Final Presentation

FINAL PRESENTATIONBY

STACEY WILLIAMSJustice Theory 303

Sher Ratnabalasuriar, InstructorNovember 29, 2009

Arizona State University

Three Major Justice Theories

Adam Smith

Emile Durkheim

Howard Becker

Adam Smith

Born in 18th century Scotland Contemporary of Francis Hutcheson

Part of the Scottish Enlightenment Moral sense theory

Chair of Logic at Glasgow University A thinker

Major Works Theory of Moral Sentiments published in 1759 The Wealth of Nations 1797

Theory of Moral Sentiment

Humans are driven by passions Ego is a self-preserving and monitoring

device for behavior Most important is the innate human

ability to have –

SYMPATHY FOR THE NEEDS OF OTHERS TO CREATE A COMMON GOOD

SYMPATHY

Sympathy creates social unity Believed that humans cared for one

another in altruistic fashion Putting oneself in the shoes of the other

person Sympathy however requires relationship

The Wealth of Nations

Appears to be in direct conflict with previous publications

Foundation of capitalism Inspired by Karl Marx Saw Wealth in whole new light Smith’s Wealth was not money, but the

producer of the product which sold for money – the people, the workers

Revolutionary idea

Invisible Hand of Economics

Equaled liberalism Division of labor Economy determined by individual/divided

interests Whether intentional or unintentional selfish

interest results in social economic good“Smith showed that by giving themselves to such

highly rewarding economic activities in their own self interest people would also be maximizing the economic well-being of society. ”(http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/wealth_nations.html)

“Smith saw people as economic agents being as it were guided by an "invisible hand" (a term first used in his Theory of Moral Sentiments). High prices (in terms of a "natural" price related to the costs of production) of any good or service would automatically induce people to engage in its production. Increased production would lead to a greater supply and lower prices.” (http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/wealth_nations.html)

Emile Durkheim

Born 1858 Professor at the Sorbonne in Paris Lived during major social upheaval and war Focused on solidarity and harmony in society

Based on reason, rationality and science Public debates build public solidarity and harmony

Major Contributions to Theory Structural Functionalism Social Solidarity Anonmie

Structural Functionalism

Societal Institutions

Crime which

unifies society for

change

Moral and Social Laws

Structural Functionalism

Durkheim felt that crime was a necessary and inevitable party of society and that it served the “function” of unification of the greater portion of society to produce change.

Focused on those things external to the individual Social norms Social artifacts Cultural norms

Suicide

Odd that Durkheim addressed suicide at all

Broke it down into four types Altruistic Anomistic Fatalistic Egoistic

Felt that Suicide was a reflection of the solidarity of society

Anomie

The process of social solidarity breaking down and reforming and restoring solidarity

In the midst of anomie – Crime Suicide Breakdown of social structures and institutions Breakdown of family structures and

institutions Breakdown of economic stability

Anomie (continued) As a sociologist Durkheim first introduced

this idea of “anomie” in his book – The Division of Labor in Society published in 1893

“This meant that rules on how people ought to behave with each other were breaking down and thus people did not know what to expect from one another. Anomie, simply defined, is a state where norms (expectations on behaviors) are confused, unclear or not present.” (http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/week8.htm)

Anomie (continued)

Anomie has been studied not only by justice theorists, but by sociologists and criminologists in attempts to explain the breakdown of society, the impact of that down, the social problems encountered, and the reason for crime. Anomie works right into the Broken Window Theory of Crime.

Howard Becker

Most known for the “Labeling Theory” You become what you are known as Labeling theory has been studied in

Criminal justice systems Juvenile justice systems Child welfare programs Education programs

Becker – an American sociologist

Was very focused on power aspect of interpersonal relationships.

How the power affected deviance in individuals

What is the social reaction to the label Is the label a self-fulfilling prophecy? Who benefits from a label? Once labeled, always labeled?

Controversy over labels

Fancy term for a nickname or something more sinister?

What happens to those with labels? Are all labels bad? Can labels be used effectively for a better

society

Labeling Evolved from Durkheim Focused on interpretations of behavior Assumes all persons are rational prior to

receiving a label Unable to explain cause of deviant behavior

and crime[D]eviance is not a quality of the act the person

commits, but rather a consequence of the application by others of rules and sanctions to an “offender.” The deviant is one to whom that label has successfully been applied; deviant behavior is behavior that people so label.”

Deviance Label

Originate from one in a position of authority

Is self-perpetuating Isolates the labeled person from the

main-stream of society Forces the labeled person to associates

with others of the same label EXAMPLE –

PRISON CULTURES DRUG ADDICTS

Societal Views of Deviance

Men as deviants Expected to a certain extent

Women as deviants Unacceptable by any stretch of imagination Doubly deviant

Problem Part of the problem is the societal view of female

deviance. Women who use drugs are viewed as “doubly deviant,” states Sheigla Murphy, PhD, director of the Center for Substance Abuse Studies at the Institute for Scientific Analysis in California. (Szalavitz, War on Drugs). That a woman would not only abandon her traditional role of nurturer and caretaker of her husband and family and use drugs flies in the face of conservative family values. In many cases, the result is far more punitive than for the man who gets arrested for the same drug offense. (Szalavitz, War on Drugs). A drunk man is just a man who has had too much to drink. On the other hand, a woman who has had too much to drink is “disgusting.” (Szalavitz, War on Drugs).

Check out the information

Szalavitz, M, “War on Drugs, War on Women,” On the Issues, 1999; 8 (1), p 42

Lutsky, J, “Is the War on Drugs a War on Women?” Partnership for Safety and Justice, formerly Western Prison Project (2003)

http://www.ussc.gov/PRESS/rel12107.htm http://www.drugpolicy.org/library

My social problem

Wrongful sentencing of too many people under mandatory sentencing laws – leading to destruction of families an unfair sentencing for women.

How do these theories work for or against the problem?

Adam SmithSympathy

It is pretty clear that sympathy for the needs of others is NOT found in mandatory sentencing. There is no effort to walk in the shoes of the other. No room for compassion. No room for the bigger picture. There is no love of man for mankind. The law has become very retributive /utilitarian. There is no room or margin for mercy or grace. Justice is harsh and unyielding. Leading to a greater breakdown of society. Anomie.

Emile Durkheim

There is no social solidarity about the issue due to the complete and total breakdown of societal standards and institutions.

We are in the middle of a social reconstruction if we are to believe fully in Durkheim’s theory.

Durkheim does, however, make it clear where we are as a society. That, in an of itself is a strength. There is power in knowing.

Becker

Unfortunately for this problem, labeling only makes the situation worse. Where does a “jail bird” hang out? With other “jail birds.” If felons cannot get jobs because they are felons, what are they going to do? Commit more felonies. Self-fulfilling? Frightfully so. Again, the only strength I see in this theory in working with my particular social problem is re-labeling. Recovered addict, former outlaw or some such silliness.

Labels

I have a new theory –

What if we apply no labels at all? Could this stop the anomie and begin to

recreate social solidarity once more?

Just something to think about………….

Works Cited http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/549630/Adam-Smith

http://www.econlib.org/library/Smith/smWN.html

http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/smith-adam/works/wealth-of-nations/index.htm

http://www.age-of-the-sage.org/philosophy/wealth_nations.html

http://www.radford.edu/~junnever/theory/durkheim.htm

http://durkheim.itgo.com/suicide.html

http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/week8.htm

http://www.criminology.fsu.edu/crimtheory/becker.htm

http://deviance.socprobs.net/Unit_3/Theory/Labeling.htm