Difference between revisions of "Hilbert89"
PaultenHave (talk | contribs) (Created page with "{{BibEntry |BibType=ARTICLE |Author(s)=Richard A. Hilbert; |Title=Durkheim and Merton on Anomie: An Unexplored Contrast and Its Derivatives |Tag(s)=EMCA; Social Theory; Anomie...") |
AndreiKorbut (talk | contribs) m |
||
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
|Volume=36 | |Volume=36 | ||
|Number=3 | |Number=3 | ||
| − | |Pages=242 | + | |Pages=242–250 |
| − | |Abstract=Combining | + | |URL=http://socpro.oxfordjournals.org/content/36/3/242 |
| + | |DOI=10.2307/800693 | ||
| + | |Abstract=Combining the anomie theories of Durkheim and Merton yields: anomie prevents anomie. This incoherence indicates that the theorists cannot be referencing the same phenomenon. Differences are pursued in the assumptions and orientations of the two theorists, particularly the ontological status of deviance, the role it plays in the health of society and the sense in which it is normal, the nature of a crisis, the formal relationship between deviance and anomie, and the similarities in theoretical outcomes to those of common sense reasoning. Durkheim s theory emerges as more compatible with labeling theory, ethnomethodology, and contemporary social problems theory than with American functionalism. Merton s theorizing emerges as an empirical example of Durkheimian ritual anomie prevention practices. | ||
}} | }} | ||
Revision as of 12:43, 14 February 2016
| Hilbert89 | |
|---|---|
| BibType | ARTICLE |
| Key | Hilbert89 |
| Author(s) | Richard A. Hilbert |
| Title | Durkheim and Merton on Anomie: An Unexplored Contrast and Its Derivatives |
| Editor(s) | |
| Tag(s) | EMCA, Social Theory, Anomie, Durkheim, Merton |
| Publisher | |
| Year | 1989 |
| Language | |
| City | |
| Month | |
| Journal | Social Problems |
| Volume | 36 |
| Number | 3 |
| Pages | 242–250 |
| URL | Link |
| DOI | 10.2307/800693 |
| ISBN | |
| Organization | |
| Institution | |
| School | |
| Type | |
| Edition | |
| Series | |
| Howpublished | |
| Book title | |
| Chapter | |
Abstract
Combining the anomie theories of Durkheim and Merton yields: anomie prevents anomie. This incoherence indicates that the theorists cannot be referencing the same phenomenon. Differences are pursued in the assumptions and orientations of the two theorists, particularly the ontological status of deviance, the role it plays in the health of society and the sense in which it is normal, the nature of a crisis, the formal relationship between deviance and anomie, and the similarities in theoretical outcomes to those of common sense reasoning. Durkheim s theory emerges as more compatible with labeling theory, ethnomethodology, and contemporary social problems theory than with American functionalism. Merton s theorizing emerges as an empirical example of Durkheimian ritual anomie prevention practices.
Notes
