There are two biological theories suggested as explanations of violent crime in this article, they are as follow:
1) Hormones – This theory suggests that androgens, namely testosterone “[increase] the probability of aggressive and acquisitive criminal behaviour” (Ellis 2005). Witnesses interviewed suggest hormones as being the cause of crime, that offenders are “fuelled up with testosterone” and that nothing can be done to avoid violent outbursts (Munro 2014). Adrian Raine (2002) suggests that there is “evidence of a causal relationship” between heightened levels of testosterone and aggression in both animal studies and human offenders.
2) Atavism – Cesare Lombroso’s original theories of crime suggested that criminals held atavistic characteristics. This view of violent crime as primitive behaviour is still present 140 years later, as evident in this article. For example, one witness statement describes offender behaviour as being “like our close primate cousins” (Munro 2014). In alignment with Lombroso’s theory,
…show more content…
Identify at least 2 strengths and 2 limitations of this article.
The article suggests multiple causes for the crime of focus, these include: Intoxication, the underdeveloped male brain, and elevated levels of testosterone, amongst other social factors. However, for causality to be ‘proven’ it must be found that (in the example of intoxication) alcohol consumption will lead to violent behaviour in anyone. Even the article neglects this as truth, instead it provides an association between the various factors mentioned as causing a one-punch attack.
Strengths
• It provides an expert social explanation, in that “changing representations of masculinity” have created a violent sub-culture (Munro 2014).
• Suggests that “violence doesn’t discriminate”, inferring that the causal factor of alcohol effects well educated people who should know better (Munro 2014).
1. There are a couple of differences and similarities between the classical and biological theories of criminology. The biological theories of crime support the idea that an individual commits a crime due to their biological make-up and had criminal tendencies because of certain abnormalities that an individual may have had and not because the offender in their right mind chose to commit the crime. The classical theory has the belief that every individual has their own right in the way in which they act upon, so they commit a crime because they choose to do so, not because it is in their biological make-up.
Nature vs. nurture has been one of the oldest and most debated topics among psychologists over the years. This concept discusses whether a child is born into this world with their developmental work cut out for them or if a child is a “blank slate” and their experiences are what shape them into who they are. Over the years and plenty of research, psychologists have all mostly come to agree that it’s a little bit of both. Children are both born with some genetic predispositions while other aspects of the child’s development are strongly influenced by their surrounding environment. This plays into the criminal justice system when discussing where criminal behavior stems from. Is a criminal’s anti-social behavior just part of their DNA or is it a result of their upbringing? The answer to this question is not definite. Looking at research a strong argument can be made that criminals developed their anti-social patterns through the atmosphere in which they were raise, not their DNA.
The documentary Tough Guise reveals that the cause of violence traces back to cultural codes on masculinity and societal expectations rooted from such codes. Prior to watching the documentary, it was difficult to understand how culture played a part in men’s violence—it was thought to be more of a natural phenomenon linked to men’s biological traits. The documentary, however, disproves this: men’s violence in America is “made” by the society, not “given”, and thus cultural implications should be explored to understand where the violence really comes from.
The documentary Tough Guise reveals that the cause of violence traces back to cultural codes on masculinity and societal expectations rooted from such codes. Prior to watching the documentary, it was difficult to understand how culture played a part in men’s violence—it was thought to be more of a natural phenomenon linked to men’s biological traits. The documentary, however, disproves this: men’s violence in America is “made” by the society, not naturally “given”, and thus cultural implications should be explored to understand where the violence really comes from.
1. Cesare Lombroso applied the methods of natural science (observation, measurement, experimentation, statistical analysis) to the study of criminal behavior. Lombroso rejected the classical theory of crime, associated with Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, which explained criminal activity as freely chosen behavior based on the rational calculation of benefit and loss, pleasure and pain. Critically analyze both schools of thought and provide an opinion as to what theory you believe is more relevant.
Biological positivism is the theory that there is something biologically inferior about criminals that makes them predisposed to criminality (Vold, et all, 2010). Throughout its history, biological positivism has focused on different aspects of a human’s biology. Its creator, Cesare Lombroso, described criminals as “throwbacks” to primitive peoples in terms of human evolution. He theorized that criminals were physically different than non-criminals. While he described these differences as differences in facial structure, Lombroso’s idea later developed into modern biological positivism that focused on genetics, brain functions, and brain development. This modern view of biological positivism is one of the theories that best describe a primary child psychopath’s development into an adu...
The most vivid example of the biological determinism is the theory of Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso based his theory on the assumption that criminals have certain physiognomic features or abnormalities. Lombroso wanted to be able to detect future criminals in order to isolate them from the society. This gave criminology a strong push to create new methods of dealing with criminals and prevent crimes. Lombroso implied that prisoners had common facial characteristics. If to exaggerate criminals in Lombroso’s theory can be identified through the shape of their skulls, asymmetry of the face and head, large cheekbones, ears and lips, long arms and a twisted nose. Lombroso’s theory is the oldest one and it can without a doubt be called the main background data for the whole process of the development of criminology. Lombroso stated that men are more inclined to commit crimes due to the conservatism and the narrow-mindedness of their interests. According to Lombroso women have less social contacts and this is what predetermines their conservatism. Thi...
...& Snipes, J. (2010). Biological Factors and Criminal Behavior.Vold's theoretical criminology (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
The nurturing of individuals plays a role in the making of killers, as 94% of serial killers had experienced some form of abuse as children and 42% have suffered severe physical abuse (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2010). A child abuse is a determining factor, in which supports the idea that serial killers and psychopath, are influenced significantly by nurture (Australian Institute of Health and Welfare, 2011). In most cases social, cultural and physiological determinants all play a role in influencing serial killers to grow into a mass murderer. It is important that physiological and social determinants can be identified, so they could be altered for the purpose of preventing the number of crime.
4. Dodge, Kenneth A., John E. Bates, and Gregory S. Pettit. 1990. “Mechanisms in the Cycle of Violence.” Science 250: 1678–83.
Advances in technology began the interest in the possibility of crime being related to genetics. As technology continues to thrive, the stronger the argument becomes that criminal behavior is caused by genetic make-up. In a Wall Street Journal article of April 27, 2013 Stanton Samenow states, “Brain-imaging techniques are identifying physical deformations and functional abnormalities that predispose some individuals to violence.” The article hails the rising field of “neurocriminology” as revolutionizing our understanding of violent behavior. Neorocriminology and biocriminology go hand-in-hand, both involving studying the physical and mental elements in crime an...
In conclusion it is shown through examinations of a average criminals biological makeup is often antagonized by a unsuitable environment can lead a person to crime. Often a criminal posses biological traits that are fertile soil for criminal behavior. Some peoples bodies react irrationally to a abnormal diet, and some people are born with criminal traits. But this alone does not explain their motivation for criminal behavior. It is the environment in which these people live in that release the potential form criminal behavior and make it a reality. There are many environmental factors that lead to a person committing a crime ranging from haw they were raised, what kind of role models they followed, to having a suitable victims almost asking to be victimized. The best way to solve criminal behavior is to find the source of the problem but this is a very complex issue and the cause of a act of crime cannot be put on one source.
...s violence goes, there are many factors such as sexual assault, intimate partner violence, violent crime, male rape, gangs and prisons.
Understanding Psychology and Crime; Perspectives on Theory and Action, New York. PENNINGTON, D ( 2002) , Introducing Psychology: Approaches, Topics and Methods, London, Hodder Arnold TANNENBAUN, B, (2007),Profs link criminal behaviour to genetics [online] , Available at: http://thedp.com/index.php/article/2007/11/profs_link_criminal_behavior_to_genetics [accessed 16th October 2011]. http://www.docstoc.com/docs/41182390/Explanations-of-Criminal-behaviour
Human antisocial behaviour is complex and trying to understand it has always proven to be a daunting intelligent task, especially in modern culturally diverse societies. Crime, broadly defined as behaviour through which individuals obtain resources for others through uncouth means, presents as one of the most refractory internal social dilemmas. Understanding individual criminal acts such a murder, rape or motives behind them is intricate, rather their behavioral definitions and causes offers a more clear platform for argumentative reasoning. Criminal behaviour, regardless of manner, involves use of barbaric methodologies to obtain symbolic or material resources. Criminal behavior results from methodical processes that involve intricate interactions among isolated, societal, and environmental factors in people’s lives.