in concrete situations. The first one consists of culturally defined goals. Purposes and interests. Held out for legitimate objectives for all or for diversely located members of the society. The goals are more or less integrated- the degree of such integration is a question of empirical fact-roughly located in some hierarchy of values. With degree of sentiment and significance the prevailing goals comprise a frame of inspirational reference. Merton has aptly remarked that the things “worth striving for are a basic component of. As Linton said, “designs for group living.” And some of these cultural goals are directly related to the biological drives of man.
The second element of the cultural structure defines, regulates and contrails e acceptable modes of reaching out for these goals. Cultural objectives coupled with regulations, rooted in the mores or institutions, of allowable procedures, enable the social groups to move towards these objectives. The Regulatory norms are not identical with technical or efficiency norms. Many procedures, via, the exercise of force, fraud or power. Although thought to be most efficient in securing desired values, are ruled out of the institutional area of permitted conduct, disallowed procedures, for example, historic taboos on vivisection on medical experimentation, and on the sociological analysis of “sacred norms”, are sometimes thought to be efficient for the group itself. Thus, in all instances, institutionalized norms limit the choice of expedients for striving towards cultural goal”. Merton maintains that cultural goals and institutionalized norms jointly operate to shape prevailing practices, although they do not bear constant elation with each other. Cultural emphasis placed upon certain goals varies independently of the degree of emphasis upon institutionalized norms. The range of alternative procedures is governed by technical rather than institutional norms. All procedures which promise attainment of important goals would be permitted in this hypothetical polar case. This constitutes one type of malintegrated culture. The second polar type is found in groups where activities conceived as instrumental are transmuted into self-contained practices. Close adherence to institutionally prescribed conduct becomes a matter of ritual. Sheer conformity becomes a central value and social stability ensured at the expense of flexibility. There develops a tradition-bound sacred’ society marked by xenophobia. Between these extreme types are societies maintaining a rough balance between emphasis upon cultural goals and institutionalized practices and these constitute the into-grated and relatively stable through changing societies.
An effective equilibrium is maintained between these two phases of social structure so long as satisfactions accrue to individuals conforming to both cultural constraints, via, satisfaction from achievement of goals and satisfactions emerging directly from the institutionally canalised modes of striving to attain them. But sometimes this equilibrium may be disturbed. And with this ongoing process of attenuation, society becomes unstable and there develops, what Durkheim called, “anomie” (or formlessness)
The sociological concept of anomie, according to Merton, pre-supposes that the salient environment of individuals can be usefully thought of as involving the cultural structure, on the one hand, and the social structure, on the other. In this connection, Merton defines cultural structure as “that organised set of normative values governing behaviour which is common to me given society or group. And by social structure is meant that organic of social relationships in which members of a society or group are Narijeusly implicated. Anomie, writes Merton, is then conceived as “a breakdown in the cultural structure, occurring particularly when there is an acute Disjunction between the cultural norms and goals and the socially structured capacities of the members of the group to act in accord with then.”
Further, in a tone reminiscent of the celebrated French social philosopher, Durkheim, Merton writes : “Anomie is a process whereby exaltation of the cod generates a literal demoralization, i.e. a de-institutionalization, of the means occurs in many groups where the two components of the social structure are not highly integrated.”
As already mentioned above, according to Merton, among the various elements of social and cultural structures, two Clements are important (I) cultural goals, (ii) institutional norms. Cultural goals represent common human sentiments and attitudes and direct the members to achieve them because they are worth striving for. Linton calls them as fundamental designs for group living. Similarly, in every social structure there are some accepted and established modes or procedures for achieving these cultural goals. These are institutional norms.
Society or social structure remains integrated and organised so long as there exists a harmony between the cultural goals and institutional norms and procedures for achieving these goals. But sometimes it so happens that society lays much emphasis on certain goals but fails to provide the members (individuals) with adequate institutional norms and procedures for achieving these goals. In that case individuals develop their own individual models or procedures of action for achieving those goals. In the words of Merton, “Societies do differ in the degree to which folkways, mores and institutional controls are efficiently integrated with the goals which stand high in the hierarchy of cultural values. The culture may be such as to lead individuals to centre their emotional convictions upon the complex of culturally acclaimed ends, with far less emotional support for prescribed methods for reaching out for these ends.” For example, a culture may set a goal before a man that he, on the basis of his capacities and capabilities, can become a millionaire or the President of the country, or the husband of the most beautiful lady of the world. But it does not provide the individual with adequate and accepted institutional procedures to achieve these ends.
On the other hand, he finds that the incapable and less qualified persons are climbing high up on the social ladder by mere manipulation and unscrupulous means. This tends to develop a sense of neglect and hatred towards entire social set up and the individual may be out to disobey and deviate from all the established norms of society. Gradually, a condition of formlessness prevails, which can be regarded as the state of anomie.
Again, within a social structure individual members have certain definite statuses and roles. When in any society the roles in relation to corresponding ajar statuses are not well defined, then also, according to Merton, the state of growing may develop.” For example, today an Indian wife does not know pacifically what her role as a wife. In-laws want her to play the role of an ideal housewife, while her husband wants her to play the role of an interesting life-partner, and society wants her to play the role of an idle woman contributing to the general progress of society. Many of the women can hardly counter- balance these conflicting roles and usually become frustrated and disturbed resulting in anomie. Anything may happen if the statues are not well defined.
The increasing indiscipline and formlessness among the students today because of the fact that they do not know what the actual status of a student is and they confuse their status with the status of the teacher, or Principal or Vice-Chancellor. That is why, they may even go to the extent of curing the chair of the Vice-Chancellor and declare one as “Vice-Chan- R Linton has also stated that “the individual finds himself frequently confronted by situations in which he is uncertain both of his own statuses and Coles and of those of others.” This state of affairs give birth to anomie. Merton applies his analysis to the United States of America, where the goal of monetary success is heavily emphasized but there is no corresponding emphasis on the “legitimate avenues to march toward this goal’s At this point, anomie results only to those groups who lack the means to attain goals. Turner rightly points out, “the conditions under which institutionalised means are unequally available to the members of a social system. This situation is anomic for some segments of the population and sets into motion efforts to adapt or cope with the disjunction between means and ends. It is this disequilibrium which causes deviance, with the rate and type of deviance reflecting the degree of disequilibrium, or anomie, and the location of affected populations in the social structure of a system.
Merton outlines five possible ways in which members of American society can respond to success goals. In this discussion, Merton uses “plus (+)” and “minus (-)” sign to classify five ways to explain ‘Anomie’. In this classification, Merton used to indicate acceptance of the goal of monetary success and/or the means to the goal; and he used (-) to indicate ‘rejection’ of the goal or means to it. Merton’s classification of five ways are conformity, innovation, ritualism, retreats, and rebellion. Merton’s analysis of deviant behaviour or anomic structure can be presented diagrammatically as below:
TABLE 1
Typology of Adaptations to Anomie
Modes of Adaptation Cultural Goals Institutionalised Means
- Conformity + +
- Innovation + –
III. Ritualism – +
- Retreatism – –
- Rebellion +- +-
1 Conformity:
It is not a type of deviance. Conformity is delay diffused and the most common type of adaptation. The direful uses the institutionalised means to achieve cultural goals. Tamer puts it, use more widespread and psychologically salient are culturally defined success goals, and the more equally available to members of the system are culturally legitimated structural means for realising them, the less the potential for anomie and the higher the rates of conforming behaviour in that system.”
In fact other four types of adaptation are considered to be deviant.
- Innovation
The second type of mode of adaptation, according to Merton, is innovation. Innovation occurs when an individual accepts the goals but rejects the institutional norms governing the means for its attainment. Merton explains it. “It, is
only when a system of cultural values extols, virtually above all else, certain common success goals for the population at large while the social structure rigorously restricts or completely closes access to approved modes of reaching these goals for a considerable part of the same population, that deviant behaviour ensues on a large scale. Merton argues that members of the lower sections of the society are most likely to select this route to success. Robbery, theft, embezzlement, forgery, cheating at the examination and so on are examples of innovation. Turner explains it in the form of proposition, “The less available to members of a population are culturally legitimated structural means, and the fewer internal prohibitions against the use of culturally no legitimated means, the greater the incidence of innovative behaviour in that populations, when:
(a) cultural values dictating individual achievement are widespread and salient; and
(b) illegitimate means are more readily available.”
In innovative types of deviance, poverty and crime are interlinked to each other.
- Ritualism:
The third type of mode of adaptation is ritualism. “Status anxiety” is central to ritualism. Merton argues that “status-anxiety” are experienced by those who have some degree of access to means but who experience acute anxiety when using means for competitive efforts at success. In ritualism, individuals resolve their status anxiety by conforming to means and rejecting the success goals. This type of deviant behaviour is found among the lower middle class. However, in comparison to members of the working class, the members of the lower middle over been strongly socialised to conform to social norms and y are away from to commit crime. Turner explains it, “The availability of culturally legitimated structural means to members of a population, and the greater the status anxiety experienced by members of this population in the pursuit of cultural success goals the greater the incidence of ritualistic behaviour anion that population, when:
(a) cultural values dictating individual achievement are widespread and salient; and (b) socialisation experiences create strong psychological commitments to culturally legitimated means.
The ritualist, therefore, is deviant because individual has rejected the success goals held by most members of society.
- Retreatism:
The fourth type of mode of adaptation, according to Merton, is retreats. In retreats, the individuals have strongly internalised both the cultural goals and the institutionalised means yet are unable to achieve success. They resolve the conflict of their situation by abandoning both the goals and the means of reaching them. In the words of Turner, “The less available to members of a population are culturally legitimated structural means, and the greater the internal prohibitions against the use of culturally illegitimate means, the greater the incidence of retreats behaviour in that population, when:
(a) cultural values dictating individual achievement are widespread and salient; and (b)socialisation experiences create strong commitments to culturally legitimate means” Retreatism is found among psychotics, autisms, pariahs, outcasts, vagrants, vagabonds, tramps, chronic drunkards, and drug addicts.
- Rebellion:
The fifth and last mode of adaptation is rebellion. It is based on the rejection of both the cultural goals and the institutionalised means and their replacement by different goals and means. As Turner puts it, “The more the members of a population experience a sense of frustration and deprivation over their involvement in culturally legitimated structural means for realising success goals, and the more available to these members are groupings which ideologically criticise the structure of the sin, the greatest the incidence of rebellions behaviour in that population.” Merton argues that “it is typically members of a rise class rather than the most depressed strata who organise the resentful and rebellious into a revolutionary group.” In this sense, organised political action, populist movements, and revolutionary upheavals are examples of rebellion.
Having discussed the typology of modes of adaptation, Merton defines anomie as:
A breakdown in the cultural structure, occurring particularly when there is an acute disjunction between the cultural norms and goals And the socially structured capacities of members of the group to act in accord with them. In this conception, cultural values may help to produce behaviour which is at odds with the mandates of the values themselves.”
In other words, Merton claims that his analysis shows how the culture and structure of society generate deviance. In fact, the condition of anomie occurs when the maladjustment between the social structure and the cultural values take place. In addition, Merton also makes a distinction between two types of anomie : ‘simple’ and ‘acute’ anomie. In the words of Merton:
Simple anomie refers to the state of confusion in a group of society which is subject to conflict between value systems, resulting in some degree of uneasiness and a sense of separation from the group; acute anomie, to the deterioration and, at the extreme, the disintegration of value-systems, which results in marked anxieties.
In short, Merton accepts the view that the conflict between cultural goals and institutionalised means are the primary source of anomie. He also gives emphasis on that anomie is a sociological concept rather than psychological one. “Anomie, then, is a condition of the social surround, not a condition of particular people. People are confronted by substantial anomie when, as a matter of objective fact, they cannot rely upon a high probability that the behaviour of others will be in rough accord with standards jointly regarded as legitimate.” This statement makes Merton a sociologist. In this sense, this theory can be applied to any society, not only “the existing society”. Merton is modest in his claims in the sense that all kinds of deviance, such as, crime and juvenile delinquency can be explained by single theory of anomie. Furthermore, he does not claim that all deviance is criminal. For instance, illness and genius may both be viewed as deviance, although they do not violates the forms of a society. Let us consider Merton’s last word on this subject, It should also be said again, since it is so easily forgotten, that to central this theory upon the cultural and structural sources of deviant behaviour is not to imply that such behaviour is the characteristic, Let alone the exclusive, response to the pressures we have been examining. This an analysis of varying rates and types of deviant behaviour, not an empirical generalisations to the effect that all those subject to these pressures respond by deviation. The theory only holds that those located in places in the social structure which are particularly exposed to such stresses are more likely than others to exhibit deviant behaviour. Yet, as a result of countervailing social mechanisms, most even of these stressful positions do not typically induce deviation; conformity tends to remain the model response.
Conclusion
In short, Merton presents an innovative sociological theory of deviance. He explains deviance , terms of the nature of society rather than the nature of the individual. Furthermore, two of his categories- innovation and rebellion, are concerned with social change. Merton’s theory of anomie is considered as one of the major contributions in the field of sociology.