Which scientists developed the following theories of deviant behavior. Norms of behavior and social control
41. Concepts of deviant behavior.
Since deviation is a process caused by social factors, it is important to establish the social determination of deviant behavior. There are a number of theories explaining the deviation by various reasons - physiological, psychological, socio-cultural, socio-economic, etc.
Biological theories (theories of physical types)
Some of the first attempts to explain deviant behavior (in the late 19th and early 20th centuries) were predominantly biological in nature. The reason for the tendency to various deviations was seen in the innate properties of a person. That is, the basic premise of all theories of physical types is that certain physical traits of a person predetermine the various deviations from the norms committed by her. The idea itself is as old as human history. In societies, expressions have long been rooted: "the face of a murderer", "perverse features of the face", etc. Among the followers of the theories of physical types can be called C. Lombroso, W. Sheldon.
So, created by the Italian psychiatrist and criminologist C. Lombroso in the 1870s. theory explained the causes of deviation, mainly crime, by certain anatomical features. Having studied the appearance and physical characteristics of criminals, C. Lombroso concluded that the “criminal personality type” is characterized by a protruding lower jaw and reduced sensitivity to pain, which are signs of degradation to earlier stages of human evolution. Lombroso recognized that social conditions can influence the development of criminal behavior, but considered most criminals to be degenerate and mentally retarded. Precisely because they supposedly have not reached their full development as human beings, their actions usually do not conform to the rules of human society.
This direction was developed in the 40s. XX century in the concept of the American psychologist and physician W. Sheldon, according to which people with a certain physical constitution tend to commit social deviations condemned by society. W. Sheldon singled out three main physical types of people: endomorphic (roundness of shapes, overweight), mesomorphic type (muscular, athletic), ectomorphic type (slenderness, thinness) and argued that mesomorphs are the most prone to deviation - individuals who are distinguished by physical strength , increased activity and decreased sensitivity.
Practice has proven the inconsistency of theories of physical types. Everyone knows numerous cases when individuals with the face of cherubs committed the gravest crimes, and an individual with rude, "criminal" facial features could not even hurt a fly.
Psychological theories
Like biological theories, psychological theories seek to explain behavioral deviations in the individual, not in society. The basis of psychological (psychoanalytic) theories of deviant behavior is the study of conflicts occurring within the consciousness of the individual. According to the theory of 3. Freud, each person has an area of the unconscious under the layer of active consciousness. The unconscious is our psychic energy, in which everything natural, primitive, knows no boundaries, knows no pity. The unconscious is the biological essence of a person who has not experienced the influence of culture. A person is able to protect himself from his own natural "lawless" state by forming his own "I", as well as the so-called "Super-I", determined solely by the culture of society. The human "I" and "Super-I" are constantly restrained by the forces that are in the unconscious, constantly limit our instincts and base passions. However, a state may arise when internal conflicts between the "I" and the unconscious, as well as between the "Super-I" and the unconscious destroy the protection and our inner content, which does not know culture, breaks out. In this case, a deviation from the cultural norms developed by the social environment of the individual.
Obviously, there is some truth in this point of view, however, the definition and diagnosis of possible violations in the structure of the human "I" and possible social deviations are extremely difficult due to the secrecy of the object of study. In addition, although each person has a conflict between biological needs and cultural prohibitions, not every person becomes a deviant.
Some scholars in this field have suggested that a small number of people develop an immoral or psychopathic personality type. Such individuals are self-contained, emotionless individuals, acting impulsively and rarely feeling guilty. However, almost all studies examining people with these characteristics have been conducted among convicts in prisons, which inevitably influenced the portrayal of such personalities in a negative light.
Thus, by analyzing any one psychological trait, conflict or complex, it is impossible to explain the essence of any kind of deviant behavior. Probably, the deviation arises as a result of the combined action of many factors (psychological, cultural, social).
Sociological theories of deviant behavior
Sociological explanations of the causes of deviation originate from the works of one of the classics of sociology E. Durkheim (1858-1917), who formulated the concept of anomie, i.e. mass deviation from the norms existing in society as the main cause of deviation.
Theory of anomie
The presence in everyday practice of a large number of conflicting norms, the uncertainty in connection with this possible choice of a course of action can lead to a phenomenon called anomie by E. Durkheim (a state of absence of norms).
Anomie is a social condition characterized by the decomposition of the value system, caused by the crisis of the whole society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the proclaimed goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority.
At the same time, Durkheim did not at all consider that modern society does not have norms, on the contrary, society has many systems of norms in which it is difficult for an individual to navigate. Anomie, therefore, according to Durkheim, is a state in which a person does not have a strong sense of belonging, no reliability and stability in choosing a line of normative behavior.
People find it difficult to coordinate their behavior according to norms that are currently becoming weak, unclear, or conflicting. During periods of rapid social change, people no longer understand what society expects from them, and experience difficulties in reconciling their actions with existing norms. The old norms no longer seem appropriate, and the new, nascent norms are still too vague and ill-defined to serve as effective and meaningful guidelines for behavior. During such periods, a sharp increase in the number of cases of deviation can be expected.
Deviant behavior, according to E. Durkheim, is necessary for society, since it performs two important functions in it. Firstly, deviation from the norms performs an adaptive function: introducing new ideas and problems into society, deviance acts as a factor in updating and implementing changes. Secondly, deviance helps to maintain the boundary between "good" and "bad" behavior in society: deviant behavior can cause such a collective reaction that strengthens group solidarity and clarifies social norms.
E. Durkheim's views on deviant behavior contributed to switching the attention of scientists from explanations based on the individual to social factors.
The idea of the anomie of society was further developed in the works of American sociologists T. Parsons and R. Merton. According to T. Parsons, anomie is "a condition in which a significant number of individuals are in a position characterized by a serious lack of integration with stable institutions, which is essential for their own personal stability and the successful functioning of social systems. The usual reaction to this condition is the unreliability of behavior." According to this approach, anomie increases due to the disorder and conflicts of moral norms in society. People begin to be limited by the norms of certain groups and as a result do not have a stable perspective according to which they need to make decisions in everyday life. In this understanding, anomie looks like the result of freedom of choice without a stable perception of reality and in the absence of stable relationships with the family, the state and other basic institutions of society. Obviously, the state of anomie most often leads to deviant behavior.
R. Merton modified the concept of anomie, attributing it to the tension that arises in the behavior of a person who finds himself in a situation where generally accepted norms come into conflict with social reality. R. Merton believed that anomie does not appear from freedom of choice, but from the inability of many individuals to follow the norms that they fully accept. He sees the main reason for the difficulties in the disharmony between cultural goals and the legal (institutional) means by which these goals are carried out. For example, while society supports the efforts of its members in the pursuit of increased wealth and high social position, the legal means of members of society to achieve such a state is very limited. The inequality that exists in society serves as the impetus that makes a member of society look for illegal means and ends, i.e. deviate from accepted cultural patterns. Indeed, when a person cannot achieve prosperity through legal socially approved means (such traditional methods as getting a good education and getting a job in a prosperous firm are officially recognized as the latter), he may resort to using illegal means that are not approved by society (such as such as drug dealing, racketeering, deceit, forgery or theft) Thus, deviations largely depend on the cultural goals and institutional means that an individual adheres to and uses.
However, the “lack of opportunities” and the desire for material well-being are not enough to create pressure towards deviation. It is only when a society promulgates common symbols of success for the whole population, while limiting the access of many people to the recognized means of achieving such symbols, that the conditions for antisocial behavior are created. Merton identified five responses to the ends-means dilemma, four of which are deviant adaptations to anomi conditions.
The first of these is conformism, i.e. passive adaptation to the existing order of things. Conformity occurs when members of a society accept as cultural goals the achievement of material success, as well as the means approved by society to achieve them. Most members of society who do not want to deviate from generally accepted norms of behavior are prone to conforming behavior, so such behavior is the backbone of a stable society.
Innovation occurs when individuals firmly adhere to culturally established goals but reject socially approved means to achieve them. Such people are capable of dealing drugs, forging checks, fraud, embezzlement, theft, burglary and robbery, or prostitution, extortion, blackmail. Ritualism occurs when members of a society reject or downplay cultural goals, but mechanically use socially approved means to achieve those goals. For example, the goals of the organization cease to be important to many zealous bureaucrats, but they cultivate means as an end in themselves, fetishizing rules and paperwork.
Retreatism consists in the fact that individuals reject both cultural goals and the recognized means of achieving them, offering nothing in return. For example, alcoholics, drug addicts, vagabonds and degraded people become outcasts in their own society; "they live in society, but do not belong to it."
The rebellion consists in the fact that the rebels reject the cultural goals of society and the means to achieve them, but at the same time replace them with new norms. Such individuals break with their social environment and join new groups with new ideologies, such as radical social movements. This goal setting is typical for some youth subcultures and revolutionary movements; it can be realized in political crimes.
R. Merton's theory of anomie focuses on those processes of establishing recognized cultural goals and means by which society initiates deviant behavior. In particular, with the help of this theory, it is possible to reveal the essence and causes of crimes related to money, committed on the basis of profit and greed, crimes among white-collar workers and corporate crimes, crimes of representatives of self-government structures and those who seek power.
However, critics of Merton's theory point out that, firstly, he loses sight of the processes of social interaction through which people form their ideas about the world and plan their actions. Merton describes the violators of social norms as individualists - people mostly self-sufficient, developing solutions for themselves to get out of stressful situations without taking into account the actions of others. Secondly, not all deviant behavior can be explained by a gap between ends and means. Merton paints a picture of an American society in which, in his opinion, there is a consensus between core values and goals. But its critics argue that American society, with its many subcultures, is pluralistic. The life of American society gives many examples when the deviant behavior of an individual can be explained by the unacceptability for him of certain norms that are prevailing in most population groups. Thus, the Indians violate the laws of hunting and fishing; representatives of some ethnic minorities enter into common marriages; people from the southern countryside are fond of cockfighting; some groups of the population make moonshine; teenagers use drugs. Additionally.
Explanations based on the concept of subculture
In the theory of anomie developed by R. Merton, in the determination of deviant behavior, serious attention is paid to cultural values, avoiding which can lead to deviant actions. This idea has found a more concrete embodiment in the theory of delinquent subcultures developed by the American sociologist A. Cohen. This theory proceeds from the fact that anomie leads sufficiently large groups of individuals, primarily young people who are not settled in life, to the search for new forms of behavior that do not correspond to the values of the dominant culture common in society. This is how subcultures arise, in which deviation from former social norms is not a deviation, but behavior that is fully consistent with the new values proclaimed by the new culture. In new subcultures, everything that is denied and condemned by the dominant culture - sexual promiscuity, aggressiveness, petty theft, vandalism, etc. - is recognized as normal means of achieving self-expression and respect from others, at least members of a given social group, for example , hippie. Thus, in delinquent subcultures, those means of achieving goals that are rejected by the dominant culture as deviant become specific norms - norms for justifying vandalism, aggressiveness, sexual promiscuity, etc.
Cultural transfer theory
A number of sociologists emphasize the similarity between the way deviant behavior is developed and the way any other style of behavior is developed. One of the first to come to this conclusion was the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde, who at the end of the 19th century. who formulated the theory of imitation to explain deviant behavior. As a district magistrate and director of crime statistics, he became convinced that repetition plays a significant role in human behavior. G. Tarde argued that criminals, like "decent" people, imitate the behavior of those individuals whom they met in life, whom they knew or heard about. But unlike law-abiding citizens, they imitate the behavior of criminals.
In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago, trying to explain the high crime rate in a number of areas of Chicago, conducted a series of studies, as a result of which they found that in certain neighborhoods of the city, crime rates remained stable for many years, despite changes in ethnic composition of the population. Scientists have concluded that criminal behavior can be transmitted from one generation to another, i.e. youth living in high crime areas adopt criminal behavior patterns. Moreover, when representatives of other ethnic groups enter these areas, deviant behavior patterns are passed on to their children from local youth.
In other words, young people become delinquents because they associate and make friends with those teenagers in whom criminal behavior patterns are already ingrained. Edwin G. Sutherland, using the findings of Chicago sociologists, developed the theory of differential association, which is based on the ideas of symbolic interactionism and emphasizes the role of social interaction in the process of shaping the views and actions of people. In a society with many subcultures, some social settings tend to encourage illegal activity while others do not. Individuals become delinquents by associating with people who are carriers of criminal norms. Basically, deviant behavior is taught in primary groups (for example, peer groups). Thus, according to E. Sutherland, individuals become offenders to the extent that they belong to an environment that follows deviant ideas, motivations and methods. The sooner contacts of an individual with a criminogenic environment begin, the more often, more intense and longer these contacts are, the higher the likelihood that such an individual will also become an offender. But there is more than mere imitation involved in this process. Deviant behavior is acquired on the basis of not only imitation, but also learning; very much depends on what exactly and from whom individuals learn. So, according to the theory of E. Sutherland, deviations are trained.
The differential association theory confirms the old adage, “Good companies make good guys, bad companies make bad guys.” When parents move to a new location to get their son away from his bully friends, they are unknowingly using the principle of differential association. The same principle is followed by the guards in the prison, who try to limit the communication of the prisoners they supervise. According to the same principle, imprisonment can lead to clearly negative consequences if young offenders are placed in the same cell with hardened criminals.
The hypothesis put forward by E. Sutherland was confirmed and experimentally substantiated in the early 1980s, when American sociologists R. Lindham and K. Fillmore established a determinant relationship between adaptability to the environment and deviation. They experimentally, based on studies conducted in two Canadian cities (Edmonton and Richmond), found that the better the adaptability of young people to the social environment, the less they have connections with their peers - offenders and the less they are prone to deviation. On the contrary, those individuals who experience serious difficulties in adapting to the conditions of the social environment are more likely to have offending friends and are more prone to deviant forms of behavior, including crime.
Thus, the theory of cultural transfer shows that socially condemned behavior can be caused by the same processes of socialization as socially approved. This theory allows us to understand why the number of cases of deviant behavior varies from group to group and from society to society. However, it cannot explain some forms of deviant behavior, especially those offenders who could not borrow from others either methods or suitable definitions and views. Examples of this include persistent breaches of financial agreements; counterfeit check makers; people who accidentally broke the law; people who commit crimes "on the basis of love." Individuals may find themselves in the same situations but perceive them differently, with different results.
Conflict theory
Although in recent decades many new directions of conflictological approach to the problem of deviation have appeared, its origin goes back to the Marxist tradition. According to orthodox Marxist theory, the capitalist ruling class exploits and robs the masses and is able to avoid retribution for their crimes. Workers - victims of capitalist oppression - in their struggle for survival are forced to commit acts that the ruling class stigmatizes as criminal. Other types of deviant behavior - alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, sexual promiscuity and prostitution - are products of moral degradation based on unscrupulous pursuit of profit and oppression of the poor, women, members of ethnic minorities. Psychological and emotional problems are explained by the alienation of people from the means of production, with the help of which they earn their livelihood, i.e. from the very basis of its existence.
The modern Marxist approach to the problem of deviation was formulated by the American sociologist Richard Quinney. According to R. Quinn, the US legal system reflects the interests and ideology of the ruling capitalist class. The law declares illegal some actions that offend the morals of those in power and pose a threat to their privileges and property: “The law is an instrument of the ruling class. Criminal law, in particular, is a tool created and used by the ruling class to preserve the existing order. In the United States, the state - and its legal system - exists to protect and maintain the capitalist interests of the ruling class." In order to "understand the nature of crime, it is necessary to understand the development of political economy in capitalist society." But if the state serves the interests of the capitalist class, then crime is ultimately a class-conditioned political act embedded in the structure of the capitalist social system.
Capitalism, in an attempt to survive in internal conflicts that undermine its foundations, commits crimes of power. One of the contradictions of capitalism is that some of its laws must be broken in order to keep the existing system safe. Here, first of all, it is necessary to name the crimes committed by corporations - from setting fixed prices to environmental pollution. In contrast to such crimes, many ordinary people's criminal misdemeanors or violations of property rights - pickpocketing, burglary, robbery, drug dealing, etc. - "made out of the need to survive" in the conditions of the capitalist social system
Crimes against the person—murder, assault, rape—are "committed by people already hardened by the conditions of life in a capitalist society." In general, according to Quinney, crime is inherent in the capitalist system. When a society creates social problems and cannot deal with them naturally, it invents and implements population control policies. Consequently, crime and criminal justice are an integral part of the larger problems of the historical development of capitalism.
According to scientists, much is true in the theory of conflict. It is quite obvious that the laws are made and enforced by individuals and social groups vested in power. As a result, laws are not neutral, but serve the interests of a particular social group and express its core values. However, according to critics of conflict theory, such intuitive guesses do not meet the requirements of scientific research. Therefore, many formulations of conflictologists require clarification (for example, it is not always clear which specific individuals or groups are meant when talking about the “ruling elite”, “ruling classes” and “the interests of those in power”) and in general, the theory of conflict needs to be verified.
Stigma theory
Proponents of the theory of stigmatization (from the Greek stigmo - stigma) took as a basis the main idea of conflictology, according to which individuals often cannot get along with each other, as they differ in their interests and outlook on life; at the same time, those in power have the opportunity to express their views and principles in the norms that govern institutional life, and successfully hang negative labels on violators of these norms. Researchers are interested in the process, as a result of which certain individuals receive the stigma of deviants, begin to consider their behavior as deviant.
Adherents of the theory of stigmatization Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson argue that, firstly, no offense in itself is criminal or non-criminal in nature. The “negativity” of an act is not due to its internal content, but to how others evaluate such an act and react to it. Deviation is always a subject of social definition.
Secondly, all people are characterized by deviant behavior associated with the violation of some norms. Supporters of this theory reject the popular idea that people can be divided into normal and those with some kind of pathology. For example, some drive over the speed limit, shoplift, cheat on homework, hide income from the tax office, get drunk, vandalize the victory of their favorite football team, trespass on private property rights, or roll in their buddy's car without asking. Supporters of the theory of stigmatization call such actions primary deviation, defining it as behavior that violates social norms, but usually escapes the attention of law enforcement agencies.
Thirdly, whether specific actions of people will be considered deviant depends on what these people do and how other people react to it, i.e. this assessment depends on what rules the society chooses to strictly follow, in what situations and in relation to what people. Not everyone who exceeded the speed limit, committed shoplifting, withheld income, violated the rights of private property, etc., is condemned. Thus, blacks can be convicted of doing things that whites can do; and women - for actions that are permissible for men; some may be condemned for the same acts that their friends do with impunity; the behavior of individuals can be defined as deviant, although it does not violate any norms, simply because they are indiscriminately accused of doing things that they may never have done (for example, a person looks “effeminate” and is labeled a homosexual) . Of particular importance is the social environment and whether it stigmatizes a particular individual as a violator of norms or not.
Fourth, labeling people has consequences for those people. It creates conditions leading to secondary deviation - deviant behavior developed by the individual in response to sanctions from others. Stigmatization theorists argue that this new deviation from the norm is initiated by hostile reactions from legislatures and law-abiding citizens. The individual receives a public definition, which is stereotyped and declared to be a delinquent, "crazy", rapist, drug addict, slacker, pervert, or criminal. The label helps to secure the individual in the status of an outsider. Such a "main" status suppresses all other statuses of the individual in the formation of his social experience and, as a result, plays the role of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Violators of the norms begin to perceive their status as a specific type of deviance and form their own life based on this status.
Fifth, those who have been branded as delinquents usually find that law-abiding citizens condemn them and do not want to "do business with them"; friends and relatives may turn away from them; in some cases they may be imprisoned or placed in a mental hospital. General condemnation and isolation will push stigmatized individuals into deviant groups consisting of people whose fate is similar to their own. Participation in a deviant subculture is a way to cope with a critical situation, find emotional support and an environment where you are accepted for who you are. In turn, joining such a deviant group strengthens the individual's self-image as a delinquent, contributes to the development of a deviant lifestyle and weakens ties with a law-abiding environment.
So, according to the theory of stigmatization, deviation is determined not by the behavior itself, but by the reaction of society to such behavior. When people's behavior is seen as deviating from accepted norms, it sets off a range of social reactions. Others define, evaluate, and label behavior. The violator of the norms begins to coordinate his further actions with such labels. In many cases, the individual develops a self-image that matches this label, as a result of which he is able to enter the path of deviation.
Thus, the theory of stigmatization helps to understand why the same act can be considered as deviant or not, depending on the situation and characteristics of the individual.
The disadvantages of the theory of stigmatization include, firstly, that it does not show what initial factors caused deviant behavior. Indeed, in many forms of deviation, it is the conditions of life that are responsible for labeling such people. Thus, it seems obvious that the vast majority of people admitted to mental hospitals experience acute disorders associated with internal psychological or neuralgic pathologies. Their confusion and suffering cannot be explained solely by the reactions of others. Labels, however, play an important role in shaping the image of former mental patients in other members of society, and in the former patients themselves.
Secondly, deviation cannot be understood in isolation from social norms. If behavior is not deviant until it has been assessed in this way, then how are such secret and unsolved crimes, such as embezzlement of public money, tax evasion, or clandestine sexual abuse, to be classified?
Summarizing the main conclusions of the above theories of deviation, as well as the results of studies of various types of deviant behavior conducted in recent years by sociologists and criminologists, we can identify the main causes that cause behavior that deviates from social norms existing in society.
1) the gap between the values of culture and the social structure existing in society;
2) the deepening contradiction between the dominant culture in society and various delinquent subcultures - the subculture of criminal groups, the subculture of groups serving prison sentences, etc.;
3) the gap between the social status of the individual and his social expectations, which is widespread in a transforming society of a transitional type, which can push individuals who have not found a worthy application of their abilities, professional, cultural level, to various types of deviant behavior;
4) alienation of the individual from the value-normative system of regulation that exists in society, when officially recognized goals and values become inaccessible to those people who would like to achieve them by legal, in any case, approved by society, ways and means;
5) the loss of a person's moral and value orientations, when the division into moral and immoral, socially approved and socially unacceptable, good and evil, permitted and unallowed disappears. In this case, a moral crisis sets in, and the person becomes a victim of permissiveness;
6) occurring in real life, especially when ideals and value orientations are collapsing, the individual's feeling of the meaninglessness of his life, leading to suicide;
7) anomie - a violation of moral precepts, legal norms, laws, etc., which, in the crisis conditions of the development of society, turns from individual into mass forms of behavior.
Among psychologists, one way or another engaged in the study of deviance, the division into supporters of innate and acquired propensity to deviance manifested itself more clearly than among scientists of another profile. The disputes between them are quite sharp, since they are, in fact, a continuation of a long-standing dispute between behaviorists and instinctivists. The former believe that human behavior is the result of exposure to various environmental stimuli. The latter are looking for the cause of behavior in internal impulses, drives and instincts. Their confrontation is one of the characteristic features of the development of psychology in the 20th century.
Relatively recently, around the end of the 1960s. In the 20th century, there has been a tendency to smooth out the contradictions between these approaches, although many disagreements are observed to this day. It should be noted that the content of the psychological concepts of deviance is not limited to the confrontation between instinctivism and behaviorism. In the modern world, humanistic and cognitive theories are gaining more and more influence. The views of representatives of the humanistic trend will be analyzed in more detail in the fifth paragraph, the reasons for which will be explained below. The whole variety of theories of deviance in modern psychology can be considered within the framework of four approaches that consider deviant behavior as: determined by innate urges or inclinations; needs activated by external cognitive and emotional processes; specific social conditions combined with prior learning.
Among the theories that interpret deviance as instinctive behavior, one of the most famous is psychoanalysis, which develops within the framework of the psychodynamic direction. The founder of this trend 3. Freud in his early works argued that all human behavior is directly or indirectly determined by eros, the life instinct, whose energy, which he calls libido, is aimed at strengthening and affirming life. Deviance was considered as a reaction to the blocking or destruction of libidinal impulses. However, later Freud somewhat changes his original theoretical scheme. He suggested the existence of a second, along with eros, basic instinct - thanatos, or the instinct of death, whose energy is directed to the destruction and termination of life. Thus, human behavior came to be seen as the result of combinations of these two instincts. However, in order to understand Freud's view of deviance, it is necessary, at least briefly, to consider his theory of personality.
Freud is famous for introducing the concept of the "unconscious" into psychology. The unconscious includes all drives, needs, memories and feelings that a person is not aware of, but which influence his behavior. Freud considered this influence much stronger than the influence of consciousness. Consciousness includes everything that is currently conscious or can be easily retrieved from memory (events, actions, desires, etc.). Along with this, Freud introduced the idea of three levels (blocks, components) of the human psyche. The first level is the most ancient and primitive part of the psyche, called "It". "It" functions entirely in the unconscious and is a "reservoir" of the instinctive energy of eros and thanatos.
This structure of the psyche is subject to the "principle of pleasure." In other words, the needs and drives that arise in the "It" require immediate satisfaction.
The second level of the psyche is the zone of consciousness and self-awareness, called "I". "I" is not only the core of our personality, but also the main mechanism for adapting a person to the outside world. Therefore, the "I" obeys the "principle of reality." In other words, drives, the immediate satisfaction of which is required by "It", "I" satisfies as far as possible and taking into account the requirements of security. The highest level of the psyche is the sphere of morality, the moral component of the personality, called the "Super-I". The area of the "Superego", sometimes called the superconsciousness, includes all the ideas about the norm, values and ideals that have become part of our personality. The superego almost always operates in the realm of the unconscious.
Indeed, you and I rarely think about the moral problems of everyday behavior, most often we just “know” which actions are “good” and which are not. "Super-I" obeys the "principle of duty", forcing a person to commit moral acts. There is a constant conflict between the demands of the moral order and the subconscious drives. "I want!" "It" says. "You must not!" - the "Super-I" objects. The most important ability of a normal person is the ability to painlessly resolve this conflict.
Here, in fact, we come to Freudian deviantology. “Normal” behavior will be in the event that the instinctive impulses of the “It” do not conflict with the normative requirements of the “Super-I”, reflected in the consciousness (“I”), giving rise to an internal conflict. Consciousness - "I" - in an effort to prevent conflict, is forced to resort to the sublimation of aggressive and sexual impulses. Sublimation is a mechanism for transferring the dark, elemental energy of instincts into a culturally acceptable framework. For example, if a person is prone to aggression (has a dominant thanatos), he can “let off steam” by doing hard physical labor or aggressive sports. If someone is faced with increased pressure on the consciousness of erotic (libidinal) impulses, then he can sublimate them into creative activities, art.
However, the pressure of subconscious drives on the "I" may be too strong to be completely sublimated. On the other hand, the immature, undeveloped "I" may be incapable of sublimation, which requires creativity. In this case, a person begins to feel anxiety, in connection with a brewing internal conflict. In these cases, consciousness, in order to mitigate the conflict between the "It" and the "Super-I" and protect itself from anxiety, uses defense mechanisms. Their action is associated with the distortion of reality and self-deception, thanks to which the consciousness is protected from traumatic and unacceptable experiences. Freud described several basic defense mechanisms - these are repression, projection, substitution, rationalization, reactive formation, regression, denial.
Repression is the suppression of subconscious drives and experiences that threaten self-consciousness and their displacement into the unconscious sphere. In this case, a person is forced to spend a significant amount of psychic energy, but the repressed desires still periodically “break through” into reality through slips of the tongue, dreams, etc. For example, a respectable father of a family may not allow the thought that he wants to cheat on his wife. At the same time, every night he dreams of crazy orgies in which he takes part. This is a typical example of the action of repressed drives. Freud called this the psychopathology of everyday life.
Projection is the attribution of one's own unacceptable experiences to others. Let's say a hypocrite is a person who hides his sexual desires and seeks out the slightest "dirty" intentions in the actions of others. Or persecution mania, when a person attributes his aggressive impulses to others, sincerely believing that they want to kill him.
Substitution is the direction of attraction energy to a safer object. For example, a man who has been yelled at by his boss lashes out at his wife and children at home, even though they did nothing wrong. Or a man who is in love with a very beautiful woman, but prefers sexual contacts with another, less beautiful, for fear that the first one will refuse him.
Rationalization is what in everyday life is called self-justification. A person seeks to give a rational explanation for actions committed under the influence of instinctive drives. Let's say the boss yelled at his employees, just because he "got up on the wrong foot." However, he explains this by the fact that the workers themselves are to blame - they performed their duties poorly.
Jet formation is a more complex defense mechanism that includes two stages. At the first stage, the unacceptable experience is suppressed, and at the second stage, the opposite feeling is formed in its place. For example, a woman who does not realize her sexuality may well turn into a man-hater. Or a brother who hates his sister, but cannot admit it to himself, can kindle a special love for his sister and surround her with all sorts of guardianship. True, it will soon be possible to notice that his concern creates significant difficulties and problems for his sister and clearly burdens her.
Regression is a return to childhood, early forms of behavior. As a rule, immature, infantile personalities resort to this type of protective mechanisms. However, normal adults in situations of mental overload can use this defense mechanism. Examples of regression are reactions to traumatic experiences or situations such as crying, "pouting" and not talking to anyone.
A variety of "childish" reactions of the psyche can be considered denial. Let's say a person in a state of intoxication commits a crime and then refuses to believe it. Or a mother whose children have tragically died acts as if they are alive.
Freud argued that defense mechanisms operate on a subconscious level, and all people resort to them from time to time. In those cases when it is not possible to reduce tension with their help, neuroses arise - whiter or less noticeable disorders of normal mental activity. At the same time, people differ among themselves in their ability to sublimate and control impulses. Much depends on the degree of development, maturity of the individual, the foundations of which are laid in early childhood. The roots of many neuroses and more severe disorders - psychoses - should, according to Freud, be sought in early childhood experiences.
In general, Freud's view of the problem of deviance and aggression is not particularly optimistic. In fact, it is a recognition that wars, violence and mental disorders are inevitable companions of human existence. They stem from instinctive, vicious human nature, only partly ennobled by moral norms and values. It should be understood that the psychodynamic view of personality is not only a scientific theory, but also a philosophy of man. In particular, the question of the meaning of human existence is removed by this view. A person is considered as a being striving for stress relief, homeostasis. Interestingly, if this view of a person is developed logically, then various kinds of deviations (for example, immoral or aggressive behavior) become, in a certain sense, "natural" - because they stem from the very nature of man. At the same time, morality itself becomes nothing more than a collective “defense mechanism.” It was on this philosophical basis that the “sexual revolution” relied. Despite the rather harsh philosophical criticism of Freud's theory (and many of his followers), psychoanalysis made it possible to clarify a lot of things in human behavior that before Freud remained outside the scope of scientific study. The most famous students of Freud - A. Adler and G. Jung - modified and changed the original theory of the teacher, retaining the general "dynamic" approach.
Numerous criticisms of Freud's theory made many of his followers take a more creative approach to the theoretical legacy of psychoanalysis. One of the weighty deviantological achievements of neo-Freudianism is the creation of personality typologies. Freud also said that the age of up to five years is especially important for a person. At this age, unconscious drives acquire a specific direction, under the influence of education. This is connected with the formation of personality types. For us, this is of interest, since different personality types have different deviantological characteristics. One of the most profound and philosophical typologies is represented by Fritz Riemann. Riemann connects the selection of different types of personality with characteristic personal fears and the corresponding reaction to them. There are four types of basic personal fears that every person faces in one way or another.
The first is the fear of losing one's own identity, experienced as a loss of "I" and dependence. We all live in a society and must adapt to other people, accept the models of thinking and behavior imposed on us by society. At the same time, we may well be threatened with the loss of our own individuality, "dissolution of the Self." This fear, like others, begins to be realized already in early childhood.
The second is fear, loneliness, rejection of us by a group, society , experienced as defenselessness and isolation. We must maintain our individuality, but we must also build relationships with others. After all, a person is realized only in a society of his own kind. Fear of social rejection also begins to manifest at a fairly early age.
The third kind of fear is connected with the finiteness of our existence - the fear of change, experienced as uncertainty. We are all doomed to die. Man is the only living being who is aware of his finiteness. This realization cannot but cause fear. Usually it transforms into fear of everything transient, changeable, everything that symbolizes the transient nature of human life. Children show early enough fear of changes that seem to threaten their existence.
Finally, the fourth type of fear is the fear of immutability, experienced as finality and lack of freedom. Any life involves variability, growth, chaos somewhere. Immutability is a limitation of vital activity, in it elemental life feels threatened. The child perceives this threat by assimilating various rules, obeying the norms that limit his life manifestations.
It is easy to see that fears are paired - the first with the second and the third with the fourth - opposite types of fears.
A harmoniously developed, healthy personality should be able to overcome each of these fears. We must learn to interact with others without fear of losing our own identity. We must also be able to preserve our individuality and not sacrifice it for the sake of conformity. Similarly, we must come to terms with the fact that "everything flows, everything changes", and we ourselves are not eternal. It is also necessary to recognize the existence of eternal principles that guide and organize our existence, to be able to limit one's spontaneity. If any fear is not processed (which is typical for most people), personality types of the corresponding profiles arise. Let's briefly consider them.
The first personality type is schizoid, fearful of self-giving. His aspirations are directed, first of all, to independence and self-sufficiency. Not needing anyone's help, not being indebted to anyone is of decisive importance to him. The schizoid seeks to distance himself from other people, the violation of the distance is perceived as a threat to the "I" and, therefore, is stopped. This type of personality is distinguished by an undeveloped emotional beginning, experiences significant difficulties in relationships (especially close ones) with others. At the same time, schizoids usually have a developed intellect that compensates for emotional underdevelopment. The formation of this type refers to the first months of a child's life, when he especially needs warmth, care and emotional contact with his mother. The lack of all this leads to fear of the outside world, the formation of a basic distrust of the world. The severity of any personality type ranges from healthy to sick, from relatively mild to more severe disorders. Building this continuum, in the case of schizoid personalities, we get: "Mild difficulty in contacts - increased sensitivity - individualism - originality - selfishness - eccentricity - strangeness - outsiderness (manner of staying apart) - asociality - criminality - psychotic disorders".
The second personality type is a depressive person who is afraid of loneliness and isolation. These personalities are dominated by the desire to love and be loved, the desire for trusting close contacts. They strive to correlate their behavior with the needs and requirements of others. In any interpersonal contacts, they are highly dependent on the partner, experiencing a constant fear of loss. Giving themselves entirely to a partner, depressed individuals lose their individuality, giving up their own desires, opinions and needs. The formation of this type is associated with a long period of dependence on the mother. After the initial period of complete dependence, we must learn autonomy, independence. However, it happens that the mother prevents this in every possible way, fulfilling all the desires of the child and protecting him from the outside world.
Over time, the child refuses his own independence, sliding into passive lack of will. As a result, depressed individuals rarely act on their own, trying to return to their childhood situation, content with the feeling of love and security that comes from others. Building a continuum of severity of depressive inclinations, we get the following: “a tendency to contemplation, bashfulness - like mild introversion; modesty, timidity - as inhibition of exactingness and ability to self-affirmation; tendency to mental and psychological comfort, passivity of perception; a tendency to passive expectation, undemanding to life; hopelessness, depression, melancholy. Often at the end of this series are suicide or complete apathy, idleness or addiction to drug abuse, which, by reducing depression, temporarily strengthens the "I".
The third personality type is a person with obsessions, who are afraid of volatility and insecurity. Hence their desire to leave everything as before, adherence once and for all to these principles. They are conservatives concerned with their own security. They tend to plan and foresee everything in advance. The desire to keep life from changing with the help of rules and schemes leads them to obsessive mental processes. Such individuals are afraid of love, which involves chaos and unbridled feelings and, therefore, is perceived as a threat. They often enter into arranged marriages. They are characterized by a pronounced will to power, based on an internal need to rule (and therefore control) and obey (the presence of rules). The formation of this type of personality refers to the period between two and four years, when the child first encounters a system of rules and prohibitions.
Excessive control surrounding the "trained" child contributes to the formation of obsessive disorders. Building a scale of obsessive disorders, we get: accuracy and punctuality - efficiency and a pronounced sense of duty, reliability - exaggerated sobriety and prudence, with developed ambition - stubbornness, despotism, autocratism - further - obsessive disorders of varying degrees. For obsessive personalities with mild disorders, adaptive mechanisms are characteristic that protect them from fear of life: skeptics and unnecessarily slow, pedants and grumblings, "sycophants" and "health fanatics" - ascetic hypochondriacs. At the end of this line are patients with obsessive-compulsive disorders in the narrow sense.
The last personality type is hysterical personalities who are afraid of the necessity and limitation of a sense of freedom. They are afraid of all sorts of restrictions, traditions, order, so significant for persons with obsessive development. They live according to the principle “once - it doesn’t count”, or “if you can’t, but you really want to, then you can.” Hysterical personalities in every possible way avoid any responsibility that reminds them of the need. Tantrums love holidays and strive to always be in the spotlight, they are distinguished by impulsiveness and intemperance. The formation of a hysterical personality is associated with a period of four to six years, when the child actively masters new behavioral patterns. Here, sensitive leadership and a stable environment that provides examples to follow are especially needed. If the environment is characterized by instability, chaos, lack of clear rules, if the child is treated like a baby, and he does not have worthy role models, hysterical inclinations develop.
Trying to determine the line of growth of hysterical personality traits, we come to the following: "cheerful-impulsive, selfish and assertive" - people with narcissistic needs for self-assertion and a desire to be in the spotlight - people with excessive assertiveness and attraction to contacts - daddy's daughters and mama's sons - hysterical deceit - theatricality and escape from reality, up to scams - "eternal teenagers" - persons without a clear perception of their gender role, often with homosexual inclinations: man-haters and "don Juans" - pronounced psychotic disorders.
The types of fear described by Riemann serve as an indicator of the spiritual and intellectual maturity of the individual. A complete person solves the problem of fears. “Overcoming fear is a victory that makes us stronger, avoiding a fight is a defeat that weakens and hurts us.” Different personality types are prone to various types of deviations. Although numerous attempts have been made to identify deviant profiles of various personality types, it is still far from being completely clear on this issue. However, the typology created by Riemann is effectively used by many practicing psychologists, which confirms its value.
Evolutionary theory of behavior. Among the theories of other supporters of the position on the innate nature of deviance (more precisely, on deviant aggressiveness), the evolutionary approach deserves serious attention, which has gained considerable popularity in wide scientific circles thanks to the works of its largest representatives K. Lorenz, representing this psychological school, and the American paleoanthropologists Washburn and Ardrey. Note that the above theories explain aggression rather than deviance as such. Since violence is one of the most serious problems of our time, we decided to include these theories in our review.
Lorenz, the Nobel Prize-winning ethologist, shows an unexpected similarity to Freud's theory. According to Lorenz, aggression originates from the innate instinct to fight for survival, which is present in humans, as well as in all animals. Lorentz argues that this instinct has evolved over a long period of evolution and is the product of man's adaptation to his environment.
The concepts of Lorentz and Freud actually state the "hydraulic model of deviance", according to their ideas, deviant energy accumulates in the human psyche, as in a kind of reservoir. In the end, a "valve opens" that releases excess of this energy. Both scientists agree that restraining one's deviant impulses poses a danger to the mental health of a person who appears to them as a creature with constantly emerging aggressively destructive energy that cannot be controlled for a long time.
Among other popular evolutionary theories, the so-called "hunting hypothesis", presented in the work of the American paleoanthropologists Washburn and Ardrey, deserves attention.
Washburn puts forward a hypothesis according to which the aggressive inclinations of a person were formed due to his hunting, and it is the psychology of a human hunter that determines the aggressiveness of mankind at the present stage. Washburn believes that if man has been hunting for most of his history, then everything in modern man can be correlated with a man - a hunter, not only physiology, but also psychology and even habits.
Summarizing the concepts of Ardrey and Washburn, we can say that it was the hunting instinct, combined with the development of the brain and the appearance of weapons that could strike at a distance, that formed a person as a creature that actively attacks members of its own species. The same theory seeks to explain gender differences in manifestations of aggression and deviance. So, evolution demanded from men physical strength, courage, thinking focused on solving specific problems (how to kill a beast, etc.). Generations have formed a standard of masculinity, including both psychological and physical qualities. The most important among these were personal courage and the ability to make decisions. The survival of both the entire tribe and the individual family depended on the personal courage of each hunter-warrior and on quick security decisions (always made by men). Male aggressiveness was one of the important conditions for survival, as well as his increased sexual activity. It is in this that they see the origins of male infidelity: biologically, a man is programmed to fertilize as many females as possible (attracting him with external - biological data), trying to leave offspring.
Evolution made no less specific demands on women. Firstly, its biological essence is focused not on prey and protection, but on the birth of offspring and caring for them. This formed the psycho-biological nature of a woman. Endurance (of a special kind, as a condition for the successful bearing and birth of a child), sensitivity, attention to the nuances of relationships, the desire not for rivalry, but for consensus. Caring, pity for the weak (the weakest are children), the desire for a strong alliance with one man (who attracts her with his functional qualities - a hunter, a warrior), all this is aimed at protecting offspring.
According to this view of the history of mankind, its current (humanity) state of crisis is artificial. Our biological and psychological qualities are deformed, acquire ugly forms, under the influence of civilization. This manifests itself in the form of crime (the release of aggression), a change in gender relations (family crisis, feminism, etc.). At the same time, traditional female and male models of behavior are being destroyed, "deviantized".
In general, various theories that defend the thesis of the innate nature of human deviance and aggressiveness actually agree on one thing: deviance is an eternal and unchanging companion of man, therefore violence and destructiveness will, to one degree or another, accompany the development of civilization. Various kinds of reforms in the social and spiritual spheres of society are not capable of seriously hindering the manifestations of the destructive tendencies of the human character.
Critics of these theories operate with similar arguments.
First, there is no real evidence for the existence of any "aggressive energy".
Secondly, all observations on animals, according to many scientists, cannot be so unambiguously transferred to humans. Considerable flexibility and variability of human behavior must be taken into account. The human brain is capable of reproducing an incredibly wide range of behavioral responses that cannot be reduced only to aggression and violence. Moreover, such statements are unlawful, because. they do not take into account the presence of complex cognitive (cognitive) structures of the human brain. But reasoning and ideas largely determine human behavior. Similarly, there are many refutations of the "hunting hypothesis". The data obtained from the study of primitive cultures leading a lifestyle similar to that of primitive hunters do not always testify in its favor.
behavioral direction. The opposite position in the discussion about the nature of deviance was taken by the majority of American psychologists, who were strongly influenced by Skinner's behaviorism. Professor Skinner has long been the recognized leader of academic psychology in the United States. He focused on the impact of environmental stimuli on individual behavior. Any psychological theories dealing with such categories as "intention", "subconscious", he interpreted as "pre-scientific". A generalized expression of the behaviorist approach to understanding behavior was his famous scheme S - R (stimulus - reaction). Skinner and his associates developed and tested a whole set of operational techniques in hundreds of experiments.
They proved that with the right stimuli, it is possible to change the behavior of both animal and human to an incredible extent. By proving this, Skinner confirmed the opinion of those anthropologists who preferred the role of sociocultural factors in the formation of deviant behavior.
In general, the position of behavioral psychologists is expressed by the thesis that behavior is a person's response to appropriate stimuli in the external environment. Changing external conditions in a certain way, respectively, can either eliminate, or vice versa - activate the manifestations of deviance.
Let's take a quick look at Skinner's theory. Science, Skinner argued, should study what belongs to the realm of facts. Ideas and "conjectures" are the subject of philosophical analysis. Facts must be fixed and measurable, otherwise scientific study is impossible. For a psychologist, the only real fact can only be human behavior - something that can be measured and analyzed. Behavior always has a reason. This reason is a stimulus - something that pushes a person to action from the outside. The actions themselves are carried out according to the “stimulus-response” scheme, such behavior Skinner called respondent. However, a person, thanks to his mental abilities, is also capable of operant behavior. In this case, the response (behavior) precedes the stimulus. For example, if we save on ice cream to buy a cake, this is precisely operant behavior. Stimulus (cake) follows response (economy). All human behavior is a more or less complex set of various stable or short-term reactions. In general, a person tends to receive positive and avoid negative stimuli. This is the basis of the mechanism of learning - fixing in the mind of typical reactions to typical stimuli. Reinforced behavior is reinforced and becomes "natural". From these positions, deviance is the result of learning associated with a different set of incentives in the environment of each person. If your parents surrounded you in childhood with care and affection; if they gave you a good education and raised you to respect people, then you are likely to grow up to be a respectable member of society. If you grew up in a dysfunctional family, your parents did not have a job, but had a tendency to alcoholism, and swearing and beatings were the main educational tool, then it is very likely that you will join the ranks of juvenile delinquents. Of course, there are exceptions to these cases, but in general, the picture will be just that. Exceptions can be seen as the result of exposure to hidden, secondary incentives. In other words, deviant behavior is taught just like "normal" behavior.
In general, behaviorists are quite optimistic about the problem of behavioral deviations. After all, all these deviations are the result of an “unreasonable” structure of society, which can be improved. However, a detailed analysis of their concepts does not leave much reason for optimism. Indeed, as the supporters of these theories believe, if the incentives provoking deviance and aggression are removed from the environment of the individual, then the problem will be solved. But after all, the total elimination of all negative environmental influences is unrealistic, therefore, there are no grounds for such optimism.
Among the main shortcomings of behavioral theories is the fact that there is practically no place left for taking into account individual psychological qualities. The individual, the peculiarities of his personality and the specificity of cognitive processes are ignored. This pretty much obscures the issue. Observing behavior from the point of view of stimulus, it is not always possible to catch the inevitably present, individual context of action. The remarkable American humanist psychologist Erich Fromm spoke most precisely on this subject, citing the example of two fathers who subject their sons to physical punishment. In terms of behavior and incentives, both fathers act in the same way - they beat their sons for disobedience. But at the same time, the underlying motives for their actions may be different. One is driven by love for his son and the desire to "make a man out of him." Another person may hide his sadistic motives behind the concern for raising his son. Accordingly, the emotional reaction of sons to punishment can vary significantly. In fact, the acting person himself, the personality itself, falls out of the field of view of the behaviorists.
However, human behavior (including deviant behavior) can be fully understood only if we know the conscious and unconscious motives underlying his actions. The same environmental stimuli can evoke a wide variety of reactions in different individuals, depending on their characterological characteristics. Behaviorism is, of course, also a philosophy. Interestingly, the philosophical foundations of behaviorism underlie another area of social knowledge - economic theory. Both of these theories describe man as a rational being striving for maximum benefit at minimum cost.
cognitive direction. Representatives of another theoretical direction of cognitive psychology do not quite agree with the behaviorists. Cognitive theories of deviant behavior proceed from the fact that when an individual reacts to various external circumstances, personal interpretation of the situation is of great importance. Depending on how exactly a person comprehends certain social interactions, he can act either “normally” or, on the contrary, “deviantly”.
Thus, cognitive psychologists focus on the content of human consciousness. They are interested in how different ideas, considerations and, in general, "ideas" affect human behavior. This makes us turn to the problem of a general worldview, the most important component of which is the system of values accepted by a person. Simplifying, it can be defined as a set of general ideas about what is good and what is bad. For example, if a person interprets aggressive behavior as unacceptable (say, a staunch pacifist), then his reaction to various provocative stimuli will be much milder than that of a person who approves violence (for example, a career criminal).
We will return to the problem of values in this chapter, in connection with its significance for understanding the nature of deviance. Cognitive psychological theories throw a kind of bridge between the personal-psychological and socio-psychological views on deviance (discussed in the next paragraph).
On the one hand, questions of personal interpretation of deviantogenic influences are of undoubted interest.
On the other hand, the issues of conventional, culturally fixed or media-transmitted interpretations are no less interesting. According to scientists, collective conventional interpretations of events largely determine the manifestations of deviance at the personal level.
· Theories of psychodynamic persuasion consider deviance as a result of the manifestation of innate drives and instincts that cannot be fully controlled by a person or society. Among the fundamental discoveries is Freud's doctrine of the unconscious as a reservoir of deviant drives.
· A significant achievement of neo-Freudianism is the identification of personality typologies, showing what personality traits contribute to the manifestation of one form or another of deviance.
· The evolutionary approach explains human deviance as a result of evolutionary deformation of instincts.
· Behaviorist orientation theories provide us with a wealth of material on the variety of stimuli that cause deviant behavior. At the same time, the center of observation is not the subject himself, but only the behavioral process, considered according to the “S -> R” scheme.
· Representatives of cognitive psychology point out that without taking into account how the acting subject himself perceives this or that social situation, we are not always able to understand what lies at the basis of his deviant reaction to this or that stimulus.
Review questions
1. What is the essence of the psychodynamic approach to human behavior?
2. Describe the personality structure according to Freud? What component of personality is the main source of deviations?
3. What is sublimation? What is its role in controlling deviance? What are the requirements for personality sublimation?
4. What are defense mechanisms? What is the general principle of their action?
5. What are the philosophical shortcomings of Freudianism?
6. What is the basis of the personal typology created by Riemann?
7. What is the manifestation of the deviance of the schizoid type?
8. What is the deviance of the depressive type?
9. What is the deviance of the obsessive type?
10. What is the manifestation of hysterical deviance?
11. What is the essence of the behaviorist approach to behavior?
12. What is deviance, according to Skinner?
13. Is it possible to eliminate all incentives that contribute to deviance?
14. Describe the cognitive psychology approach to deviance.
15. What is the essence of the theory of conventional interpretations?
Have you heard the phrase “Society does not understand me, however, as I do it”? Or maybe you yourself think so? Then it is possible that you are a deviant, that is, a person with behavior that deviates from generally accepted norms. And read more about this below.
The phenomenon of deviant (deviant) behavior is not new. This phenomenon has always been present in society, is present and, perhaps, will be present. Deviants, that is, people who do not want or are not able to live according to the norms of society, have always been and will be. However, each society has its own framework of behavior and the concept of the norm, which means that the number of individuals with such behavior can be different, just as the average level of deviation from the social norms of one society can differ from another.
At the heart of theories about the phenomenon of deviant behavior, first of all, lies the search and assessment of its causes. I suggest you immerse yourself in history and take a tour of the formation of society's attitude to deviations and understanding the essence of this phenomenon.
Deviation theories: history
Thinking about the causes of deviant behavior, the features of its formation and development for the first time began in the XIX century. Generally speaking, to this day, all theories can be divided into biologization and sociologization, psychoanalytic.
Biologization theories
The first theories arose from the standpoint of the biologization approach. They somehow differed from each other, but the general idea was the same - all deviations are innate.
- The anthropological theory of crime, which belonged to C. Lombroso, became the initial one. In the USA, the supporters of this theory were H. Sheldon, E. Kretschmer, A. Huton, and in Russia - A. Dril. The main idea of this theory is that criminals are born. The occurrence of abnormalities at birth is due to somatic features, as well as features of the skull and face.
- This theory began to be developed, as a result, in the 70s, along with the discovery of Klinefelter's syndrome, a hypothesis arose about chromosomal abnormalities in criminals. That is, in this theory, the main explanation for deviations was impaired genetics. However, after numerous experiments and studies conducted in the USSR and other countries, in 1972 this hypothesis was officially refuted. But later, E. Wilson began to develop the idea of the decisive role of genetics in shaping behavior.
- In the modern world, the biologization approach is not so relevant, but still it has a place to be. Walter Gove owns the theory of sex and age factors, according to which difficult and serious crimes are more often committed by men. In addition, the scientist found that both men and women are more likely to commit crimes in their youth (18-24 years).
Modern supporters of the biologization approach call unfavorable individual characteristics prerequisites for antisocial behavior. At the same time, the authors do not exclude the impact, in addition to biological factors, of social and psychological ones. As part of this, I. S. Noy and V. S. Ovchinsky spoke about the need to study genetics, psychiatry, psychology and psychogenetics.
Sociologising theories
Practically in parallel with the biologization approach, the sociological approach is considered. Its representatives associate deviant behavior with the social conditions of people's lives. However, having revealed the relationship of deviations in behavior with the socio-economic conditions of society, scientists could not fully differentiate and explain the nature of deviant behavior.
Durkheim expressed the opinion that there is a certain level of crime in any society, it cannot be absent. And care must be taken to maintain this level and not allow it to grow, and not to eradicate.
So, within the framework of the sociological approach, the following theories can be distinguished:
- The theory of the functionality of deviations (anomies). The supporters of this theory were E. Durkheim, T. Parsons, J. Mead, R. Merton. These authors believe that the causes of deviations are the depreciation of the norms of behavior. This phenomenon is characterized by anomie - destroyed solidarity in relation to basic values and norms. Individuals (groups) begin to look for deviant, but effective ways of self-affirmation, provided that the approved methods do not work.
- The theory of stigmatization ("hanging labels"). This was studied by M. Foucault, E. Hoffmann, E. Lammert, G. Becker. The main idea: deviations arise as a result of imposing on an individual (group) their opinions, definitions, mores. Those who have the power can do it. In other words, for example, calling a lagging student difficult and problematic instead of help and development, the teacher will receive just such a child.
- Theory of conflict and deviance. Deviation arises due to the conflict of social groups, the antinomy “negativism” - “positivism” is manifested. This opinion was shared by T. Mor, R. A. Saint-Simon, R. Owen, C. Fourier, F. Engels, G. Marcuse, R. Mills, R. Quinney, L. Coser.
- The theory of cultural transfer. Revealing the identity between the ways of generating deviant behavior and any other behavior or activity. Russian and French sociologists N. K. Mikhailovsky and G. Tarde revealed the mechanism of imitation.
- Theory of social disorganization. Many researchers (R. Park, E. Burges, L. Wirth, R. Mackenzie, P. Berger, T. Shibutani, E. Tiriakyan) explained the occurrence of deviant behavior by the influence of certain areas, places, environments that are comprehensively socially and personally disorganized.
- Theory of inclusion - exclusion (M. Foucault, J. Young). Deviations are explained by the differentiation of people into "off" and "included" in the political life of society.
Socio-psychological theories
From the middle of the 20th century, socio-psychological theories began to emerge. What they had in common was that the researchers were looking for the causes of personality deviations among her immediate environment. That is, the relationship of the individual with the environment was analyzed.
- The basis of R. Merton's theory of social anomaly was the hypothesis "about the withering away of moral norms in deviant behavior, which is caused by a mismatch between the goal and the means to achieve it among deviants."
- From the theory of neutralization by D. Mate and T. Saika, it follows that a person understands the norms of morality and even accepts them, but justifies his behavior in different ways, most often referring to other people and blaming others.
- E. Sutherland belongs to the theory of differentiated communication. This position explains the formation of deviations by the selective attitude of the individual to the norms and values of his environment.
- The last theory in this approach is the theory of a delinquent subculture, that is, a culture within a culture. The representative of the theory is A. Cohen. He believed that the subculture chooses for itself norms and values that are absolutely opposite to those established in the wider culture. R. Cloward and L. Oulin dealt with the same topic. They singled out the criminal subculture, conflict and "withdrawal". In Russia, I. A. Gorkova was actively involved in the study of the influence of subculture on personality.
The representative of the socio-psychological approach was also the Russian scientist Yu. A. Aleksandrovsky. He said that in response to the socio-economic and political situation in the country, a person may experience social stress disorders. And this, in turn, affects behavior. I. I. Karpets and A. R. Ratinova put defects in the field of legal consciousness at the head of deviant behavior; N. F. Kuznetsova - defects in the psychology of individuals, social communities.
By the way, in Russia, the first studies of deviant behavior began to be carried out in the 60s of the twentieth century (V. S. Afanasiev, A. G. Zdravomyslov, I. V. Matochkin and others). At the initial stage, these were studies of certain types of deviations. A significant theoretical contribution was made by V. N. Kudryavtsev, who was the first to consider social deviations as a pathology, antisocial behavior. However, Ya. I. Gilinsky expressed an alternative opinion. From his point of view, deviations are a normal social phenomenon, a function of the social system.
Psychoanalytic theories
Another approach is psychoanalytic. Its main representative was Z. Freud, later his ideas were continued by A. Adler, E. Fromm, K. Horney, W. Schutz. With this approach, researchers believe that the leading role in the formation of deviant behavior is occupied by certain qualities of the individual:
- feeling elevated;
- aggressiveness (this was considered the main quality);
- rigidity;
- inferiority complex;
- desire and desire to destroy everything.
Proponents of the theory said that all socially maladaptive forms of behavior arise due to:
- suppression of the true desires of the individual;
- hard blocking of their implementation;
- tight control over oneself and one's emotions;
- low self-esteem.
The dominant role was given to aggression by other scientists - A. Bandura, A. Bass, L. Berkovts, S. Rosenzweig, among domestic scientists - S. N. Enikolopova, T. N. Kurbatova. But their rationale for the emergence of aggression was different. The reasons, according to these authors, are not the curbing of drives, but various social, lifelong factors.
What is deviant behavior?
Thus, after analyzing a number of sources, we can conclude that there is no single concept of what deviant behavior is. The complexity of defining the concept under study is due to its interdisciplinary nature. A number of sciences are studying the problem of deviations:
- psychology,
- pedagogy,
- criminology,
- sociology.
However, it is obvious that deviant behavior can be interpreted from the standpoint of public opinion and from the standpoint of the individual. Then, for a society within the framework of psychology, deviant behavior is a set of actions that, in their manifestations, contradict the legal or moral and social norms of a particular society generally accepted in society at a particular time.
But from the position of sociology, deviant behavior in relation to society can be interpreted as “a social phenomenon that is studied using special sociological methods jointly by criminologists, psychologists and other specialists. Any behavior that causes disapproval of public opinion is called deviant” (G. F. Kutsev).
Regarding the personality, deviant behavior is a mismatch of mental processes associated with:
- insufficient adaptability;
- problems with self-determination;
- inadequate self-esteem;
- insufficient moral control over their behavior.
The concept of norm
Speaking of deviations, it is important to indicate what is the norm. I. A. Lipsky defines the concept of “social norm” as follows: officially established or formed under the influence of social practice, the rules of social behavior and manifestations of a person in the specific historical conditions of society.
That is, behavior that currently does not cause misunderstanding among other citizens is considered normal. I will give an example of the relativity of the concept of "norm". In the modern world it is considered normal to modify your body (piercing, tattoos, colored hair), but in another era it was unacceptable and condemned. Now, of course, you can also find judgmental ones, but in general, body modifications are accepted.
Deviant behavior: pros and cons
Deviant behavior is often associated with a minus rather than a plus sign. However, this is not absolutely necessary. Deviant behavior can also be positive.
E. Durkheim was one of the first to speak about deviations in a positive way. He expressed the idea that the deviation itself is positive and inevitable. The author notes that every invention, every creative thought that develops our society is a positive deviation.
Results
After analyzing several author's theories and definitions of the phenomenon of deviations, we can say that the social norm is the rules, rights and obligations of the behavior of people in this society established by a particular society. Deviant behavior - behavior that does not correspond to the norms established in a given society.
Thus, deviant behavior is behavior that deviates from generally accepted norms (in a positive or negative direction), caused by the peculiarities of socialization (assimilation of social experience) of a person or his desocialization (loss of previously acquired social experience).
The development, formation and assimilation of deviant behavior occurs due to the individual characteristics of a person, his close environment and the socio-economic state of the society in which the individual is located. All factors can be grouped into three groups: social, psychological and biological.
In parting, I want to recommend you three more of my works that complement this article:,. Each of the articles complements the others, and together you can get the most information on the topic of deviant behavior, as well as references to the literature.
Thank you for attention! See you soon!
Deviant behavior is the commission of acts that are contrary to the norms of social behavior in a particular community. The main types of deviant behavior include primarily crime, alcoholism and drug addiction, as well as suicide, prostitution. In the context of the theory of socialization, people are prone to deviant behavior, whose socialization took place in the conditions of encouraging or ignoring certain elements of deviant behavior (violence, immorality). In the theory of stigmatization, it is believed that the emergence of deviant behavior becomes possible even with the mere definition of an individual as socially deviant and the application of repressive or corrective measures against him.
The problem of deviant behavior has been in the spotlight since the beginning of sociology. Emile Durkheim, who wrote the classic Suicide (1897), is considered one of the founders of modern deviantology. He introduced the concept of anomie, which he first mentioned in his dissertation, which later developed into a scientific work on the division of social labor.
Since deviation is a process caused by social factors, it is important to establish the social determination of deviant behavior. There are a number of theories explaining the deviation by various reasons - physiological, psychological, socio-cultural, socio-economic, etc.
Biological theories (theories of physical types)
Some of the first attempts to explain deviant behavior (in the late 19th and early 20th centuries) were predominantly biological in nature. The reason for the tendency to various deviations was seen in the innate properties of a person. That is, the basic premise of all theories of physical types is that certain physical traits of a person predetermine the various deviations from the norms committed by her. The idea itself is as old as human history. In societies, expressions have long been rooted: “the face of a murderer”, “vicious facial features”, etc. Among the followers of the theories of physical types can be called C. Lombroso, W. Sheldon.
So, created by the Italian psychiatrist and criminologist C. Lombroso in the 1870s. theory explained the causes of deviation, mainly crime, by certain anatomical features. Having studied the appearance and physical characteristics of criminals, C. Lombroso concluded that the “criminal personality type” is characterized by a protruding lower jaw and reduced sensitivity to pain, which are signs of degradation to earlier stages of human evolution. Lombroso recognized that social conditions can influence the development of criminal behavior, but considered most criminals to be degenerate and mentally retarded. Precisely because they supposedly have not reached their full development as human beings, their actions usually do not conform to the rules of human society.
This direction was developed in the 40s. XX century in the concept of the American psychologist and physician W. Sheldon, according to which people with a certain physical constitution tend to commit social deviations condemned by society. W. Sheldon singled out three main physical types of people: endomorphic (roundness of shapes, overweight), mesomorphic type (muscularity, athleticism), ectomorphic type (slenderness, thinness) and argued that mesomorphs are the most prone to deviation - individuals who are distinguished by physical strength , increased activity and reduced sensitivity.
Practice has proven the inconsistency of theories of physical types. Everyone knows numerous cases when individuals with the face of cherubs committed the gravest crimes, and an individual with rude, “criminal” facial features could not even hurt a fly.
Psychological theories
Like biological theories, psychological theories seek to explain behavioral deviations in the individual, not in society. The basis of psychological (psychoanalytic) theories of deviant behavior is the study of conflicts occurring within the consciousness of the individual. According to the theory of 3. Freud, each person has an area of the unconscious under the layer of active consciousness. The unconscious is our psychic energy, in which everything natural, primitive, knows no boundaries, knows no pity. The unconscious is the biological essence of a person who has not experienced the influence of culture. A person is able to protect himself from his own natural "lawless" state by forming his own "I", as well as the so-called "Super-I", determined solely by the culture of society. The human "I" and "Super-I" constantly restrain the forces that are in the unconscious, constantly limit our instincts and base passions. However, a state may arise when internal conflicts between the “I” and the unconscious, as well as between the “Super-I” and the unconscious destroy the protection and our inner content, which does not know culture, breaks out. In this case, there may be a deviation from the cultural norms developed by the social environment of the individual.
Obviously, there is some truth in this point of view, however, the definition and diagnosis of possible violations in the structure of the human "I" and possible social deviations are extremely difficult due to the secrecy of the object of study. In addition, although each person has a conflict between biological needs and cultural prohibitions, not every person becomes a deviant.
Some scholars in this field have suggested that a small number of people develop an immoral or psychopathic personality type. Such individuals are self-contained, emotionless individuals, acting impulsively and rarely feeling guilty. However, almost all studies examining people with these characteristics have been conducted among convicts in prisons, which inevitably influenced the portrayal of such personalities in a negative light.
Thus, by analyzing any one psychological trait, conflict or complex, it is impossible to explain the essence of any kind of deviant behavior. Probably, the deviation arises as a result of the combined action of many factors (psychological, cultural, social).
Sociological theories of deviant behavior
Sociological explanations of the causes of deviation originate from the works of one of the classics of sociology E. Durkheim (1858-1917), who formulated the concept of anomie, i.e. mass deviation from the norms existing in society as the main cause of deviation.
Theory of anomie
Anomie is a social condition characterized by the decomposition of the value system, caused by the crisis of the whole society, its social institutions, the contradiction between the proclaimed goals and the impossibility of their implementation for the majority.
People find it difficult to coordinate their behavior according to norms that are currently becoming weak, unclear, or conflicting. During periods of rapid social change, people no longer understand what society expects from them, and experience difficulties in reconciling their actions with existing norms. The old norms no longer seem appropriate, and the new, nascent norms are still too vague and ill-defined to serve as effective and meaningful guidelines for behavior. During such periods, a sharp increase in the number of cases of deviation can be expected.
Cultural transfer theory
A number of sociologists emphasize the similarity between the way of developing deviant behavior and the way of developing any other style of behavior. One of the first to come to this conclusion was the French sociologist Gabriel Tarde, who at the end of the 19th century. who formulated the theory of imitation to explain deviant behavior. As a district magistrate and director of crime statistics, he became convinced that repetition plays a significant role in human behavior. G. Tarde argued that criminals, like "decent" people, imitate the behavior of those individuals whom they met in life, whom they knew or heard about. But unlike law-abiding citizens, they imitate the behavior of criminals.
In the 1920s and 1930s, sociologists at the University of Chicago, trying to explain the high crime rate in a number of areas of Chicago, conducted a series of studies, as a result of which they found that in certain neighborhoods of the city, crime rates remained stable for many years, despite changes in ethnic composition of the population. Scientists have concluded that criminal behavior can be transmitted from one generation to another, i.e. youth living in high crime areas adopt criminal behavior patterns. Moreover, when representatives of other ethnic groups enter these areas, deviant behavior patterns are passed on to their children from local youth.
In other words, young people become delinquents because they associate and make friends with those teenagers in whom criminal behavior patterns are already ingrained. Edwin G. Sutherland, using the findings of Chicago sociologists, developed the theory of differential association, which is based on the ideas of symbolic interactionism and emphasizes the role of social interaction in the process of shaping the views and actions of people. In a society with many subcultures, some social settings tend to encourage illegal activity while others do not. Individuals become delinquents by associating with people who are carriers of criminal norms. Basically, deviant behavior is taught in primary groups (for example, peer groups). Thus, according to E. Sutherland, individuals become offenders to the extent that they belong to an environment that follows deviant ideas, motivations and methods. The sooner contacts of an individual with a criminogenic environment begin, the more often, more intense and longer these contacts are, the higher the likelihood that such an individual will also become an offender. But there is more than mere imitation involved in this process. Deviant behavior is acquired on the basis of not only imitation, but also learning; very much depends on what exactly and from whom individuals learn. So, according to the theory of E. Sutherland, deviations are trained.
Thus, the theory of cultural transfer shows that socially condemned behavior can be caused by the same processes of socialization as socially approved. This theory allows us to understand why the number of cases of deviant behavior varies from group to group and from society to society. However, it cannot explain some forms of deviant behavior, especially those offenders who could not borrow from others either methods or suitable definitions and views. Examples of this include persistent breaches of financial agreements; counterfeit check makers; people who accidentally broke the law; people who commit crimes "on the basis of love." Individuals may find themselves in the same situations but perceive them differently, with different results.
Conflict theory
Although in recent decades many new directions of the conflictological approach to the problem of deviation have appeared, its origin goes back to the Marxist tradition. According to orthodox Marxist theory, the capitalist ruling class exploits and robs the masses of the people and is able to escape retribution for their crimes. Workers - victims of capitalist oppression - in their struggle for survival are forced to commit acts that the ruling class stigmatizes as criminal. Other types of deviant behavior - alcoholism, drug abuse, domestic violence, sexual promiscuity and prostitution - are products of moral degradation based on unscrupulous pursuit of profit and oppression of the poor, women, members of ethnic minorities. Psychological and emotional problems are explained by the alienation of people from the means of production, with the help of which they earn their livelihood, i.e. from the very basis of its existence.
According to scientists, much is true in the theory of conflict. It is quite obvious that the laws are made and enforced by individuals and social groups vested in power. As a result, laws are not neutral, but serve the interests of a particular social group and express its core values. However, according to critics of conflict theory, such intuitive guesses do not meet the requirements of scientific research. Therefore, many formulations of conflictologists require clarification (for example, it is not always clear which specific individuals or groups are meant when talking about the “ruling elite”, “ruling classes” and “the interests of those in power”) and in general, the theory of conflict needs to be verified.
Stigma theory
Proponents of the theory of stigmatization (from the Greek stigmo - stigma) took as a basis the main idea of conflictology, according to which individuals often cannot get along with each other, as they differ in their interests and outlook on life; at the same time, those in power have the opportunity to express their views and principles in the norms that govern institutional life, and successfully hang negative labels on violators of these norms. Researchers are interested in the process, as a result of which certain individuals receive the stigma of deviants, begin to consider their behavior as deviant.
Adherents of the theory of stigmatization Edwin Lemert, Howard Becker and Kai Erickson argue that, firstly, no offense in itself is criminal or non-criminal in nature. The “negativity” of an act is not due to its internal content, but to how others evaluate such an act and react to it. Deviation is always a subject of social definition.
Secondly, all people are characterized by deviant behavior associated with the violation of some norms. Supporters of this theory reject the popular idea that people can be divided into normal and those with some kind of pathology. For example, some drive over the speed limit, shoplift, cheat on homework, hide income from the tax office, get drunk, vandalize the victory of their favorite football team, trespass on private property rights, or roll in their buddy's car without asking. Supporters of the theory of stigmatization call such actions primary deviation, defining it as behavior that violates social norms, but usually escapes the attention of law enforcement agencies.
Thirdly, whether specific actions of people will be considered deviant depends on what these people do and how other people react to it, i.e. this assessment depends on what rules the society chooses to strictly follow, in what situations and in relation to what people. Not everyone who exceeded the speed limit, committed shoplifting, withheld income, violated the rights of private property, etc., is condemned. Thus, blacks can be convicted of doing things that whites can do; and women - for actions that are permissible for men; some may be condemned for the same acts that their friends do with impunity; the behavior of individuals can be defined as deviant, although it does not violate any norms, simply because they are indiscriminately accused of doing things that they may never have done (for example, a person looks “effeminate” and is labeled a homosexual) . Of particular importance is the social environment and whether it stigmatizes a particular individual as a violator of norms or not.
Fourth, labeling people has consequences for those people. It creates conditions leading to secondary deviation - deviant behavior developed by the individual in response to sanctions from others. Stigmatization theorists argue that this new deviation from the norm is initiated by hostile reactions from legislatures and law-abiding citizens. The individual receives a public definition, which is stereotyped and declared to be a delinquent, "crazy", rapist, drug addict, slacker, pervert, or criminal. The label helps to secure the individual in the status of an outsider. Such a "main" status suppresses all other statuses of the individual in the formation of his social experience and, as a result, plays the role of a self-fulfilling prophecy. Violators of the norms begin to perceive their status as a specific type of deviance and form their own life based on this status.
Fifth, those who have been branded as delinquents usually find that law-abiding citizens condemn them and do not want to "do business with them"; friends and relatives may turn away from them; in some cases they may be imprisoned or placed in a mental hospital. General condemnation and isolation will push stigmatized individuals into deviant groups consisting of people whose fate is similar to their own. Participation in a deviant subculture is a way to cope with a critical situation, find emotional support and an environment where you are accepted for who you are. In turn, joining such a deviant group strengthens the individual's self-image as a delinquent, contributes to the development of a deviant lifestyle and weakens ties with a law-abiding environment.
So, according to the theory of stigmatization, deviation is determined not by the behavior itself, but by the reaction of society to such behavior. When people's behavior is seen as deviating from accepted norms, it sets off a range of social reactions. Others define, evaluate, and label behavior. The violator of the norms begins to coordinate his further actions with such labels. In many cases, the individual develops a self-image that matches this label, as a result of which he is able to enter the path of deviation.
Thus, the theory of stigmatization helps to understand why the same act can be considered as deviant or not, depending on the situation and characteristics of the individual.
Summarizing the main conclusions of the above theories of deviation, as well as the results of studies of various types of deviant behavior conducted in recent years by sociologists and criminologists, we can identify the main causes that cause behavior that deviates from social norms existing in society.
- 1) the gap between the values of culture and the social structure existing in society;
- 2) the deepening contradiction between the dominant culture in society and various delinquent subcultures - the subculture of criminal groups, the subculture of groups serving prison sentences, etc.;
- 3) the gap between the social status of the individual and his social expectations, which is widespread in a transforming society of a transitional type, which can push individuals who have not found a worthy application of their abilities, professional, cultural level, to various types of deviant behavior;
- 4) alienation of the individual from the value-normative system of regulation that exists in society, when officially recognized goals and values become inaccessible to those people who would like to achieve them by legal, in any case, approved by society, ways and means;
- 5) the loss of a person's moral and value orientations, when the division into moral and immoral, socially approved and socially unacceptable, good and evil, permitted and unallowed disappears. In this case, a moral crisis sets in, and the person becomes a victim of permissiveness;
- 6) occurring in real life, especially when ideals and value orientations are collapsing, the individual's feeling of the meaninglessness of his life, leading to suicide;
- 7) anomie - a violation of moral precepts, legal norms, laws, etc., which, in the crisis conditions of the development of society, turns from individual into mass forms of behavior.
Deviant behavior is a special form of deviant behavior in which a person loses the concept of moral values, social norms and completely focuses on satisfying his needs. Deviant behavior implies the obligatory degradation of the personality, because it is simply impossible to progress by hurting others. A person is changing literally before our eyes: he loses a sense of reality, elementary shame and all responsibility.
The psychology of deviant behavior is such that the individual is often unaware that they are acting in a destructive manner. She does not want to delve into the needs of others, she does not care about the feelings of loved ones. Deviant behavior robs a person of the opportunity to think and reason sensibly.
The concept of deviant behavior
The concept of deviant behavior in psychological science appeared thanks to the hard work of Emile Durkheim. He became the founder of the theory of deviation in general. The very concept of deviant behavior initially meant some discrepancy with the public understanding of how one should behave in a given situation. But gradually the concept of deviant behavior became closer to understanding offenses and knowingly causing harm to others. This idea was supplemented and developed in his works by a follower of Emile Durkheim - Robert King Merton. The scientist insisted that deviant behavior in all cases is dictated by the unwillingness to develop, work on oneself and benefit those who are nearby. The concept of deviant behavior is one of those that affect the sphere of human relationships.
Reasons for deviant behavior
The reasons why a person chooses deviant behavior for himself are very diverse. These reasons sometimes subjugate a person to such an extent that she loses her will, the ability to think sensibly, to make decisions independently. Deviant behavior is always characterized by excessive touchiness, vulnerability, increased aggressiveness and intransigence. Such a person demands that his desires be immediately satisfied, no matter what the cost. Any type of deviant behavior is extremely destructive, they make a person extremely receptive and unhappy. The personality gradually begins to degrade, losing social skills, losing habitual values and even its own positive qualities of character. So, what are the reasons for the formation of deviant behavior?
Unfavorable environment
Personality is greatly influenced by the environment in which it is located. If a person is placed in an environment where he is constantly humiliated and reproached, then gradually he will begin to degrade. Many people simply withdraw into themselves and stop trusting others. A dysfunctional environment makes a person experience negative feelings, and then build defensive reactions against them. Deviant behavior is the result of cruel and unfair treatment. A prosperous and happy person will never hurt others, try to prove something at any cost. The essence of deviant behavior is that it gradually destroys a person, revealing old grievances and unspoken claims to the world.
The reason for the formation of deviant behavior always indicates that it is necessary to change in life. Features of deviant behavior are such that it does not appear suddenly, not immediately, but gradually. A person, harboring aggression in himself, becomes less and less controllable and harmonious. It is very important to change the environment if there are attempts to change deviant behavior to constructive one.
Alcohol and drug use
Another reason for deviant behavior is the presence of excessively negative destructive factors in a person's life. Deviant behavior, of course, does not arise by itself, without apparent reasons. One cannot but agree that toxic substances have a negative effect on our consciousness. A person who takes drugs necessarily begins to degrade sooner or later. The drug addict cannot control himself, loses the ability to see the good in people, loses self-respect, he manifests bouts of aggression directed at others. Even a person without special education can diagnose such deviant behavior. A degrading personality produces a bright repulsive impression. People around, as a rule, try to avoid meeting with such subjects, fearing adverse consequences and simply worrying about their lives. Sometimes it is enough to look at a person to establish the cause of her inappropriate behavior. Deviant deviant behavior cannot be hidden from prying eyes. Relatives and relatives of someone who exhibits deviant behavior, as a rule, begin to feel embarrassed and ashamed of what is happening, although they themselves suffer greatly from the actions of the deviant.
A person suffering from alcohol addiction also has manifestations of aggression and uncontrollable anger. Most often, this person is disappointed first in himself, and then in the people around him. To diagnose deviant behavior, sometimes it is enough to look at the person himself, to determine his essence. The reason why people break themselves and start taking various toxic substances is simple: they cannot fulfill their potential in the world. Deviant behavior of a person always implies the presence of sharp negative manifestations that harm the life and well-being of people around.
Constant criticism
There is another reason for the formation of deviant behavior. If in childhood a child is constantly scolded for something, then manifestations of self-disappointment will not be long in coming. From here come self-doubt, increased sensitivity to criticism, emotional and mental instability. Constant criticism can eventually lead to all forms and types of deviant behavior. All types of deviant behavior, regardless of the form of expression, nullify any efforts to become better and establish themselves in any area of life: personal life, profession, creativity. It's just that at some point a person stops believing in himself and his abilities. He does not understand the causes of his condition, but seeks confirmation of negative manifestations outside. Diagnosis of deviant behavior is a rather complicated and time-consuming process that should be carried out by specialists. You need to be extremely careful with children and adolescents so as not to break their dreams, not to destroy faith in themselves and their own prospects. The reasons for deviant behavior can be completely different. It is better to prevent the development of such a deviation than to try to correct the consequences later.
Classification of deviant behavior
The classification of deviant behavior includes several important concepts. They are all interconnected and mutually condition each other. Those who are close to such a person are the first to sound the alarm. Even a child can diagnose a degrading personality. In other words, deviant forms of behavior are not difficult to recognize. The manifestation of deviant behavior, as a rule, is noticeable to others. Consider the most common forms and types of deviant behavior.
Addictive behavior
Addiction is the very first type of deviant behavior. Addictions in humans develop gradually. By forming some kind of dependence, he tries to compensate for the absence of something very significant and valuable in his life. What kind of addictions can there be and why are they so destructive to the individual? This is primarily a chemical addiction. The use of drugs and alcohol leads to the formation of a stable addiction. After some time, a person no longer imagines a comfortable existence without an addiction. So, heavy smokers say that a cigarette smoked in time helps them relax. People who are addicted to alcohol often justify themselves by saying that a glass of alcohol allows you to discover new possibilities in yourself. Of course, such prospects are imaginary. In fact, a person gradually loses control over himself and his emotional state.
There is also a psychological addiction. It manifests itself depending on the opinions of others, as well as painful focus on another person. There are unrequited loves that take away a lot of vitality. Such a person also destroys himself: endless experiences do not add health and strength. Often the desire to live, set goals and strive to achieve them disappears. Diagnosis of deviant behavior implies timely detection of pathological signs and prevention of their development. The manifestation of deviant behavior always, in all cases, without exception, needs to be corrected. Any addiction is a type of deviant behavior that sooner or later will lead a person to complete destruction.
Delinquent behavior
Criminal or illegal behavior is another type of deviant behavior that can be considered dangerous not only for the individual, but also for society as a whole. A delinquent - one who commits criminal acts - is a person who has completely lost any norms of morality. For him, there are only his own needs of a lower order, which he seeks to satisfy in any way. You can diagnose such a person at a glance. Most people are seized with natural fear as soon as there is a suspicion that a criminal is near them. Some types of citizens tend to immediately apply to law enforcement agencies.
Delinquent will not stop at any obstacles. He is only interested in obtaining his own momentary benefit, and in order to achieve such a goal, he is sometimes ready to take unjustified risks. The main signs that you have an offender are the following. The offender rarely looks straight in the eye, tells a lie in order to get out of a difficult situation himself. It will not be difficult for such a person to substitute even a close relative. Diagnosis of offenders, as a rule, is carried out by the relevant authorities.
antimoral behavior
Antimoral behavior is a special type of deviant behavior, which is expressed in defiant or ugly behavior in public. In addition, in each individual society, different actions and actions will be considered anti-moral. General violations of morality are: prostitution, public insult of other people, obscene language. Individuals who do not have any ideas about how one should behave in a given situation are prone to anti-moral behavior. Often they come into conflict with the law, have problems with the police. Diagnosing such behavior is quite simple: it catches the eye immediately, at the first manifestation.
Suicide
This type of deviant behavior is one of the mental disorders. Suicide attempts are made by those individuals who do not see further prospects and opportunities for the continuation of their existence. Everything seems to them meaningless and devoid of any joy. If a person is only thinking about suicide, it means that his life can still be corrected. He just went to the dangerous line. It is necessary that someone be next to him at the right time and warn against this rash step. Suicide has not yet helped anyone solve pressing problems. Parting with life, a person punishes, first of all, himself. Even close relatives someday are consoled and with all the strength of their souls continue to live on. Diagnosing suicidal tendencies is difficult enough because such people learn to be secretive and succeed significantly in this activity. However, potential suicides are in dire need of timely assistance. Unfortunately, not everyone gets it.
Signs of deviant behavior
The tendency to deviant behavior by psychologists is determined by a number of essential features. These signs directly or indirectly indicate that a person is in an inadequate state, which means that he may be involved in the commission of crimes or be involved in addiction. What are the signs of deviant behavior? By what parameters can you understand that there is a deviant in front of you? There are several forms of negative expression. You can diagnose them simply by observing people and drawing the appropriate conclusions.
Aggressiveness
Any person who does something illegal will show his worst qualities of character. The problem is that even the good personality traits of a deviant are lost over time, as if they go into the void and dissolve into thin air. Deviant behavior is characterized by increased aggressiveness, intransigence and assertiveness. A criminal or any other violator will try to defend his position in everything and do it quite harshly. Such a person will not take into account the needs of other people, recognize alternatives, for her there is only her own individual truth. Aggression repels other people and allows the deviant to go unnoticed by society for a long time. With the help of aggressiveness, a person goes to his goals, avoids effective interaction with other people.
Aggression is always a sign of the presence of fear. Only a confident person can afford to be calm and balanced. Someone whose daily activities involve risk will always be nervous. Every minute he has to be on the alert so as not to inadvertently give himself away, and sometimes not to reveal his presence.
Uncontrollability
The deviant seeks to control everything, but in fact he becomes uncontrollable and nervous. From constant stress, he loses the ability to reason logically, sensibly, and make responsible decisions. Sometimes he begins to get confused in his own reasoning and make significant mistakes. Such mistakes gradually undermine strength, contribute to the formation of terrible self-doubt. Uncontrollability in the end can do him a disservice, make a person aggressive and withdrawn at the same time. And since all social ties by that time are broken, there is no one to ask for help.
No one can convince a deviant that he is wrong. By his own uncontrollability, he discovers the need to constantly be in a state of danger. By defending himself, a person actually loses control over the situation more and more, as he wastes precious energy in vain. As a result, an emotional break with one's own personality occurs, and a person ceases to understand where he should move on.
Sudden change of mood
The deviant has jerky mood swings in the process of life. If someone does not act according to the established pattern, then the offender begins to take an aggressive approach. The most interesting thing is that he can not control his emotions in any way. At one moment he is cheerful, and in a minute he is already screaming with indignation. A sharp change in mood is dictated by the tension of the nervous system, emotional fatigue, depletion of all important internal resources.
Deviant behavior is always aimed at destruction, even if at the very beginning of illegal actions it seems to a person that he has found an easy and carefree way to live. The deception is revealed very soon, bringing with it a deafening force of disappointment. Deliberate gaiety is just an illusion, for the time being, carefully hidden even from the deviant himself. A sharp change in mood always negatively affects the further development of events: a person becomes uncontrollable, loses peace, self-confidence and tomorrow. It is not difficult to diagnose a sharp change in mood, even the person himself is able to notice it in himself.
stealth
Any violator always has to make considerable efforts to remain unnoticed for as long as possible. As a result, the deviant develops secrecy, aimed at deliberately withholding the necessary and necessary information. Secrecy breeds suspicion, unwillingness to share one's thoughts and feelings with anyone. This emotional vacuum contributes to the development of serious emotional exhaustion. When a person cannot trust anyone in this life, he loses everything: he actually has nothing to live for, the most necessary meaning is lost. Human nature is so arranged that you need to constantly have certain ideals in your head for a comfortable existence. The formed outlook leads us forward, to new achievements. In the absence of visible prospects, a person immediately begins to destroy himself and degrade.
Stealth breeds a tendency to deceive. The deviant cannot tell the truth, because he lives according to different laws than the society around him. Over time, deception becomes the norm and completely ceases to be noticed by them.
Thus, deviant behavior is a serious problem that exists in modern society. Such a phenomenon necessarily needs to be corrected as soon as possible, but it seems to be much difficult, almost impossible, to correct it.
Two heads and six legs; four walk, and two lie still
Self-esteem - what is it: concept, structure, types and levels
Cassandra's Path, or Pasta Adventures War on Earth and Underground