Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-nr4z6 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-16T09:11:47.989Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A Contribution to the Discussion of the Theory of Anomie

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  13 March 2023

Filip Novaković Open the ORCID record for Filip Novaković [Opens in a new window]
Filip Novaković*
Affiliation:
The Institution of the Human Rights Ombudsman of Bosnia and Herzegovina
*
Corresponding Author: Filip Novaković, The Institution of the Human Rights Ombudsman of Bosnia and Herzegovina, Banja Luka, Bosnia and Herzegovina. E-mail: filipnovakovic.iur@gmail.com
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The paper analyses the notion of anomie through various theories presented in the works of classical Greek thinkers up to today’s understanding of this notion. In this regard, the article will touch on some previous understandings of this phenomenon, and the beginnings of modern thought on anomie in the work of Jean-Marie Guyau, and the developed understandings of Robert Merton and Émil Durkheim as the two most prominent authors dealing with this topic. In addition, the attitudes of marginalized writers will be analysed, as well as neglected and underrepresented understandings in criminology and wider science. The purpose of this paper is to find common ground between all previous understandings of the theory of anomie, and to try to find a more specific meaning of the term in order to contribute to the discussion on this topic.

Abstracto

Abstracto

El artículo analiza la noción de anomia a través de diversas teorías presentadas en la obra de los pensadores griegos clásicos hasta la comprensión actual de esta noción. En este sentido, el autor tocará algunos entendimientos previos de este fenómeno, y los comienzos del pensamiento moderno sobre la anomia en el trabajo de Jean-Marie Guyau, y los entendimientos desarrollados por Robert Merton y Émil Durkheim como los dos autores más destacados que se ocupan de la anomia. este tema. Además, el autor analizará las actitudes de los escritores marginados, así como los conocimientos descuidados y sub-representados en nuestra ciencia y en otras más amplias. El propósito de este artículo es encontrar un terreno común entre todas las interpretaciones previas de la teoría de la anomia y tratar de encontrar un significado más específico del término para contribuir a la discusión sobre este tema.

Abstrait

Abstrait

L’article analyse la notion d’anomie à travers diverses théories présentées dans les travaux des penseurs grecs classiques jusqu'à la compréhension actuelle de cette notion. À cet égard, l’auteur abordera certaines compréhensions antérieures de ce phénomène, et les débuts de la pensée moderne sur l’anomie dans l'œuvre de Jean-Marie Guyau, et les compréhensions développées de Robert Merton et Émil Durkheim en tant que deux auteurs les plus éminents traitant de ce sujet. En outre, l’auteur analysera les attitudes des écrivains marginalisés ainsi que les compréhensions négligées et sous-représentées dans notre science et au sens large. Le but de cet article est de trouver un terrain d’entente entre toutes les compréhensions antérieures de la théorie de l’anomie, et d’essayer de trouver une signification plus spécifique du terme afin de contribuer à la discussion sur ce sujet.

摘要：

摘要：

本文通过古希腊思想家作品中提出的各种理论，分析失范的概念，直至今天对失范概念的理解。 在这方面，作者将谈及以前对这一现象的一些理解，让玛丽居约 (Jean-Marie Guyau) 的著作中关于失范的现代思想的开端，以及罗伯特默顿 (Robert Merton) 和埃米尔杜尔凯姆 (mil Durkheim) 作为处理失范问题的两位最著名的作家的发展理解。 这个话题。 此外，作者将分析边缘化作家的态度以及我们和更广泛的科学中被忽视和代表性不足的理解。 这篇论文的目的是在所有先前对失范理论的理解之间找到共同点，并试图找到该术语的更具体含义，以有助于对该主题的讨论。

الخلاصة

الخلاصة

تحلل الورقة فكرة الشذوذ من خلال النظريات المختلفة المقدمة في أعمال المفكرين اليونانيين الكلاسيكيين حتى فهم اليوم لهذه الفكرة. في هذا الصدد ، سيتطرق المؤلف إلى بعض المفاهيم السابقة لهذه الظاهرة ، وبدايات الفكر الحديث حول الشذوذ في أعمال جان ماري جياو ، والتفاهمات المتطورة لروبرت ميرتون وإميل دوركهايم كأبرز مؤلفين يتعاملان مع هذا الموضوع. بالإضافة إلى ذلك ، سيحلل المؤلف مواقف الكتاب المهمشين بالإضافة إلى التفاهمات المهملة والممثلة تمثيلاً ناقصًا في علمنا وعلى نطاق أوسع. الغرض من هذه الورقة هو إيجاد أرضية مشتركة بين جميع المفاهيم السابقة لنظرية الشذوذ ، ومحاولة إيجاد معنى أكثر تحديدًا للمصطلح من أجل المساهمة في المناقشة حول هذا الموضوع.

Keywords

antisocial behaviourcriminal behaviourcriminological theorysuicidecrimecrime preventioncriminologyconducta antisocialconducta delictivateoría criminológicasuicidiodelitoprevención del delitocriminologíacomportement antisocialcomportement criminelthéorie criminologiquesuicidecrimeprévention du crimecriminology反社会行为犯罪行为犯罪学理论自杀犯罪犯罪预防犯罪学。السلوك المعادي للمجتمعالسلوك الإجراميالنظرية الإجراميةالانتحارالجريمةمنع الجريمةعلم الإجرام
Type
Article
Information
International Annals of Criminology , Volume 61 , Issue 1 , March 2023 , pp. 66 - 81
Copyright
© International Society of Criminology, 2023

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Agnew, R. 1992. “Foundation for the General Strain Theory of Crime and Delinquency.” Criminology 30(1):47–88.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Agnew, R. and Passas, N.. 1997. The Future of Anomie Theory. Boston, MA: Northeastern.Google Scholar
Chamlin, M. B. and Cochran, J. K.. 1995. “Assessing Messner and Rosenfeld’s Institutional Anomie Theory: A Partial Test.” Criminology 33(3):411–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Deflem, M. 2015. “Anomie: History of Concept.” Pp. 718–21 in International Encyclopedia of Social and Behavioral Sciences, 2nd ed., edited by Wright, J. D.. Oxford: Elsevier.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Durkheim, É. 1963. Pravila sociološke metode. Belgrade: Savremena škola.Google Scholar
Durkheim, É. 1972. O podeli društvenog rada. Belgrade: Prosveta.Google Scholar
Durkheim, É. 1997. Samoubistvo. Belgrade: BIGZ.Google Scholar
Featherstone, R. and Deflem, M.. 2003. “Anomie and Strain: Context and Consequences of Marton’s Two Theories.” Sociological Inquiry 73(4):471–89.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hirschi, T. 1969. Causes of Delinquency. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.Google Scholar
Ignjatović, Đ. 2005. Kriminologija. Belgrade: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.Google Scholar
Inderbitzen, M., Bates, K. A., and Gainey, R. R.. 2016. Deviance and Social Control: A Sociological Perspective, 2nd ed. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE Publishing.Google Scholar
Jašović, Ž. 1991. Kriminologija maloletničke delinkvencije. Belgrade: Naučna knjiga.Google Scholar
Johnson, E. H. 1964. Crime, Correction and Society. Homewood, IL: Dorsey Press.Google Scholar
Jugović, A. 2014. Zapisi iz anomije, Ogledi iz nauke o društvenim devijacijama. Belgrade: Institut za kriminološka i sociološka istraživanja.Google Scholar
Konstantinović-Vilić, S. and Nikolić-Ristanović, V.. 1992. Osnovi kriminologije. Niš: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Nišu.Google Scholar
Marković, I. 2010. Osnovi kriminologije. Banja Luka: Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Banjoj Luci.Google Scholar
Merton, R. 1938. “Social Structure and Anomie.” American Sociological Review 3(5):672–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Merton, R. 1949. Social Theory and Social Structure. New York: The Free Press.Google Scholar
Metsueda, R. L. 2015. “Social Structure, Culture and Crime: Assessing Kornhauser’s Challenge to Criminology.” Pp. 117–43 in Challenging Criminological Theory: The Legacy of Ruth Rosner Kornhauser, edited by Cullen, F. T., Wilcox, P., Sampson, R. J., and Dooley, B. D.. Piscataway, NJ: Transaction Publishers.Google Scholar
Miller, J. M. 2014. The Encyclopedia of Theoretical Criminology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Milutinović, M. 1979. Kriminologija. Belgrade: Savremena administracija.Google Scholar
Mizruchi, E. H. 1960. “Social Structure and Anomia in a Small City.” American Sociological Review 25(5):645–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mlađenović-Kupčević, R. 1982. Kriminologija. Sarajevo: Svjetlost.Google Scholar
Nedeljković, Z. 2007. “Doprinos Emila Dirkema konstituisanju sociologije morala.” Zbornik radova Filozofskog fakulteta u Prištini 36:235–46.Google Scholar
Orrú, M. 1987. Anomie: History and Meanings. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Pulišelić, S. 1978. Osnove sociologije. Zagreb: Infromator.Google Scholar
Reinarman, C. 2000. “The Future of Anomie Theory by Nikos Passas, Robert Agnew.” Contemporary Sociology 29(1):252–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosenfeld, R. and Messner, S.. 1994. Crime and the American Dream. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth.Google Scholar
Rosenfeld, R. and Messner, S. F.. 1997. “Markets, Morality, and an Institutional Anomie Theory of Crime.” Pp. 207–24 in The Future of Anomie Theory, edited by Passas, N. and Agnew, R.. Boston, MA: Northeastern University Press.Google Scholar
Šeparević, Z. 1987. Kriminologija i socijalna patologija. Zagreb and Belgrade: Pravni fakultet Sveučilišta u Zagrebu i Pravni fakultet Univerziteta u Beogradu.Google Scholar
Šram, Z. 2007. “Anomija, depresivnost i antizapadna orijentacija.” Revija za sociologiju 38(3–4):103–18.Google Scholar
Srole, L. 1956. “Social Integration and Certain Corollaries.” American Sociological Review 21:709–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vodopivec, K., Kobal, M., Bavcon, L. J., and Skalar, V.. 1966. Kriminologija, I dio. Zagreb: Narodne novine.Google Scholar