Research Paper on:
Conflict v. Functionalist Theories on Poverty and Crime

Unformatted Sample Text from the Research Paper:
is crime and the other is poverty. The two camps, functionalists and conflict theorists, have distinct and differing views about the causes and the implications of both crime and poverty,  and in effect the one camp who has the most influence at the time with those in power is the predominantly held view of the situation. But are either of  them totally right? And is either of them totally wrong in their assumptions? The functionalist sees everything that happens, as happening for a reason, like part of the food chain.  The positive aspects are analyzed for any given behavior and it is seen as a contributing factor in some way to society as a whole. This philosophy analyzes the behavior,  but not the motivation. Herein lies the greatest difference between conflict theorists and functionalists. Conflict theorists analyze the motivation and the function is the secondary characteristic. A good example  of this would be team sports. A functionalist would see team sports as serving the role of teaching social interaction between a group, who may be diverse in their backgrounds  but share the love of the sport. This teaches tolerance and unity. Also, it serves to reinforce group rules and codes of acceptable conduct amongst the group. A functionalist might  also state that group sports teaches hard work and patience, working toward a common goal and submission to authority, which are all traits that are valued in a civilized society.  However, the conflict theorist would disagree with practically everything the functionalist has just touted. Firstly, sports, the conflict theorist would state, only serves to maintain the class structure which  is symbolized in the positions one holds on the field in competitive sports. Also, they may state that sports is a panacea for society so that they dont focus on