The Normal and the Pathological� by Emile Durkheim (pages 73-77). Some things to think about as you read:

SOC414 Discussion Order Description Task 2: Read �Functionalism: The Normal and the Pathological� by Emile Durkheim (pages 73-77). Some things to think about as you read: Durkheim asserts that because deviance continues to exist, it must be functional. Do you agree? Why or why not? Can a society be free of deviance? What does Durkheim say? Do you agree? Is there anything else about this reading you found particularly interesting or perplexing? Did the author(s) discuss anything you strongly agree or disagree with? Task 3: Read �Natural Law and the Sociology of Deviance� by Anne Hendershott (pages 45-50). Some things to think about as you read: How does Hendershott�s view of deviance differ from the �neutral� and �relativist� perspectives discussed in your �lectures�? At the end of the article, Hendershott writes, �Perhaps, in time, sociologists will again be willing to recognize that a society which continues to define down the deviant acts our common sense tells us are destructive is a society that has lost the capacity to confront evil.� What do you make of this? Do you think sociologists (and/or Americans in general) should be more careful about �defining deviancy down� and more open to making �moral judgments�? Is there anything else about this reading you found particularly interesting or perplexing? Did the author(s) discuss anything you strongly agree or disagree with?