W. I. Thomas

W. I. THOMAS & FLORIAN ZNANIECKI

I.   SOCIAL DISORGANIZATION REFERS TO
     INSTITUTIONS, DIFFERENT THAN
     INDIVIDUAL ORGANIZATION

  A. DIFFERENCES RESULT BECAUSE

     1. DIVISION OF LABOR
     2. SOCIALIZATION

II. DEFINITION

  "A DECREASE OF THE INFLUENCE OF
  EXISTING SOCIAL RULES OF BEHAVIOR
  UPON INDIVIDUAL MEMBERS OF THE
  GROUP."

III. LIKE DURKHEIM, IT IS FOUND EVERYWHERE AT ALL TIMES

  FOR THOMAS, RULE BREAKING IS
  DYSFUNCTIONAL

  MUST NEUTRALIZE DISORGANIZATION OR
  IT WILL DESTROY A SOCIETY

  PROCESS OF DISORGANIZATION AND
  REORGANIZATION

  IF DISORGANIZATION GETS OUT OF
  CONTROL, IT IS LIKELY TO END IN

  1. DESTRUCTION

  2. SOCIAL RECONSTRUCTION

THE SECOND IS MORE LIKELY

  NEW NORMS, VALUES, ETC.

HOW DO WE FIND CAUSES AND WHERE DO
WE LOOK?

1. RULES REFLECT ATTITUDES

  VALUES, COLLECTIVE CONCEPTION OF
  WHAT IS DESIRABLE

2.   RULES MAY REFLECT A MULTITUDE OF
     VALUES, 
       THEFT = PRIVATE PROPERTY,
       AUTONOMY, PRIVACY, FREEDOM OF
       MOVEMENT, ETC.

     TOO MANY CAUSES OF RULE VIOLATION

  INSTEAD, LOOK FOR:
  
  "LAWS OF SOCIO-PSYCHOLOGICAL
  BECOMING, I.E. FIND CAUSES WHICH
  ALWAYS AND EVERYWHERE PRODUCE
  CERTAIN DEFINITE ATTITUDES, AND THESE
  CAUSES WILL EXPLAIN ALSO SOCIAL
  DISORGANIZATION..."





 Return to Sociological Theories
of Deviance Page. 



 Return to John Hamlin's Home Page



This page is maintained by John Hamlin (jhamlin@mail.d.umn.edu) 
Last modified on Wed Mar 13