Discuss the differences between the positivist approach to the study of deviance and the interactionist approach to the study of deviance. What are the key differences in how deviance is conceptualized and researched? What are the benefits of each for understanding deviant behavior? Which approach is best suited for the study of what is referred to in the book as the politics of deviance designation?

A key aspect of chapter 2 in the book is the discussion of the medicalization of deviance, that is, the 20th century trend toward greater acceptance of medial definitions of deviance as the product of sickness or disease. In you view is this a good development for modern society? Does medicalization of deviance absolve rule breakers of any moral responsibility?What are the possible negative aspects of granting medical authority a dominant voicein defining and dealing with deviance?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *