Anomie - A theory about deviance? Examples of modern anomie

Anomie is a state of public or individual moral and mental consciousness, which is characterized by the corruption of moral norms, the collapse of the moral and value system. The concept of anomie was proposed by French sociologist Emile Durkheim to interpret deviant behavioral responses, for example, suicidal intentions, illegal acts. The state of anomie is inherent in society in times of unrest, revolutions, perestroika, social crisis, due to the contradiction between the promulgated goals and their impracticability for the prevailing part of the subjects, that is, in those periods when the majority of members of a particular society lose confidence in the existing moral values, moral guidelines and social institutions. The problem of anomie is closely related to professional degradation, disappointment in life and activities, and the alienation of the individual from society, which invariably accompanies the phenomenon described.

What is anomie

Anomie is a state of public or individual moral and psychological consciousness, characterized by the decomposition of moral norms, the foundations of mentality and the collapse of the moral and value system. The concept of anomie was proposed by the French sociologist Emile Durkheim to interpret deviant behavioral reactions, for example, suicidal intentions, illegal actions.

The state of anomie is inherent in society during periods of upheaval, revolution, perestroika, social crisis, due to the contradiction between the set goals and their impracticability for the majority of subjects, that is, during those periods when the majority of members of a given society lose confidence in existing moral values, moral guidelines and social institutions . The problem of anomie is closely related to professional degradation, disappointment in life and work, and the alienation of the individual from society, which invariably accompanies the described phenomenon.

Anomie is a state of society, which is expressed in spiritual and professional degradation

Causes of anomie

The reason is a sharp change in morals, values, ideals, and ethical standards in society. The source of change is the socio-political activity of the state. Some members of society do not have time to accept new values ​​and new means of achieving previous goals, and therefore certain social groups feel that society has rejected them. New values ​​are not perceived as social and useful for all people; they are perceived as dangerous, useful only to certain representatives.

In simple words, anomie in society is the destruction of social order. A number of negative factors lead to this:

• socioeconomic and political changes that have made physical survival a priority for most people;
• criticism of previous values, changing the boundaries between the concepts of good and evil.

The corruption of values ​​occurs in times of unrest, perestroika, revolutions, and social crises. At this time, people lose confidence in social institutions, the government and the norms and guidelines that they offer. A cohesive and stable society is the best prevention of anomie.

Anomia and deviant behavior

The destruction of values ​​and alienation from society leads to deviance:

• Alcoholism,
• Addiction,
• Crime,
• Divorce,
• Rape,
• Early pregnancy,
• Single parent families
• Suicide,
• Xenophobia,
• Fascism,
• Extremism,
• Sexual promiscuity
• Vagrancy, etc.

A crisis can affect anyone, but teenagers are a particular risk group. This is the time when values ​​are formed, when a new system of moral norms is destroyed and built, i.e. teenagers are already unstable on the internal level of the individual. If this is compounded by instability and the destruction of morality in society as a whole, the risk of developing deviance doubles.

We have already said that one of the characteristics of devaluation is that certain categories of citizens reject the means offered by society to achieve their goals. Instead, they offer their own funds, usually criminal and illegal. A person does not believe that he owes anything to society. He is guided only by his needs and desires.

Durkheim believed that society cannot exist without crime. Deviants have always existed. We should strive not to eradicate crime, but to reduce it to a minimum. Criminals ensure the progress of society. Social norms, punishment, and community unity and cohesion maintain acceptable levels of deviance. If society is broken, crime increases. This is dangerous for society and leads to regression.

Anomie theory

Anomie is a state of lawlessness. In order to understand what this theory is, it is important to consider Durkheim's theory of anomie.

The French sociologist argued that deviant behavioral reactions and crime are completely normal phenomena. After all, if there is no such behavioral reaction in society, then, consequently, society is under control to the point of painfulness. When crime is eliminated, progress stops. Lawless behavior is the price that has to be paid for the active anthropogenesis of social transformation.

Durkheim's theory of anomie is based on the premise that a society without crime is unthinkable. After all, if a person stops performing actions that are considered illegal in modern society, then some “fresh” types of behavioral reactions will have to be classified as criminal actions. Durkheim argued that “crime” was indestructible and inevitable. The reason for this lies not in the weakness and natural anger of man, but in the existence of an endless variety of behavior in society. The unity of human society can only be achieved by exerting conformist pressure on this variety of behavioral responses. Such pressure can be ensured by punishment.

Social norm and social anomie, according to Durkheim, are the most important social phenomena, since crime is a factor in the healthy state of society, and without a social norm it cannot exist. In a society without crime, the pressure of social consciousness would be so sharp and intense in its force that no one would be able to resist it. A decrease in crime entails a loss of society's ability to move along the path of progressive development. Criminals are agents of anomie, pawns who lead society into a new turn, not parasites, people unable to go through the process of socialization, not alien elements in society.

Durkheim argued that in a society where there is sufficient human unity and social cohesion, there will be little crime. When social solidarity is destroyed and the isolation of its constituent elements increases, deviant behavior and, consequently, crime increases. This is how anomie arises, as Durkheim believed.

In the problem of maintaining social solidarity, punishment of criminals, according to Durkheim, is of great importance. A correct understanding of the “laws” of decency and honesty is the most important primary source of the unity of society. To preserve the love of the average citizen for this social structure, it is necessary to punish the criminal element. Without the threat of punishment, the average person may lose his deep attachment to a particular society and his willingness to make the sacrifices necessary to maintain that attachment. In addition, the punishment of a criminal serves as visible social confirmation of his “social ugliness.”

Overcoming anomie is largely characterized by dependence on the specific cause of anomie and the type of conflict that caused it. When society is unable to create a new normative value system or elevate some particular system to the rank of universal, it turns to the past, looking for a basis for solidarity in it.

In sociology, the phenomenon of anomie was studied not only by Durkheim, but later it was significantly developed by the American sociologist Merton. According to his concept, anomie is an orientation of individual citizens and social situations that does not correspond to the goals set by the culture of society. According to Durkheim, the phenomenon described means the inability of society to control the natural impulses and desires of individuals. Merton, in turn, believed that the aspirations of many subjects are not necessarily “natural”, but are often determined by the enlightened actions of society itself. The social system limits the ability of individual social groups to satisfy their own aspirations. “It “squeezes” certain individuals into society, forcing them to act illegally.

Merton viewed anomie as the breakdown of the control system of individual desires, resulting in a person wanting more than he could achieve within a particular social structure. He notes that the phenomenon described arises from the inability of many citizens to conform to norms that they fully accept, and not from the presence of freedom of choice.

An example of anomie is the structure of modern American society, in which all citizens are focused on wealth, and those who cannot legally achieve financial well-being do so through illegal means. Thus, to a large extent, deviance depends on the set of institutional means and the presence of cultural goals that a particular actor follows and from which he benefits.

The state of anomie is an absolute discrepancy between declared and civilized goals and socially organized means of achieving them. In relation to an individual member of society, anomie means the uprooting of his moral principles. At the same time, a person loses all sense of tradition and continuity, loses all obligations. The connection with society has been destroyed. Thus, without updating spirituality and moral guidelines, a radical transformation of society, and the development of new values ​​and norms, overcoming anomie is impossible.

The phenomenon of anomie has been considered by many sociologists

The concept of anomie and attempts to modify it

[249]

The main function of sociology is social diagnostics and social therapy. Sociology, on the basis of a social symptom and syndrome, must make an accurate diagnosis of social diseases, social pathology and, based on this, outline ways and methods of healing, as a result of which it will become possible to overcome social pathology.

Man is a social being and lives in society. In society he realizes his essential powers. It is in a healthy society that a person finds an existence that corresponds to his essence. It is the incompatibility of essence and existence that is the main indicator of a person’s alienation, his painful state. A person is then real when he has an existence corresponding to his essence. The category of reality is precisely “the direct unity of essence and existence” (Hegel).

Society is a complex structure. This structure is created by people. For their part, the structures of society influence a person. Social structures determine a person’s position in society, but what should they be? What should be the parameters of the structure in order for the maximum realization of [250] reasonable essential human powers to become possible? The main task of sociology should be to answer these questions, and it is in this that the humanistic function of sociology should be revealed.

One form of social pathology is social anomie. In modern sociology, great importance is attached to the concept of anomie, the roots of which are found in the depths of the 25-century past. In ancient Greek, anomos means "illegal", "outside the norm", "unruly". (This term is found in Euripides, Plato, in the 16th century - in the French philosopher and sociologist Jean Marie Guyot and in the works of other thinkers). In sociology, it is believed that this term was introduced by E. Durkheim. Therefore, it is necessary to at least briefly present his views and the place of this concept in the categorical system of Durkheim’s teaching. Considering the problem of the relationship between society and the individual, he argues that man is a dual being, since in him a physical person is combined with a social person. The latter necessarily requires a society, the spokesman of which is himself, and which he is obliged to serve. The behavior of an individual completely depends on the cohesion and strength of society, therefore, if society is in a state of crisis, social regulations lose their meaning for the individual, which results in unbridled desires and passions. Durkheim calls this state of society anomie. He considered the capitalist society of his time to be in a state of anomie. “The crisis and state of anomie in the industrial world are not only constant phenomena, but even, one might say, normal.”

Durkheim's views on anomie were significantly developed and modernized by R. Merton. Merton also sees the reason for the emergence of anomic situations in certain conditions of the human environment, which he understands, on the one hand, as a social structure, and on the other, as a cultural structure. Cultural structure is a set of those values ​​and norms that indicate the behavioral orientation of certain members of society or groups; and by social structure is meant [251] that complex of social relationships in which the members of a society or group exist. According to Merton, anomie is the result of disagreement and conflict between “culture” and “social structures.” Anomie expresses a social situation where people cannot achieve their goals by legal means, and, due to this, they ignore said means, trying to achieve the goal through illegal means. The process corresponding to this is called deviation, i.e. it is not a process resulting from a conflict between socially recognized goals and the means to achieve them. The anomic situation is also aggravated by the decline in individual respect for legal and moral norms.

Merton classifies the main responses to the effects of anomie - people's acceptance or non-acceptance of the goals of society, the methods of their implementation, or both at the same time.

According to Merton's scheme, total submission—conformism—implies agreement with social goals and legitimate means of achieving them. A well-educated young man finds a prestigious job and rises up the career ladder; he is the personification of this model of behavior, since he sets financial success as his goal and achieves this through legal ways and means. It must be taken into account that conformity is the only way of non-deviant behavior. R. Merton also probably feels well that conformism is not an expression of deviation from the norm and law, but, on the contrary, adaptation to them and, as he himself notes, action in the name of achieving one’s own goals based on adaptation to existing norms and laws. It can be assumed that Merton introduced conformism into the forms of deviation precisely because “strengthening”, “petrification”, etc. official norms and laws create a situation of stagnation in society. Under such conditions, individual freedom is also limited. The situation of stagnation cannot last long, since many other factors will still cause the movement of society in the natural-historical direction, including other forms of deviation. During this process, fossilized or standardized norms and laws are discarded [252] and destroyed. In other words, collapsing laws and rules themselves become one of the forces changing the social situation. (Here it can be noted that Erich Fromm actually excludes conformity from forms of deviation, but we will talk about this in more detail below).

The second possible reaction is called innovation, which implies agreement with social goals, but denial of socially accepted rules for achieving them. The “innovator” uses new illegal means of achieving wealth - blackmail, racketeering, or commits the so-called. “a white collar crime of embezzlement of other people’s money.

The third reaction, called ritualism, involves the denial of social goals, but acceptance (sometimes absurd) of the use of socially accepted means. A fanatically dedicated bureaucrat insists that every form be carefully checked and filed in quadruplicate. In the end, he becomes a victim of the merciless bureaucratic system and usually ends his life in complete despair, suppressed only by alcohol. As a result, he abandons the originally intended goal - material well-being.

The fourth reaction, called retreatism, is observed when a person rejects socially recognized goals and means at the same time. The most obvious evidence of retreatism is people who find themselves outside of society - tramps, alcoholics, drug addicts, the mentally ill, etc.

And finally, rebellion, like retreatism, is associated with the simultaneous denial of socially recognized goals and means. But, at the same time, it causes the formation of new, socially recognized means and goals. Based on the rebellion, a new ideology is formed (it can be revolutionary), which creates new goals and means, for example, a system of socialist property that expels private owners and is considered by the rebels to be more legitimate than the previously existing goals and means. [253]

In connection with the rebellion, the point of view of E. Fromm is interesting. He identifies an authoritarian type of people, characterized by a tendency to resist all power and influence. “Sometimes this opposition obscures the whole picture so much that the tendency to submit becomes invisible. Such a person constantly rebels against all authority, even against that which acts in his interests and does not apply repressive measures at all.” Fromm considers the rebelliousness of people of this type to be a hereditary property. He identifies a type who is in an ambivalent relationship to power. These are people who fight against one system of power and, at the same time, obey a second system (at least only in their own minds), which, due to its power and promises, perhaps satisfies their masochistic tendencies. “Finally, there is a type in which the rebellious tendencies are completely suppressed and appear only during the weakening of conscious control.”

It should be noted that Merton’s concept is also of great importance because it “considers conformity and deviation in the form of two bowls of the same scales, and not as separate categories” (N. Smelser). It also points out that deviation is not the result of an absolutely negative attitude towards generally accepted standards, as many claim. A thief will not ignore a socially accepted means of achieving financial success. The bureaucrat who practices ritualism does not refuse to apply the generally accepted rules of work; he performs them in too much detail, leading to the point of absurdity. However, the behavior of these two people is deviant.

Merton did not formulate these forms of deviation unexpectedly. Previously, he unilaterally destroyed the categorical-conceptual apparatus of structural-functional analysis: unlike his colleagues, he contrasted the concept of function with the concept of dysfunction, thereby preparing the basis for the transition to the concept of anomie. Merton believed that functionalism should focus on the dynamic rather than the static side of social reality; therefore he must examine both function and dysfunction, i.e. both sources of stability and foundations of social change. [254]

In sociology, Merton's formulation of the concept of anomie is not the last word. Parsons expanded Merton's typology of adjustment by using three variables instead of two and describing eight types of deviant behavior. Parsons explains the emergence of deviant motivations by failure to fulfill expectations. The orientation can be “accommodative” or “alienated.” An “adaptive active” orientation leads to innovation, an “adaptive passive” orientation leads to ritualism, an “alienated active” orientation gives rise to rebellion, and an “alienated passive” orientation leads to relapse. Parsons' third variable is the attitude towards "social goals" (people and groups).

American sociologist Robert Dubin also modified Merton's concept. He contrasted institutionalized norms with the actual behavior of individuals and groups. Dubin expanded the typology of deviant adaptations to a fourteen-member scheme of the sphere of ritualism.

There is also the so-called the individual-psychological direction of anomie, according to which the anomic position of individuals is directly related to the anomic position of the social system, although for analytical purposes they are separated. This is reflected in the terminology: to denote “social” anomie, the Durkheimian version of this word (anomie) is used; for “psychological” - the term “anomia”, proposed by the American sociologist Leo Sroul.

Robert McKiver, David Riesman and Leo Sroul developed the psychological concept of anomie. According to McKiver, "social anomie" is a "state of mind" in which the sense of social cohesion - the driving force of an individual's morality - is weakened or completely destroyed; Anomie is “the destruction of the individual’s sense of belonging to society.” “A person is not restrained by virtue of his moral standards; for him there are no longer any moral standards. He lost his sense of heredity and duty, the ability to sense the existence of other people. An anomic person becomes spiritually sterile; he is responsible only to himself. He is skeptical [255] about the life values ​​of others. His only religion is the philosophy of negation. He lives only by immediate sensations, he has neither a future nor a past.” McKiver attributes this phenomenon "to three problematic characteristics of modern democratic society"—cultural conflict, capitalist competition, and the rapid pace of social change. Accordingly, he distinguishes three types of anomie as states of consciousness of individuals. Individuals are anomic:

1. When their life is aimless due to a lack of values, which, in turn, is the result of conflicting clashes between different cultures and value systems: “By losing the compass that shows the way to the future, they lose the future.”
2. When they use their own strengths and capabilities only for themselves, this is the result of a loss of moral orientation in a society of capitalist competition.
3. When they are isolated from meaningful human relationships and connections, “devoid of the soil of former values.”

David Rimsen views anomie as synonymous with rejection. He divides individuals who do not correspond to the character of the era into “autonomous” and “anomic” types. The first has the ability to adapt to the behavioral norms of his own society; Anomic individuals, on the other hand, correspond to behavioral norms that differ from the prevailing ones.

Leo Sroul suggests measuring the psychological feeling of anomie individually. He identifies five dimensions of anomie and presents them on a five-point scale that includes the areas of politics, culture, economics, internalized social norms and values, and “primary” attitudes towards others. Questions concern:

1. the individual’s feeling that public leaders are distant from him and indifferent to his needs;
2. the individual’s pessimistic perception of the social system as predominantly fragile and unpredictable;
3. such a view of the individual, according to which he and others like him retreat back from already achieved goals; [256]
4. the individual’s feelings of purposelessness in life;
5. feelings that the network of relationships of the individual is not predictable and lacks support.

Srawl recognizes that individual psychological anomie is determined by social anomie, but, along with this, he points to the importance of causal relationships.

Also noteworthy are the attempts of the so-called. empirical dimension of anomie, which are mainly associated with the names of Bernard Lander and Leo Sroul. Lander found that “the anomic factor is areas of “comparative non-rationing” and social instability.” Mayer and Bell looked at the impact of socioeconomic status, gender, ethnicity, and other factors on anomie and concluded that anomie depends on the “opportunity to achieve life goals.”

As we have seen, today there is no single definition of the concept of “anomie”. This is explained by the multi-level nature of the social phenomenon of anomie:

1. micro-, macro- and average (meso level);
2. cognitive, affective (“subjective” aspect) and conative (“objective” aspect) levels.

Their intersection alone gives eight meanings, and the heterogeneity of social processes doubles this number.
The main attention should be paid not so much to attempts to modify the concept of anomie, but to fundamental changes in its content. These changes do not always flow from theoretical dialogue. For example, we cannot claim that E. Fromm is familiar with Merton’s version of the concept of anomie and seeks to clarify its content, but in a number of cases his views on such a concept similar to conformism, such as bureaucracy, make us think that Merton’s recognition of conformity as a form of deviation , i.e. the source of the anomic circumstance is not entirely convincing. This is confirmed by Fromm’s opinion about the so-called. "herd conformism" Fromm believes that as long as a person does not deviate from the norm, he is the same as others, is recognized by others as one of [257] them and feels like “I.” The feeling of a person’s own “self-identity” in this situation is equated to a feeling of conformity.

Of great value is the analysis according to which individual anomie is caused by social anomie, although it does not exclude the role of imperfect moral or legal norms and laws in the emergence of anomie. On the contrary, this was noted by Jean Marie Guyot, Herbert Spencer and others. For example, Spencer is so critical of legislators and the state that, in essence, he excludes their role in the progress of social organization and society as a whole. Spencer's views are of great importance not only for the theoretical solution to the problem of anomie, but also for the practical solution to the problem of deepening the anomic processes of our time. And, indeed, it is quite painful, from the point of view of the moral or legal strength of society, for the legislators and moralists themselves to ignore norms and laws, even at the parliamentary level. This creates and spreads mass disrespect for norms and laws, condones deviations from them, giving rise to a transition from the facts of individual anomie to a system of social anomie, or, on the scale of the entire society, to the unity of multiple expressions of social anomie.

Anomie, as a phenomenon reflecting social vices, is of serious concern to non-sociological thinkers. For example, K. Wolf o. According to R. Gilbert, “anomie is a tendency to social death; in its aggravated forms it means the death of society.”

Fromm, in his views on a “sick society,” points to the global danger of anomie. The idea of ​​Fromm's main humanistic work is that the main indicator of the disease of society is indifference to the human person. In this regard, one can also evaluate the anomic results presented by Fromm in the concepts of “narcissism”, “necrophilia”, “sadism”, “masochism”, etc. It is clear that the foundations of these psychopathological [258] deviations are not in the people themselves, but in public structures. (Here it should be noted that the grounds for deviations should not be sought in violations of mental, moral or legal norms, their shortcomings or imperfections. For example, the basis of theft as an anomic phenomenon is not the weakness of the law acting against it, but those social conditions that give rise to theft) .

It can be noted that fans of the teachings of R. Merton, comparing the views of these two thinkers, give a clear advantage to Merton (for example, N. Pokrovsky), but Fromm, with no less force than G. Spencer and the same Merton, denounces the anti-human depravity of a sick society.

Finally, the contribution made by Fromm to the expansion of the concept of anomie can be considered the development of its psychopathological aspect, thanks to which he continued the Durkheim tradition of searching for the psychological aspect of the concept of anomie, which, in essence, was rejected by R. Merton.

If this view is acceptable, then we can conclude that E. Fromm paid attention to the natural aspect of anomie, while Merton and his associates focused more on the fact of the existence of anomic deviations caused by subjective activity, i.e. on deviations from moral and legal norms. Moral and legal norms, as is known, are not only the product of the realization of the objective needs of society, but also the result of the creativity of subjects - legislators and moralists.

Durkheim's Anomie Theory

Durkheim was the first sociologist to introduce the term “anomie” into social science. In his book The Division of Labor in Society, the sociologist argues that social life arises from the division of tasks among different members of a community. In general, such division generates solidarity between social groups, but in some cases it can lead to the opposite result...

According to Durkheim, when the division of labor does not lead to natural solidarity, it is because the necessary conditions for its emergence have not been created. It is in such cases that a state of anomie can arise.

Thus, anomie would be typical of societies in which work is so specialized that those involved have no sense of belonging. Currently, workers do not understand the rules of the production process, and conflicts may arise between workers and their managers.

Various reasons

For Durkheim, however, the division of labor is not the only cause of anomie. This condition usually occurs as a result of very rapid social changes, such as an economic or political crisis, or the disappearance of traditional values.

In such cases, society will try to adapt to new conditions, but will not be able to do so, and therefore a deficiency of moral regulation may arise.

In moments of social crisis, people have no values ​​to guide them, so they will seek their own pleasures….

This will lead to a lack of discipline among the population and the emergence of new appetites and desires that in other times would be considered insane.

Anomie and suicide

Durkheim was particularly concerned about what he called "atomic suicide"; that is, suicide, which is provoked by the loss of values ​​and boundaries of human passions.

The sociologist believed that unbridled desires are by definition insatiable, which leads to great dissatisfaction with people's lives.

On the other hand, having lost the moral compass of society in times of anomie, people will feel that their lives have no meaning. This, coupled with the economic crisis situations that occur during this time, will cause a large portion of the population to commit suicide.

This problem was so important to Durkheim that he dedicated an entire book to it, which he simply called Suicide.

Merton's Anomie Theory

Robert Merton wrote one of the most famous articles in all of sociology in the 1940s, in which he analyzed the concept of "deviance" and the reasons for its occurrence in various societies...

In his opinion, deviation is an individual’s violation of social norms; this disruption can be either good or bad.

Merton uses his concept of anomie to explain why Western societies have more deviant behavior than others and to examine differences in the incidence of deviance depending on race, ethnicity, or social class.

Merton points to the United States of his time as an example of a culture that had more deviance due to a situation of anomie. In this society, much attention is paid to achieving material success, but there are no clear moral rules on how to achieve it.

For example, Merton argues that just as great investors or entrepreneurs are admired, so too are criminals who break the law and make a fortune through theft or robbery are admired in American culture. In the United States of his time, he said, success was much more important than virtue.

On the other hand, it was not equally easy for all people in this society to achieve material success. For example, a person born into a humble family will not have access to the resources needed to become a great entrepreneur. Therefore, he will suffer the consequences of the discrepancy between the goals imposed by society and his daily reality.

To confront this reality, people can use a variety of strategies, from conformity to rebellion.

Different scientists have looked at anomie from different angles

Aberrant deviation

It involves accepting the goals imposed by society, but trying to achieve them by breaking the rules (means).

Rebellious deviation

Rules are broken, social goals are not envisaged, but there is also no alternative.

Nonconformist deviation

Both goals and social norms are rejected, but an alternative is offered. Sometimes it's about reforming the entire system.

According to Merton, three types of deviance arise when social goals cannot be achieved by means that society considers legitimate. This can happen in a situation of anomie, so such a situation will be the immediate cause of social deviation.

Anomie of Russian society: four splits

An expert at the Center for Problem Analysis and Public Management Design, Sergei Kara-Murza, presents his new book “Anomie in Russia: Causes and Manifestations.” Based on a wide array of statistics and sociological research, the prominent Russian social scientist analyzes the causes of the crisis in which our society finds itself. The author proposes to consider the accumulated knowledge, a kind of “case history” of society, in order to begin treatment.

This book is for everyone who can read and listen. As it goes to press, we offer you a few excerpts from the study.

Anomie, a social disease

Mentally, we master the colossal crisis of Russia as a system, considering its different “slices.” It is still difficult to formulate its integral, multidimensional rational model in one’s mind; one has to be content with artistic images and sensations. The situation with the language to describe the image of this catastrophe is also bad: it’s scary to call things by their proper names; one has to limit oneself to euphemisms so as not to cause trouble. We say, for example, “crisis of the legitimacy of power.” Does this convey the degree, and most importantly, the quality of the alienation that has arisen between the population and the authorities? No, we are faced with a phenomenon that Weber could not even imagine. Developing an analytical language for studying our Troubles is a big task that has hardly been attempted yet. We must at least fill the terms from the generally accepted vocabulary of Western sociology with our content. After all, almost all the concepts denoted by these terms require “open” definitions and require a large number of meaningful examples from the reality of our particular crisis.

In this work, we will consider one aspect of our crisis, which can be called anomie in Russia.

Anomie (literally lawlessness, lack of norms) is a state of society in which a significant part of it deliberately violates known norms of ethics and law.

E. Durkheim, introducing the concept of anomie into sociology (1893) [1], saw in it a product of the destruction of the solidarity of traditional society while delaying the formation of the solidarity of civil society. This state was experienced by the West during the formation of bourgeois society during the transformation of a communal person into a free individual. A series of revolutions during the emergence of the modern West (Reformation, Scientific and Industrial revolutions, great bourgeois revolutions) caused in Europe not just a surge of mental disorders, but even inherited physiological changes that became ethnic markers inherent in the peoples of this region, such as the splitting of consciousness ( science historian Needham calls it "the characteristic European schizophrenia").

In Soviet times, the concept of anomie was rarely used, since the idea of ​​the Soviet man was imbued with an essentialist belief in the stability of his value matrix (just as in the class society of Tsarist Russia there was a strong belief in the monarchism of the Orthodox Russian peasant).

Anomie is a double life as the norm. Moreover, this is a necessary aspect of the life of society as a whole. Marginal groups that show a tendency towards deviant and criminal behavior exist in any society and at any time. Of course, in Soviet society there were manifestations of anomie (for example: petty theft by “nonsuns”, mass petty corruption, etc.), but these were considered painful forms of deviant behavior that did not acquire a system-forming character.

Post-Soviet social science is also slowly mastering the cognitive capabilities of ideas about anomie. For twenty years, almost half of the articles in SOCIS have touched on the problem of anomie of one or another sociocultural community in Russia, but even the very concept denoting this phenomenon is almost never used. Out of 2–3 thousand relevant articles on the problem of anomie in Russian society, there are barely a dozen with this term in the title.

The concept of anomie is quite specific and rigid; it denotes a severe social illness in which alienation is only a mild symptom.

Here are the statements of the philosopher and sociologist: “Durkheim’s ideas about anomie... are only a minor but ominous prelude” (K. Wolff); “Anomie is a tendency towards social death; in its extreme forms it means the death of society” (R. Hilbert). Moreover, this disease has been studied within the framework of modern rationality for a century and a half; a mass of empirical material has been accumulated and systematized. In this work we will try to organize at least part of the material devoted to anomie in Russia - here and now.

We will talk about anomie as a social phenomenon. It is distinguished from the anomic state of individuals (although, obviously, it is associated with the situation in society).

A 1992 review says: the Durkheimian version of the word (anomie) is used to denote “social” anomie; to denote “psychological” anomie is a term proposed by the American sociologist Leo Srawl (anomia).

“Psychological anomie,” according to McIver, is a “state of consciousness” in which the sense of social cohesion—the driving force of an individual’s morality—is destroyed or completely weakened. Anomia is spiritual emptiness, an inescapable melancholy that pushes either to crime, or to alcohol and drugs, or to suicide. People avoid these extreme evils in different ways, but live their years in a state of deep mental distress.

McIver defines anomie as “the destruction of an individual's sense of belonging to society,” and associates this phenomenon with three “problematic characteristics of modern democratic society—cultural conflict, capitalist competition, and the rapidity of social change.”

These problematic characteristics are inherent in both post-industrial Western and our current “democratic” society, but anomie has covered Russia and a number of other post-Soviet societies so densely and comprehensively that comparison with the modern West gives us little.

It is much more difficult to endure anomie in countries where changes in the value-normative system are associated with a significant deterioration in the economic situation.

Anomie is such a phenomenon that, looking through it, one can consider and understand almost all spheres and sections of life in modern Russia. Today, any process or event in Russian society must be approached armed with knowledge about anomie, as a touchstone.

The stratification of society that turned life upside down

From a sociological point of view, the main consequence of the reform of the 1990s was disintegration, the collapse of Russian society. Disintegration and anomie are two sides of the same process; they reinforce each other with a cooperative effect. The crisis, which reached an acute stage in 1991, shook the entire system of society, all its elements and connections. It can be argued that one of the main reasons for the duration and depth of the crisis lies precisely in the depth of disintegration of society. Its flywheel was promoted for political purposes as a way to dismantle Soviet society. But it was not possible to stop this flywheel after 2000 (if such a task was realized and set at all).

A. Toynbee wrote that a “sick society” (in a state of disintegration) is waging war “against itself.” Social cracks are formed - both “vertical” (for example, between regional communities) and “horizontal” (within communities, classes and social groups). This is what is happening in Russia.

A large review work says: “Currently, the Russian social space is dominated by intense disintegration processes, blurring of identities and social statuses, which contributes to anomie in society.

Transformation processes have changed the previous configuration of the social-class structure of society, the quantitative ratio of workers, employees, intelligentsia, peasants, as well as their role. The fate of the former upper strata (political and economic elite) developed differently: some retained their positions using existing privileges, while others lost them. Worst of all was the representatives of the former middle strata, which were very numerous, although heterogeneous: professionals with higher education, middle managers, office workers, highly skilled workers. Most of them have become poor and are rapidly falling down, a small proportion are getting richer and confidently moving towards the top of the social pyramid...

The principles of social stratification of society have radically changed, it began to be structured according to new principles for Russia...

Research confirms that there is a close connection between the flourishing of the upper stratum, the “new Russians” with their sociocultural marginality, and the reproduction of social poverty, crime, and the weakness of the rule of law”[2].

This condition was recorded already in the mid-1990s. In 1998 A.A. Galkin wrote: “If we approach the problem theoretically, then the emerging picture can be imagined as the result of the superposition of two stratification grids on top of each other: the old, traditional one, although partially cleared of mythological distortions, and the new one, which has developed (or is emerging) thanks to the transformation of economic relations . Such an overlap must inevitably result in a high degree of fragmentation of social groups, their increased mosaic...

Many social groups that theoretically should have formed the backbone of the middle class (primarily non-manual workers, the majority of skilled workers, artisans, some small entrepreneurs) as a result of the costs of transformation and incompetent policies found themselves on the social bottom or somewhere nearby. Those who, with some stretch, could be classified as part of the middle class (the bulk of trade workers and small entrepreneurs in industry and the service sector) have difficulty holding on to its very last, lowest rung, constantly in danger of sliding down...

Dismemberment and internal contradiction of interests are also characteristic of other layers and groups of Russian society”[3].

After 2000, this process did not stop: its inertia is great. This is how sociologists V.A. Ivanov and V.N. Shubkin characterize the state of society by comparing the answers of respondents in 1999 and 2003: “There is an increasing focus on readiness for social survival on the principle of “everyone for himself, one God for all.” 30% believe that even their family and close circle will not be able to provide them with means of protection adequate to the dangers that threaten them, i.e. they feel completely unprotected against the threat of disasters. An analysis of the problem of Russians' fears allows us to talk about the deep disintegration of Russian society. Almost none of the problems is perceived by the majority of the population as common, requiring the sympathy and mobilization of the efforts of everyone”[4].

V.E. describes the situation in approximately the same way. Boykov (2004): “The state of mass frustration is illustrated by data from sociological surveys of various categories of the population. According to a 2003 survey, 73.2% of respondents to one degree or another experience fear that their future may not be cloudless; 74.6% are afraid of losing everything they have acquired and another 10.4% said that they have nothing to lose; 81.7% - do not plan their life or plan it for no more than one year; 67.4% believe that they are not at all immune from economic crises that plunge them into the abyss of poverty, and 48.3% feel completely defenseless against crime; 46% believe that if everything in the country continues as before, then our society will face a catastrophe. Let us note that anxiety and uncertainty about the future are inherent in representatives of all segments and groups of the population, although, of course, among poor and elderly people these feelings manifest themselves more often and more acutely”[5].

And here is the conclusion when looking at the Russian reform from the outside, with a general formulation. Vice-President of the International Sociological Association M. Burawoy writes: “Russia is polarizing... The center is integrating into the advanced networks of the global information society, the provinces are wandering in the opposite direction towards neo-feudalism... The incredibly deep division of society by property status has led to alienation. Disregard for social norms became a destructive form of protest. In the social structure of a disintegrating society, a significant layer of “outcasts” arose - lumpen people, in whose community crime, alcoholism and drug addiction flourish"[6].

Thus, the collapse of the structure of society means the disappearance of the social environment that ensures the fulfillment of moral (and, to a large extent, also legal) norms by each member of society.

People who are not connected with close social, informational and emotional connections do not receive signals of approval or disapproval from others, much less experience the moral sanctions of their community.

According to the observation of Z.T. Golenkova and E.D. Igitkhanyan (2008), the main characteristic of modern Russian society is its social polarization, stratification into a majority of the poor and a minority of the rich. At the same time, the space of social stratification, they note, seems to be reduced to almost one indicator—property (capital, property, income).”

The stratification of society and its division into large communities (classes) is the subject of macrosociology. But the general conclusion about the disintegration of Russian society under the influence of the reform is also confirmed by sociologists who observe processes occurring at the “micro level” - in small groups, in relationships between people at the individual level. Such regular surveys began already in 1981 and continued during the reform.

A recent review paper summarizes the results of long-term observations. Here is an extensive excerpt from this work: “The analysis shows that the most noticeable and most controversially assessed changes in the Russian way of life over the past quarter century have occurred in one of the main spheres of human interaction and communication - in the microenvironment, through which social demands are either accepted or rejected , or are modified, refracted through the prism of specific conditions, norms, values, views and relationships, etc.

As follows from the data presented, the general vector of the changes that have occurred is the active expansion of the zone of action of negative norms and the narrowing of positive ones. Thus, the share of microenvironments in which almost all people are confident in the future has decreased by 8.4 times, and those in whose immediate social environment almost everyone also strives to work as best as possible have become 2 times less. The share of microenvironments consisting mainly of responsive people, always ready to help, has decreased by 40%. On the contrary, there are 4.4 times more people in whose immediate social environment almost everyone is concerned exclusively with themselves and their personal well-being. The share of microenvironments consisting of people who drink has increased 3 times, and the share where the majority abuse alcoholic beverages has increased 1.4 times. Today, more than 3 times as many people live in the immediate social environment, infected with nationalist prejudices, as in 1981–1982. Thus, we clearly see that “work better” is gradually replaced by “better consume”, mutual assistance with self-centeredness, confidence in the future with social and national tension.

All these are signs of a clear destruction of social relations, the scale of which is quite clearly visible from a comparative analysis of the nature of the social environment of people in Soviet and current times. The tendency to replace a social environment that is favorable for a normal person with an unfavorable, parasitic-egoistic, aggressively hostile one is clearly visible...

The analysis shows that in modern Russian society an alternative normative system is not only being formed, but is already being implemented, which determines the everyday practices of people. During the Soviet period, the basis of public life was the modal type of civilized personality, which was formed on the basis of the culture of a stable society. In modern Russia, people are not confident in the future; among them, the proportion of those who strive to work as best as possible, who are ready to show responsiveness and mutual assistance, has decreased significantly. Ethnic intolerance and alcoholism of the population increased sharply. Today, the majority of people strive to take more from society and give it less. The social situation in general, including in production, has sharply deteriorated, and the inculcation of the ideology of corruption has led to the widespread spread of unbridled, extra-ethical individualism”[7].

This is a picture of Russia's descent into the abyss of anomie.

Let us note one more side of this process. V.E.’s remark was given above. Boykov, who pointed out an important sign of anomie - people “do not plan their lives or plan it for no more than one year,” and this is characteristic of “representatives of all layers and groups of the population.” This topic is developed by V.V. Krivosheev (2009), calling this specific form of manifestation of anomie “a situation of short life projects” [8].

V.V. Krivosheev connects the spread of this type of anomie precisely with the qualities of the new social order in comparison with the Soviet life order. He writes: “The previous society, although it was largely homogenized, still consisted of differentiated individuals who were in a state of “emotional confusion,” that is, the possibility of including themselves in the lives of others. The modern person, having the opportunity to communicate with others like never before, remains lonely, isolated from general social institutions. A new, fragmented individual has formed...

During the Soviet period, stories were not only declared, but also other, long-term life projects were implemented in practice... The situation of long life plans presupposed the presence of a certain system of value coordinates. Sociological studies conducted in 1963–1966, for example, showed that the overwhelming number of young people (70% of those surveyed) considered their main life guidelines to be “having an interesting, favorite job”, “be respected by others”, “to love and be beloved." A study conducted in Moscow in 1982 revealed that the first place among the life values ​​of young respondents was “interesting work” (75.3%), followed by “family happiness, happiness in love, children” (66. 4%), “respect for people” (43.6%). It turns out that it was long life plans that were the guideline in the sphere of family relationships. A person planned his life with one marriage partner, which can also be regarded as a certain inertia of the elements and characteristics of traditional society.

The radical transformation of Russian society, which began in the late 1980s and early 1990s, simultaneously meant a sharp transition of a significant number of people, entire social groups and categories to short-term life projects”[9].

It can be assumed that an important factor in the deepening of anomie was the collapse of a large community - the intelligentsia. In modern society, especially among the urban population, the intelligentsia played the most important consolidating function as having authority in the interpretation of the phenomena of social life. An engineer and a teacher, a doctor and an officer, through personal contacts at the mass level, carried out “molecular” work to legitimize legal and moral norms. The “declassing” of the intelligentsia, its sharp impoverishment and decline in social status eliminated the very possibility of performing this function - and at the same time led to extensive anomie among the representatives of this community themselves.

A.A. Galkin wrote (1998): “Mass groups of people of intellectual labor, i.e., the intelligentsia, have undergone deep dispersion. At the same time, her unprecedented status decline occurred. Hundreds of thousands, millions - engineers, scientists, medical workers, teachers - have lost the opportunity to work in accordance with their profession. Their wages, already low in previous years, fell two to four times. In many cases, it is known to not be paid at all.

In the structure of unemployment, the highest level is among non-manual workers. The value of mental activity in the public consciousness has fallen to its lowest level in decades. To survive, many intellectuals have to do hard, low-prestige work, while listening to mocking comments from the soon-rich and bureaucrats who have retained their positions. And this is not a situational situation, but a prospect for many decades...

Now the duality of the position of the intelligentsia in the system of social relations and its deep internal differentiation are again becoming more and more obvious, although the configuration, as usually happens at a new stage, looks different.

In the sphere of political orientation, three main groups are increasingly distinguished: two mass groups and one, acquiring the features of a marginal one. The first group includes those who do not accept the values ​​of the emerging social system; the second - his deeply disappointed former supporters; the third group mainly, and in some cases completely, identifies itself with the authorities”[10].

Let us briefly consider the types of schisms that immediately break many connections between people and together lead to the disintegration of society and comprehensive anomie.

— The first split is between the poor and the rich.

This is the most massive division. The categorical conclusion of sociologists was given above: “The space of social stratification seems to be reduced to almost one indicator - property (capital, property, income).” This, of course, is an exaggeration, since the fundamental division occurs on many grounds, no less important than property.

Since 1994, the Institute of Sociology of the Russian Academy of Sciences has been monitoring “socio-economic tolerance” in Russia - regular surveys identifying subjective assessments of the possibility of achieving mutual understanding and cooperation between the poor and the rich. After November 1998, these attitudes became remarkably stable. In November 1998, they were the most skeptical: 53.1% of respondents assessed this possibility negatively, and 19% positively (the rest were neutral). Then, from year to year (from October 2001 to October 2006), the share of negative assessments ranged from 42.1 to 46%. An optimistic assessment was given - from 20 to 22% [50]. The threat of loss of “communication skills” increases over time.

— The second split is ideological.

This mass division runs through all groups. It even crosses the gaps between rich and poor, between Russians and non-Russians, between generations.

Sociologists write the following about this intersection of dividing lines: “Russians are more concerned not about the size of their “neighbor’s” wallet or bank account, but about the fact that the current stratification into rich and poor is unnatural, inorganic, stems from sources that “tear” society and define dubious, antisocial guidelines. The “nature” of this stratification contradicts the consensus value of the majority of Russians (over 75% of those who share it) that “a person should have the income that he earned through honest labor” [63].

L. Radzikhovsky states in the official Rossiyskaya Gazeta: “Ideologically, the country still consists of “two Russias.” One is for Stalin, the Russian god of equality, envy and sadistic cruelty. The other is for Gaidar, a symbol of inequality, competition, and market rigidity. And it’s impossible for these two countries to come to an agreement—thankfully, there’s no quiet civil war. Such a country is two mutually exclusive halves, with different pasts and different thoughts about the future.”[11]

V.E. Boykov provides data from surveys of the population aged 18 years and older (sample size - 2,400 people) and experts (242 people), conducted by the Sociological Center of the Russian Civil Registry of State Statistics and the Institute of Social Research (autumn 2009) in 24 constituent entities of the Russian Federation. Subject: socio-political orientations of Russians. The author makes an extremely important conclusion: “In the hierarchy of value orientations, “social justice” is of key importance. For the majority of respondents, it still means primarily social equality, which is manifested in the assessment of differences between people based on the principle of their income. In the respondents’ views on the correspondence of wages to labor efforts, there was a significant shift towards social equality... Assessments of social justice from a moral point of view appear as people’s awareness of a socially necessary type of relationship.

As research data show, the distribution of opinions about the essence of social justice and the unfair nature of social relations is the same in both younger and older age groups... It is the discrepancy between social reality and the majority’s mental idea of ​​social justice that alienates the population to the greatest extent from the political class, representatives of business and government authorities"[12].

— The third split is ethnocultural.

Ethnonationalism as an ideology began its onslaught back in the USSR, during the years of perestroika. And in the 1990s, reformers managed to make an important change in the entire structure of the interethnic community of Russia - to shift the mass consciousness of non-Russian peoples from Russocentric to ethnocentric. In some regions, the mobilization of ethnicity began on the basis of Russophobia, that is, aggressive ethnonationalism.

Anomie in the sphere of ethnic relations is inertial; overcoming it requires great and careful efforts. Their results are destroyed by the social forms that arise during the reform. Based on research from 2003, sociologists write: “Regardless of their ideological and religious affiliation, 62% identify themselves as citizens of Russia. At the same time, 11% still consider themselves citizens of the USSR, and 3% of respondents - citizens of the world. About a quarter of respondents (24%) reported uncertainty about their own civic orientation.

The most significant differences are demonstrated by the group of followers of Islam, in which only 39% of respondents consider themselves citizens of Russia, while 19% - citizens of the USSR, and 8% - citizens of the world. At the same time, the level of uncertainty in the civic orientation of Muslims is also the highest - 33%"[13].

— The fourth split is between generations.

In the last years of perestroika and in the 1990s, cultural trauma, affecting both older generations and teenagers, caused sharp conflicts between generations, destroying traditional relationships and the system of norms for the integration of society established in Soviet times; this split only deepened, becoming “systemic”: There was a divergence of social and value attitudes, structures of needs, etc.

M.B. Glotov, who studies relations between generations, writes (2004): “The most expressive and aggressive confrontation between generations occurs at the macro level on issues of ideology. At the micro level, the clash of generations is smoothed out by family traditions and caused by differences in attitudes towards moral and subcultural values. Intergenerational conflicts are negatively affected by social phenomena such as social inequality and social injustice, competition and unemployment, ethnic, class and religious differences.

The aggravation of intergenerational conflicts is facilitated by large-scale and dynamic changes in the political and economic structures of society, changes in everyday and cultural standards, as well as accompanying social conflicts, such as, for example, family, ethnic, class, and professional ones”[14].

Here is a recent assessment of the state of young people: “The attitudes of a significant part of young people are characterized by normative relativism - the readiness of young people to transgress social norms if their personal interests and aspirations require it... Typically, such a strategy is implemented as a result of exaggeration of the conflict with the environment, its transfer to society as a whole. At the same time, the conflict, which can have various sources, acquires a value-role character in the consciousness of the subject and, as a consequence of this, a pronounced tendency to escalate.”

Psychologists and sociologists write about youth subcultures and “groups” in which adolescents and young people acquire a “negative” (asocial and aggressive) identity. This is a type of manifestation of anomie.

At the same time, it is the youth who bring innovation to society, and in terms of the consolidation of different cultures and closer ties in their own culture, all the new and fashionable hobbies of young people that captivate their masses are positive for the development of society. Thus, the development of new technology in the form of gadgets, its constant use and accompanying discussions and use of services certainly brings consolidating potential. An example is Apple services. Apple has been delighting the world with its technology since 1976, which is supported by its serwis apple. Apple produces computers, various game consoles, displays, iPhone phones, iPad tablets, iPod music players, and computer equipment. This is a huge range of practical actions that ensure the need for social communication and, thereby, stabilize culture.

Sergei Kara-Murza’s book “Anomie in Russia: Causes and Manifestations” has appeared on the website rusrand.ru!

Anomie Merton

R. Merton is a follower of I. Durkheim. The sociologist continued to study the phenomenon and concept of anomie. In this regard, R. Merton included the following key points in his definition of value destruction:

• the contradiction between the goals, desires, needs of the majority of members of society and the means that are offered to them (society does not accept them), i.e. the ends not only do not justify the means, but even contradict them;
• the influence of social norms tends to zero (people are uncontrollable, norms do not regulate their behavior).

Thus, according to Merton's theory of anomie, this phenomenon is caused by the contradiction between the goals (norms) of society and the means available to the individual. For example, a person accepts the idea of ​​wealth, success, prosperity, but cannot get a good education and find a prestigious job because he was born into a poor family and does not have the means for this. Then he chooses another way to achieve the same goal - crime (robbery, fraud, deception, extortion, begging, etc.) Inequality is one of the causes of anomie, according to Merton.

However, this does not always lead to deviation. Merton identifies 5 reactions to the “end-means” contradiction within the framework of the concept of anomie, 4 of which lead to deviation:

• Conformism - compliance with the goals and means proposed by the norms (does not cause deviations);
• innovation - finding new ways to achieve the proposed goals (prostitution, fraud, blackmail, theft, drug trafficking, etc.)
• ritualism - denial and belittlement of goals and the use of proposed methods (the means become an end in themselves);
• Retrovisionism - denial of goals and means, lack of suggestion (drug addicts, alcoholics, tramps);
• Rebellion is the denial of goals and means, the proposal of alternatives (political and revolutionary movements, subcultures, sects, social movements).

Decay, decay and crime

It has already been noted that anomie is predominantly studied by sociology; in sociology, Durkheim, for example, identified this concept with the state of a decaying and degrading society, where there are no norms that previously acted as guarantors of social order. Most often, anomie manifests itself as:

• Instability of social norms.
• The impossibility of morality to influence society.
• Lack of regulators of people's behavior during critical periods.

Further, this concept of anomie was somewhat refined by R. Merton. He, like his predecessor, argued that anomie is a completely natural phenomenon, which is caused by the destruction of ethical standards.

If the old moral standards are outdated or simply ceased to be perceived by some part of society, and they are not replaced by new principles, values ​​are replaced, and people often begin to behave illegally. Moreover, the phenomenon of anomie and deviant behavior can be observed in all layers of society, but still, first of all, it is inherent in the younger generation.

It turns out that having lost generally accepted norms, a person chooses his own style of behavior and often becomes a criminal. Moreover, the sociological approach to the phenomenon of crime is very interesting.

We recommend: Assertive behavior is

For example, Durkheim considered it a completely normal phenomenon that does not allow society to stop in its development. And this phenomenon is almost impossible to eradicate - even if society gets rid of maniacs, robbers, killers, etc., then soon criminal acts will appear again, but they will be somewhat different, ones that did not exist before.

If there are no criminals, then there will be no wrong role model of behavior in society, which is necessary in order for normal members of society to form. And at the same time, Durkheim noted that the intensity of antisocial behavior grows regardless of the political state of society or the level of development of its economy, if two basic conditions are met:

• In society there is an ideal of some common good introduced for everyone.
• Most of society has no legal means of achieving the ideal.

Anomie Parsons

American psychologist T. Parsons argued that anomie is caused not by the contradiction of goals and means, but by freedom of choice. The norms of individual institutions are so contradictory that people begin to choose one group and limit themselves to it. Groups change very often. As a result, people are in an unstable state, they do not have a stable perception of reality as a whole, they do not have stable relationships with other institutions, groups, the state and society. This leads to deviations.

Anomie Srawl

Psychologist L. Small was the first to study anomie from a psychological point of view, since before that he considered it only as social anomie. Stroul studied this phenomenon at the individual level. According to the theory of anomie in psychology, the destruction of moral norms and values ​​leads to a breakdown in cohesion with society and the emergence of a desire for self-destruction through addictions (physical and moral).

There are many examples of deviant behavior in our lives.

Manifestations of anomie

Social anomie has three manifestations:

1. Uncertainty, instability, contradictory norms and values. The government says to focus on one thing, but creates conditions for people to focus on something else.
2. Ineffectiveness of rules and regulations. Laws do not apply to a person; they do not influence his behavior.
3. The absence or partial absence of norms at a time when the old value system is destroyed and a new one has not yet been built. A striking example in Russia is the period of the collapse of the USSR.

Anomie manifests itself at all levels and affects all institutions. Recently, it has been especially noticeable in politics, religion, the institution of family, and economics. People do not understand what society expects from them; it is difficult for them to coordinate their actions according to unclear norms.

Examples of anomie

Traditionally, examples of anomie can be divided into large-scale (national) and collective, sometimes individual. Examples of large-scale anomie include wars, revolutions, and the disunity of small states. Collective anomie manifests itself in attempts to influence public opinion: riots, uprisings, new trends for social causes (for example, the “childless” movement). Individual anomies can be defined as anomies manifested in criminal acts, alcoholism, drug addiction, etc.

Whether it concerns an individual or society as a whole, everyone involved feels the need for change. In a group, an individual accepts a new idea, which creates the illusion that only through illegal actions can he achieve his goals. However, there are frequent cases of group disintegration after its suppression, which once again confirms the impossibility of achieving goals through illegal means.

Attention should be paid to the influence of the media and parental examples that provoke destructive human behavior. More and more people talk about what is bad rather than about what is good. People began to share their troubles, which further convinced others that they could not trust anyone and be treacherous.

Irreligion also refers to anomie. This phenomenon clearly manifested itself during the reign of faith and religion. Let's remember how women suspected of witchcraft were burned at the stake. Anyone who did not conform to certain social norms had to die, which created the illusion of continued integrity. However, this only led to the fact that the wicked learned to hide or pretend to be believers.

When talking about social norms, it is important to understand that many people are forced to follow them. The more cunning of them have learned to avoid punishment, which is a consequence of committing a criminal act. Anomie is an attempt to adapt to living conditions.

Social anomie

In the course of a fairly dramatic change in the goals and morality of a certain society, some social categories cease to feel that they belong to this society.

The concept of anomie is the process of erosion of the fundamental foundations of culture, in particular ethical standards. The result is the alienation of such categories of citizens. Moreover, they reject new social ideals, norms and morals, including socially proclaimed patterns of behavior. Instead of using generally accepted ways to achieve individual or social goals, they propose their own, often illegal.

The state of anomie, which affects all segments of the population through social upheaval, has a particularly strong impact on young people.

In sociology, anomie is any type of “deviation” in the value-normative system of society. In other words, this state occurs when the existing hierarchy is destroyed and a new one has not yet formed. Until the social forces which stand alone in times of crisis are brought into balance, their comparative value cannot be taken into account, and consequently any regulation becomes untenable for the time being.

Durkheim saw the causes of anomie in the contrast between “fundamental” society and modern industrial society.

The problem of anomie is caused by the transitional nature of the historical period, the temporary weakening of moral regulation of new economic-capitalist relations.

Anomie is a product of an incomplete transition from mechanical unity to organic unity, since the objective basis of the latter (social division of labor) progresses more intensively than it finds moral justification in the collective consciousness.

Factors contributing to the formation of anomie: a collision of two categories of socially generated phenomena (the first is interests and needs, the second is resources to satisfy them). Within the framework of generally accepted orders, the capabilities and needs of individuals were satisfied quite easily, since they were restrained by the corresponding collective consciousness, preventing the development of individualism, personal liberation, and establishing strict limits on what a subject could legitimately achieve in a given social position. Hierarchical (traditional) feudal society was fixed because it set different goals for different strata and allowed each member to feel that his own existence had meaning within a limited, closed strata.

Developments in social processes have caused an increase in "individualization" while at the same time eroding the power of group control and the stable moral boundaries of earlier times. In the new conditions, the degree of individual freedom from traditions, group customs, prejudices, and the availability of individual choice of knowledge and methods of action increases sharply. The relatively free structure of industrial society ceases to determine the life activity of individuals and constantly reproduces anomie, which means the absence of stable life ideals, norms and patterns of behavior, which puts most people in a situation of uncertainty, depriving them of collective unity, a sense of connection with a certain category and society as a whole. All this leads to an increase in deviant and self-destructive behavioral reactions in society.

Anomie is caused by confrontation in society, which is aimed at violating generally accepted rules and prohibitions

state exam / deviations / 5.5

5. Theory of anomie by E. Durkheim and R. Merton.

Definition of anomie. Causes of anomie in society. Anomia and deviant behavior. Types of behavior in a situation of anomie (conformism, innovation, ritualism, retreatism, rebellion).

Sociological concepts try to take into account deviation the social and cultural factors that influence and determine human behavior in society. For the first time, a sociological explanation of the essence of deviation was proposed by E. Durkheim, who developed the theory of anomie

(from the Greek anomos - lawless, normless, uncontrollable).
By anomie
he understood a state of society in which there is no clear regulation of people's behavior due to the absence of all sorts of norms and values ​​in society (the old ones have become obsolete, and the new ones have not yet been accepted). In such conditions, indifference, alienation, and distrust of people towards each other are observed, the stability of the family institution is lost, and complete indifference to the activities of the state is expressed. Deprived of goals and meaning in life, people become susceptible to stress and anxiety, which leads to various forms of deviant behavior.

Broadly speaking, anomie

- these are “violations in the value-normative systems of the individual and social groups, the value-normative vacuum, the ineffectiveness of social and, above all, legal norms,” which determine the commission of crimes.

Theory of anomie (E. Durkheim, T. Parsons, R. Merton)—

deviant behavior arises as a result of a large number of conflicting norms, uncertainty in connection with this possible choice of behavior (anomie). R. Merton notes that anomie does not arise from freedom of choice, but from the inability of many individuals to follow norms that they fully accept. For example, in America, everyone strives for wealth; those who cannot achieve this legally (through talent, etc.) achieve it illegally. Thus, deviations largely depend on the cultural goals and institutional means that a particular individual adheres to and uses.

It should be noted that deviant behavior can also have a positive meaning for society. Social deviations can become a means of progressive development, overcoming conservative and reactionary standards of behavior. The boundaries between deviant and non-deviant behavior are fluid in time and space. There is a dependence of forms of deviant behavior on economic, social, demographic, cultural and other factors.

According to Durkheim, anomie is a state of society in which there is decay, disintegration and disintegration of the system of values ​​and norms that guarantee social order. A necessary condition for the emergence of anomie in society is a discrepancy between the needs and interests of some of its members, on the one hand, and the possibilities of satisfying them, on the other. It manifests itself in the form of the following violations:

• vagueness, instability and inconsistency of value-normative prescriptions and orientations, in particular, the discrepancy between the norms defining the goals of activity and the norms regulating the means of achieving them;
• low degree of influence of social norms on individuals and their weak effectiveness as a means of normative regulation of behavior;
• partial or complete absence of normative regulation in crisis, transitional situations, when the old value system is destroyed, and the new one has not taken shape or has not established itself as generally accepted.

Further development of the concept of anomie is associated with the name of Robert Merton.

The concept of anomie expresses a historically determined process of destruction of the basic elements of culture, primarily in terms of ethical norms. With a sufficiently sharp change in social ideals and morality, certain social groups cease to feel their involvement in a given society, their alienation occurs, new social norms and values ​​(including socially declared patterns of behavior) are rejected by members of these groups, and instead of conventional means of achieving individual or social own goals are put forward (in particular, illegal ones). The phenomena of anomie, affecting all segments of the population during social upheavals, have a particularly strong effect on young people.

According to the definition of Russian researchers, anomie is “the absence of a clear system of social norms, the destruction of the unity of culture, as a result of which people’s life experience ceases to correspond to ideal social norms.”

Durkheim concludes that crime is normal

social phenomenon. Its existence means the manifestation of conditions that are necessary for society not to stop in its development, crime prepares the ground for social progress, and only excessive or too low crime is abnormal.

Durkheim believed that even if society somehow manages to rehabilitate or destroy existing criminals (thieves, murderers, rapists, etc.), society will be forced to make other acts criminal that were not previously considered criminal. This is explained by the fact that the criminal represents a negative role model of behavior necessary for the formation of a person as a full-fledged member of society.

This conclusion is quite paradoxical and therefore met with serious opposition from other criminological schools. However, its significance lies in the fact that it explains all the failures of attempts to radically eradicate crime.

Durkheim's ideas were developed by the American sociologist Robert Merton, who, having analyzed the reasons for the growth of crime in American society, concluded that regardless of the class structure of society, its economic, political and other development, the intensity of antisocial behavior will increase if two conditions are met:

• Society is dominated by an ideology that places certain symbols of success, supposedly common to the population as a whole, above all else (in American society, Merton considered wealth to be such a symbol).
• A significant part of the population has no or almost no legal means to achieve the goals set by these symbols.
• It was the theories of social anomie that determined the development and modern character of American criminology.

To explain social deviations, E. Durkheim proposed the concept of anomie. The term "anomie" translated from French means "lack of law or organization." This is a state of social disorganization - a social vacuum, there are no new norms yet, but the old ones have already been destroyed. E. Durkheim emphasized the need to explain various forms of social pathology precisely as social phenomena. For example, the number of suicides depends not so much on the internal properties of the individual, but on the external reasons that control people.

E. Durkheim did not doubt the objective nature of social deviations so much that he asserted the “normality” of crime. In his opinion, there is no other phenomenon that would have such indisputable signs of a normal phenomenon, as crimes are observed in all societies of all types and crime does not decrease as humanity develops.

Thus, E. Durkheim considered social deviations primarily as a consequence of the normative and value disintegration of society. His ideas were further developed in the works of researchers (including V. Pareto, L. Coser), who recognized contradictions between classes and various social forces, for example, innovative and conservative, as the leading causes of deviant behavior.

Not all people (classes) have the same conditions for achieving success, but they can adapt to the contradiction that arises in several ways. As such ways of adaptation, R. Merton identified:

• conformism (full acceptance of socially approved goals and means of their implementation);
• innovation (acceptance of goals, rejection of legitimate ways to achieve them);
• ritualism (inflexible reproduction of given or habitual means);
• retreatism (passive withdrawal from fulfilling social norms, for example in the form of drug addiction);
• rebellion: (active rebellion - rejection of social norms). Conflict between goals and means to achieve them can lead to anomic tension, frustration, and the search for illegal ways to adapt. This circumstance partly explains the relatively high crime rate among lower social strata.

The first type that Merton identified, conformism, is behavior when both goals and means of achieving goals are approved by society. This behavior is not deviant.

The next type is innovation. Here, the goals accepted in society are achieved through the use of any illegal, illegal means. Various economic crimes fall into this category.

The third type is ritualism. In ritualism, the means are quite acceptable, but at the same time they forget about the purpose of any activity. An example is the behavior of officials in a bureaucratic organization, when the implementation of formal rules becomes an end in itself for them, and they forget about the true goals of organizational activity.

Retreatism involves abandoning both socially approved goals and generally accepted means of achieving them. This type includes forms of deviant behavior such as alcoholism and drug addiction.

Another type identified by Merton is rebellion. It is characterized by the rejection of the goals and means proposed by society, while simultaneously replacing them with fundamentally new goals and means. Examples include religious sects and revolutionary parties.

The classification of types of deviant behavior proposed by Merton was quite widely discussed by other sociologists and was used in research.

Total and focal anomia

Depending on the area of ​​social space covered by destructive processes, anomie can be focal or total. After the forces of chaos have left their mark in the past, residual, peripheral forms of anomie always remain in any social system. They are still present in numerous social “niches” of the social system.

Focal anomie, as opposed to complete anomie, has been an integral part of every social system throughout its history.

Focal outbreaks of disorder are necessary for the system to maintain its viability. This is due to the fact that total, complete homogeneity and absolute orderliness make the system fragile and reduce its resistance to external destructive influences. The presence of enclaves of anomie with their characteristic plurality of various deviations creates a wide space of social freedom for active action and energetic self-affirmation of social subjects. It is these hotbeds that turn out to be places where non-standard models of life, various fresh discoveries and social innovations are born.

Is this why the state, its institutions, and power always treat freedom and its various manifestations with distrust? The answer is that they feel a direct connection between freedom and anomie. They believe that freedom is one of the manifestations of chaos, that it can lead to the disintegration of social structures, that it always carries with it the possibility of a transition to permissiveness.

Focal anomie is a form of preserving “niches” of freedom even in the most “closed” systems, where blocks of social institutions are closely connected with each other. The stricter and more total the social control, the more intense the processes in these “niches.”

Civil society plays an important role in preserving such niches. One of its tasks is to maintain the existence of such dictionaries and protect them from destruction by the state machine. Of course, this applies to those centers where forms of anomie are cultivated that are not criminal and do not threaten the life, health or dignity of citizens.

Social norm and social anomie

One of the main concepts in sociology is a social norm, which is considered as a mechanism for assessing and regulating the behavioral reactions of individuals, categories and social groups. Social norms are prescriptions, attitudes, and expectations of appropriate (socially approved) behavior. Norms are certain ideal patterns that define what people should say, think, feel and do under certain conditions. The system of norms operating in a given society forms a single whole, the individual structural elements of which are interdependent.

Social norms are the obligations of one person to another or to the social environment. They determine the formation of a network of social relations of a group or society. Social norms are also the expectations of groups of different sizes and society as a whole. The surrounding society expects certain behavior from every person who follows these norms. Social norms determine the development of a system of social relations, including motives, ideals, aspirations of the subjects of action, expectations, and evaluations.

The state of society, which consists in the loss by its members of the significance of social attitudes and ideals, which provokes the spread of deviant behavior, is called social anomie. This also shows up:

• In the absence of comparative norms between people and social assessment of one’s own behavior, which gives rise to a state of “lumpenization” and loss of group unity;
• A discrepancy between social goals and the approved means of achieving them, which pushes people towards illegal means of achievement when the goals established by law are unattainable.

Sociologists, comparing the concepts of anomie and deviant behavior, considered the point of intersection of non-compliance by members of society with the norms they themselves established. The fundamental difference between the concepts of anomie and deviation lies in the social scale of the factors that provoked their manifestation. The nature of anomie is much deeper. It is caused by serious social transformations that affect society as a system and its individual members.

Factors in the development of social anomie

The essence of social anomie is the disruption of social order. The following are the factors “thanks to” which social anomie can develop as a phenomenon:

• Natural, political, economic or other shocks, as a result of which a significant part of the population ceased to focus on established norms, abandoned their usual statuses and roles in favor of physical survival.
• Corrosion of values, that is, the blurring of the boundaries between good and evil and moral standards. As a consequence, criticism of things that were important not so long ago, rhetorical questions from society “Are they as important as they were thought?” Disintegration of social integrity.

Social control

When studying the theory of social anomie, one cannot fail to note such a phenomenon as social control. After all, it is he who is called upon to influence the individual and society as a whole in order to regulate public order.

Social control can be divided into two types - internal and external. External is a certain set of mechanisms that guarantee society’s compliance with norms of behavior. It can be formal or informal. An example of formal social control is laws and other legal acts, and informal control is social values ​​and moral norms.

Internal control in sociology is usually called self-control. It works as follows: a person controls his own behavior, based on generally accepted norms. In the process of growing up, each individual learns social rules so well that they are literally absorbed into the subcortex of his brain.

We recommend: Antisocial personality

If it happens that a person is forced to cross a certain line, then subsequently he begins to experience torment of conscience. Let us note that social control, according to scientists, consists of 70% self-control. It turns out that it is the self-awareness of each individual that determines behavior in society as a whole. The higher the level of self-awareness of citizens, the less manifestations of deviant behavior are observed in society. Author: Elena Ragozina

Features and consequences of anomie

Anomie is a detrimental effect on society and the individuals within it. It alienates one thing from another, reduces the entire structure to “nothing.” Dissociality, which is one of the characteristics of anomie, leads to a loss of the ability to regulate members of society with the help of norms and rules, traditions and attitudes. Connections and relationships, the conditions for the existence of society, cease to reproduce and self-reproduce, which leads to its unconditional collapse. Depending on the degree of penetration of anomie into social life, it becomes increasingly difficult to restore its structure.

The manifestations of this process in modern Russia are closely related to the psychological mood of the population and its social state: instability and uncertainty of the future make the situation precarious, and the alternating dominance of attitudes very clearly characterizes today's anomie. The unstable divergence is exacerbated by the inability of authorities to understand the social ties of origin.

Anomie is a natural process for society at any stage of its development

Overcoming anomie

If we go back in time, we can say that overcoming anomie is impossible. At all times, people have tried to create a society that would harmoniously promote the happiness and health of people. However, as long as there is no such system, anomie cannot be overcome.

When overcoming anomie, people often turn to the past: “Life used to be good.” However, in some situations this does not work if people understand that the mechanisms proposed to them will not help eliminate the internal conflict between what is desired and what is achievable.

Until society provides all people with socially acceptable ways to achieve the goals that it itself promotes, people will commit immoral acts. They will be motivated by a desire to change the environment in which the desire or goal will eventually be realized but will be characterized by society as immoral.

As long as there is a conflict between goals (values) and the means to achieve them (means), anomie will exist. Therefore, the only way to overcome it is to correlate goals with the resources available to achieve them. However, this does not take into account the desire “I want more,” which is inherent in a person striving for progress. This means that the goals will always be ahead of the means, i.e. they will not live up to them and will cause anomie.

Anomie in modern society

Modern Russian society is also in a state of instability, where values ​​are being destroyed. People do not feel confident in the future, they do not have time to adapt to rapidly changing guidelines and dominant values, and they experience financial difficulties. The same reorientation occurs from moral values ​​to physical survival. The destruction of values ​​leads to professional degradation of people, disappointment in themselves and life, in their work and loss of self-esteem.

Thoughts that concern modern citizens, especially young people:

• “Hope for a better life has collapsed, there will be no improvement in its quality and level”;
• “My mental health is practically zero, I’m becoming psychotic”;
• “My future and the future of the country is unclear, it’s not worth having children now”;
• “I’m afraid to live, I don’t feel stability or security”;
• “I feel vulnerable, I don’t know what to do or where to go”;
• “I don’t know who I should be, what I should do, I don’t know what I want”;
• “I know what I want, but I don’t know how to achieve it”; “I don’t know how to get it”;
• “Everything is so unclear that it is difficult for a simple person like me to understand what is happening in the country”;
• “Now everything has depreciated, only money, connections, personal success are important”;
• “Everyone lives one day at a time, they don’t think about the future”;
• “I’m not sure of anything and I can’t trust anyone, I can’t trust anyone right now.”

Chaos, apathy, disorientation, market and consumer sentiment, social infantilism, lack of direction and uselessness - this in a nutshell can describe the state of modern society and each individual person. As a result, we already have three so-called lost generations. One of them is about 50 years old, but he still doesn’t understand how to live in this world. The youngest generation is characterized by revolutionary, extremist tendencies. Some of them clearly understand what they want to achieve in life, but they do not care about the interests of the country or the entire society. The middle generation is focused on consumption and market relations. But most of them are consumed by alcohol and drugs, that is, where they are not needed by society.

How to deal with anomie? Search for the cause and the conflict that caused it in order to eliminate it. Choose one of the current systems at that time, or create something completely new, or borrow someone’s ready-made system, for example, by turning to the past.

Origin

Most scientists have wondered and are still asking the question: where does anomie come from, what factors in the development of personality influence the fact that a person becomes “wrong” and violates generally accepted norms. Answering these questions, Durkheim, for example, believed that the concept of anomie is a certain state of society in which there is no necessary moral regulation of people’s behavior.

Or rather, it existed, but lost its relevance, and the new norms have not yet taken root. It turns out that such a society can be called anarchic in some way. People lose faith in each other, and sometimes in themselves, experience constant nervous tension, are subject to stress, and ultimately acquire deviant behavior. A striking example of such a phenomenon as social anomie is the post-perestroika period in Russia - the 90s.

Most scientists believe that the reasons for social anomie are the presence of a large number of social norms that contradict each other, so people - especially the younger generation - experience a kind of “inconsistency”: they do not understand how to behave correctly, and what behavior will be deviant.

We recommend: What is homeostasis in psychology?

Robert Merton, studying anomie, said that anomie often occurs not when a person has greater freedom of choice, but when he cannot follow certain norms. He considered an example of such behavior to be that all Americans strive for wealth, but not everyone has the opportunity to achieve their goal through legal means. Those who fail to do this begin to do it illegally.

But we cannot exclude the fact that the state of anomie is sometimes useful for society. In particular, this phenomenon can act as a driver of progress, and the boundaries between normal and abnormal behavior are very fluid, both in time and space. Remember, if in the last century our grandmothers could hardly imagine a woman in trousers, today this is quite a common occurrence.