FINAL PRESENTATIONBYSTACEY WILLIAMS Justice Theory 303 SherRatnabalasuriar, Instructor November 29, 2009 Arizona State University
Three Major Justice Theories
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 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………….