逸脱行動論序説

アノミー、ディスオーガニゼーション論の展開と統合化

抄録

The science of sociology has not yet developed a theoretical framework effective in analyzing such social pathological phenomena as crime or delinquency. The present article is intended to fill the gap by attempting to integrate the existing theories of anomie and of social disorganization in to comprehensive sociological hypothesis, on the basis of which a new conceptual framework for the analysis of social deviation is to be advanced.
First, we will interpret the theories of anomie and of social disorganization in terms of the social climate the main proponents of these theories found themselves in. As to the two outstanding teachers of the anomie theory, namely E. Durkheim and R. Merton, the former analyzed the anomie as a personality controlled by the conditions of laissez-faire capitalism and the corresponding social ethic of Protestantism, while the latter's conception of anomie was developed on the basis of capitalism now in its monopolistic stage and the spirit of Puritanism in the United States. Merton's main contribution lies in that he tries to see systematically the relationships between personal frustration and socio-cultural structure. When we turn to the social disorganization theory, the view points of the Chicago School especially of R. Park and L. Wirth, are conspicuous, Park stressed that in rapidly developing urban centers the social control of primary groups through folkways and mores is no longer effective as it was befoe. Wirth, on the other hand, grasped social disorganization as the consequence of the conflict between different value systems characteristic of immigrant groups with different national background. Those viewpoints of the Chicago School are to be understood against the background of social change occurring in the United States in the nineteen twenties, especially in its Mid-Western area. The social pathological phenomena can be approached on the basis of either of these theories, The anomie theory includes in its scope the frustration-deviation hypothesis, while the disorganization theory would explain deviant behavior in terms of the conflict among value systems. At present there is still a considerable distance between these two ways of explaining deviant behavior, and a good deal of difficulty is yet to be overcome before we are able to integrate them to arrive at a systematic theory of deviation.
If we, however, turn to compare the basic implications of these anomie and disorganization theories, we can't but be astonished to find how, for example, Durkheim and Park were alike in their way of presenting the problems as well as of constructing theoretical frameworks. Both of these men analyzed anomie and disorganization within the wider scope of comprehensive social change of rapid industrialzation and urbanization. Since there exisit these essential similarities, our next step must be to develop, on the basis of these theories, an integrative theory of the change of social structure. We will note that, in order to do this, it will be necessary to introduce first the theory of reference groups as to the social psychological aspect, and the consepts of legality and illegality with regard to the values, attitudes and techniques of the deviant.
Finally, we would like to emphasize that we, as Japanese sociologists, will have to build such an integrative framework against the background of the actual structure of Japanese society differing from that of the modern West, which has imprinted peculiarly Western character on the anomie and disorganization theories.