Anomie Theories of Durkheim and Merton

IF 0.6 Q4 SOCIOLOGY COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY Pub Date : 2023-04-19 DOI:10.1163/15691330-bja10076
I. Faizi, H. Nayebi
{"title":"Anomie Theories of Durkheim and Merton","authors":"I. Faizi, H. Nayebi","doi":"10.1163/15691330-bja10076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"\nThe theory of anomie has two main theorists: Durkheim, its founder, and Merton, who developed it. However, Durkheim’s theory of anomie is very different from Merton’s. This difference has been largely ignored due to the dominance of Merton’s theory in sociological research. The purpose of this article is to explain these theories and to explore their differences. This article shows that the differences between Durkheim’s and Merton’s theories of anomie are mainly in explaining anomie, precedence and latency of factors, studied societies, origin of aspirations, impact of poverty and class on anomie and scope of explanation. The ignorance of these theoretical differences has led to ambiguities in meaning and differences in the definition and measuring methods for anomie, while each of these theories has distinct capabilities that, by better understanding these differences, can be used to research a range of social issues such as social deviations.","PeriodicalId":46584,"journal":{"name":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-04-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"COMPARATIVE SOCIOLOGY","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1163/15691330-bja10076","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"SOCIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The theory of anomie has two main theorists: Durkheim, its founder, and Merton, who developed it. However, Durkheim’s theory of anomie is very different from Merton’s. This difference has been largely ignored due to the dominance of Merton’s theory in sociological research. The purpose of this article is to explain these theories and to explore their differences. This article shows that the differences between Durkheim’s and Merton’s theories of anomie are mainly in explaining anomie, precedence and latency of factors, studied societies, origin of aspirations, impact of poverty and class on anomie and scope of explanation. The ignorance of these theoretical differences has led to ambiguities in meaning and differences in the definition and measuring methods for anomie, while each of these theories has distinct capabilities that, by better understanding these differences, can be used to research a range of social issues such as social deviations.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
迪尔凯姆和默顿的社会反常理论
失范理论主要有两位理论家:其创始人涂尔干和发展者默顿,但涂尔干的失范理论与默顿的失范论有很大不同。由于默顿理论在社会学研究中的主导地位,这种差异在很大程度上被忽视了。本文的目的是解释这些理论,并探讨它们之间的差异。本文认为,涂尔干和默顿的失范理论的不同之处主要在于对失范的解释、因素的先后和潜伏、所研究的社会、愿望的起源、贫困和阶级对失范现象的影响以及解释的范围。对这些理论差异的无知导致了意义的模糊,以及失范的定义和测量方法的差异,而每一种理论都有不同的能力,通过更好地理解这些差异,可以用来研究一系列社会问题,如社会偏差。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.90
自引率
16.70%
发文量
26
期刊介绍: Comparative Sociology is a quarterly international scholarly journal dedicated to advancing comparative sociological analyses of societies and cultures, institutions and organizations, groups and collectivities, networks and interactions. All submissions for articles are peer-reviewed double-blind. The journal publishes book reviews and theoretical presentations, conceptual analyses and empirical findings at all levels of comparative sociological analysis, from global and cultural to ethnographic and interactionist. Submissions are welcome not only from sociologists but also political scientists, legal scholars, economists, anthropologists and others.
期刊最新文献
Comparing Small Gatherings in Their Urban Contexts Do Trials as Part of Transitional Justice Challenge the Stigma Related to Being Targeted by Serious Human Rights Violations? Environmentally Related Taxes and Forest Loss World Society, Cultural Diversity, and Gender Gap in Political Empowerment Digitalized Electoral Democracy, Subversive Politics, and Islam
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1