Example of then compare and contrast the two theories in terms of how they explain deviance report

For years, many scholars such as sociologists and behavioral scientists believe that presence of subcultures between societies has generated varying social norms that appear to be extensively diverse from each other. Thus creates a confusion on what is generally accepted as the norms because what maybe a norm in one subculture may be regarded as deviant in another.
Such great disparity between norms has caused some to view that modern societies are now turning into a state of “ anomie” or the lack of social norms. Structural tension and lack of moral regulations, as what the “ Functionalist Theories” assert, can become the cause of deviance.
“ Functionalist Theories” claim that material progress and success are the cause of deviance. Society, especially middle-class, sees material progress as a measure of success. Material success is achieved through “ hard work and self-discipline”, which ascertain a person’s success. However, proponents of the “ Functionalist Theories” argue that for most people, success cannot be ensured even with hard work. As such, deviance arises from struggling people finding material success by any means, even illegitimate ones; deviance arises from economic disparity.
The “ Conflict Theory”, on the other hand, believes that factors such as anomie and social disorganization or differences have nothing to do with deviance. They believe that deviance and crimes are an individual’s option. One chooses the path of unlawfulness. Thus, deviance is more often deliberate and political in nature.
A major difference between “ Functionalist Theories” and the “ Conflict Theory” is that the latter has encompassed certain matters the former did not address. For instance, “ Functionalist Theories” have relied greatly on the assumption that the middle-class represents the social norms of the public. Consequently, studying the behaviors of this class and certain subcultures in them could give the answer as to why crimes are existent. They gravely represented, however, illegitimate activities of the “ white collar” upperclassmen.
Such power, in contrast, was recognized by the “ Conflict Theory” inthat they viewed the inequality of the capitalist system as the chief culprit of deviance. Justice, as it appears, is not fair to all. Blue-collar workers become more oppressed than white-collar ones and by extension, those with higher ranks and government positions. Theorists have argued that everyone, even the most powerful, breaks the law. They are, however, only seldom caught and liabilities become transferred to low-ranking criminals with less power.
While they have their differences, both theories do have similarities. One of which is that both acknowledge the possibility for introduction of social challenges into a society. On the one hand, the political nature of deviance in “ Conflict Theory” shows that whoever engages themselves in political and social issues and acts such as working for equality in race and gender is already a social challenge in itself and invites positive change. The adaptive function of “ Functionalist Theories”, on the other hand, brings about development through solidifying social norms in response to negative challenges such as drug addiction.
Though perceived to be positive or not, there are still a lot of questions surrounding deviance and the society. With presence of so much incongruence, one will always argue the variances with which deviance is recognized. The issue addressed by the “ Conflict Theory”, thus, raises much debate on the coverage of deviance because theoreticallyspeaking caught or not, breaking the law is still considered a crime and powerful or not, true justice is when they are considered criminals.

WORKS CITED

Giddens, Anthony, Duneier, Mitchell, Applebaum, Richard P., and Carr, Deborah. Introduction to Sociology. 8th ed. U. S. A.: W. W. Norton & Company, 2011. Print.
Theoretical Perspectives in Sociology. New Charter University, n. d. Web. 9 November 2012.