Durkheim - Crime as a Normal, rather than Pathological Phenomenon
Bookmark this page

Most contemporary politicians regard crime as a problem. Durkheim argued that crime should be seen as something functional and necessary for society rather than something pathological, and a symptom of a diseased society.

In seeking to argue his case, Durkheim points to the fact that crime seems to be omnipresent across time and space. All societies, bar none, have experienced crime. Thus, crime seems to represent something of a condition of normality.

Futhermore, Durkheim argued that crime is functional. By punishing criminals, society reaffirms it own values. If crimes were not committed, then the values of society would become blurred. If there is no punishment, then there would be no way of reestablishing the values that the crime offends.

An important point to remember is that, for Durkheim, what constitutes a crime is something culturally relative rather than universal. A crime is a crime because it offends values, not because it is something fundametally wrong.

His view of crime nevertheless has come in for a great amount of criticism. Criticisms of his perspective on crime generally constitute footnotes of criticisms of his wider theories, notably functioinalism and his use of biological metaphors.

Other Notes in this Category

1. Durkheim - Crime as a Normal, rather than Pathological Phenomenon
2. Durkheim and Social Facts
3. Durkheim and the Division of Labour in Society
4. Mechanical and Organic Solidarity

Didn't find this useful?

• Visit Coursework.Info for over 14,000 GCSE, A-Level and University Essays