Early theories of criminology were predominantly deterministic, all searching for a quick way of identifying criminals. Each one had an idea that there was some trait that could easily be found, whether through looking at them or through giving them a test, and used to differentiate criminal from non-criminals. Throughout this paper, I’m going to talk about determinism with a strong focus on biological determinism and the theories of Cesare Lombroso. I’ll go over why deterministic theories were so popular, the positive impacts biological determinism has had, and the inherent problems with these theories as well. Determinism was extremely popular in history which, ignoring the problems for the moment, makes a lot of sense. People …show more content…
One of the positive impacts that Lombroso’s school of thought is that it helped theorists to step away from the idea of free will. The classical school of thought had popularized the idea that criminals all choose to become a criminal, ignoring the possibility of outside forces having an influence. The Italian school of thought helped to step outside this idea and away from the problems it presented. Another positive, and amusing, effect that Lombroso had was that people criticized it so much that it’s lead to other theories which lead to other theories. As Adler, Mueller, and Laufer explained “ As happens so often in history, his work has been kept alive more by criticism than by agreement,” (70). All theories, no matter how asinine they may seem, have a legitimate place in history. Every theory will have its critics, who will establish their own theory that will have its own effects and will gain its own critics who will create a theory and so on. It’s an ongoing cycle, advancing us further and further as time goes on. Every new theory proposes new questions and will inspire future researcher, even if they’re doing it out of desire to falsify other theories. Lombroso’s theories were challenged by both Charles Goring and Gabriel Tarde, which lead to both psychological determinism and sociological determinism; which presented their own …show more content…
People who share these thoughts and belief systems can now feel justified in their beliefs because they were told that science backs them up, then they can use this to further mistreat the people they are discriminating against. In fact, “...certain Nazi anthropologists and physicians made use of Lombroso’s ideas about born criminals. They proposed ‘scientific’ classification of Aryans and non-Aryans (and ultimately death or denial of civil rights to non-Aryans) on the basis of skull measurements,” (Adler, Mueller, and Laufer 70). People have used these kinds of theories to justify the killing of others, all under the idea that these people are atavistic criminals. Deterministic theories have had a significant influence on modern criminology, but their influence haven’t always been a positive one. The theories, like any, have inherent flaws and problems throughout. Biological determinism in particular is rife with biases and a discriminatory agenda. These theories were a part of the history of criminology, they’ve paved the way for more theories to come in. Despite all the things it gets wrong, it remains an important part of criminology’s history that cannot be
Up until the 19th century, Classicist ideas dominated the way in which people looked at crime. However during the late 19th century a new form of “scientific criminology” emerged, called Positivism (Newburn, 2007). Positivism looked at the biological factors on why someone would commit a crime, this involved looking at the physical attributes of a person, looking at their genetic make-up and their biochemical factors.
Determinism is the theory that everything is caused by antecedent conditions, and such things cannot be other than how they are. Though no theory concerning this issue has been entirely successful, many theories present alternatives as to how it can be approached. Two of the most basic metaphysical theories concerning freedom and determinism are soft determinism and hard determinism.
The problem of free will and determinism is a mystery about what human beings are able to do. The best way to describe it is to think of the alternatives taken into consideration when someone is deciding what to do, as being parts of various “alternative features” (Van-Inwagen). Robert Kane argues for a new version of libertarianism with an indeterminist element. He believes that deeper freedom is not an illusion. Derk Pereboom takes an agnostic approach about causal determinism and sees himself as a hard incompatibilist. I will argue against Kane and for Pereboom, because I believe that Kane struggles to present an argument that is compatible with the latest scientific views of the world.
Many of the traditional criminological theories focused more on biological, psychological and sociological explanations of crime rather than on the cost and benefits of crime. More conservative approaches, including routine actives, lifestyle exposure and opportunity theories have clearly incorporated crime rate patterns as a fundamental part of analyzing the economics of crime. Crime statistics are important for the simple reason that they help put theories into a logical perspective. For example, a prospective home owner may want to look at crime rates in areas of potential occupancy. On a more complex level, it helps law enforcement and legislators create effective crime reduction programs. Furthermore, it also helps these agencies determine if crime prevention programs, that have been in effect, have been successful. There are many factors that influence the rates of crime including socio economic status, geographical location, culture and other lifestyle factors. More specifically, Messner and Blau (1987) used routine activities theory to test the relationship between the indicators of leisure activities and the rate of serious crimes. They discussed two types of leisure actives, the first being a household pastime, which primarily focused on television watching. The second type was a non-household leisure event which was consisted of attendance to sporting events, cinemas, and entertainment districts. The focus of this paper will be to study the effects that substantial amounts of leisure activities have on the offender and the victim. Leisure activities not only make a crime more opportunistic for offenders, it may also provide offenders with motivation to engage in criminal activity. On the other hand, it may also be argue...
Determinism currently takes two related forms: hard determinism and soft determinism [1][1]. Hard determinism claims that the human personality is subject to, and a product of, natural forces. All of our choices can be accounted for by reference to environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary (biological) causes. Our total character is a product of these environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary forces, thus our beliefs, desires, values and habits are all outside of our control. The hard determinist, therefore, claims that our choices are determined by these factors; free will is an illusion because the choices and decisions we make are derived from our character, which is completely out of our control in creating. An example might help illustrate this point. Consider a man who has just repeatedly stabbed another man outside of a bar; the other man is dead. The hard determinist would argue that there were factors outside of the killer’s control which led him to this action. As a child, he was constantly beaten by his father and was the object of ridicule and contempt of his classmates. This trend of hard luck would continue all his life. Coupled with the fact that he has a gene that has been identified with male aggression, he could not control himself when he pulled the knife out and started stabbing the other man. All this aggression, and all this history were the determinate cause of his action.
Cesare Lombroso, medical criminologist, headed the school. Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garafolo were Lombroso’s disciples, both of whom also headed, as well as had their own opinions on the biological crime theory. Lombroso argued that “criminality was a biological trait found in some human beings” (Boundless, 2015, 1). Today, the biological theory emphasizes the relationship between genetics and crime. The biological theory of crime has evolved over the years in the sense that, initially, the theory was primarily based on physical features. In contrast, it is now primarily based on genetics. As technology has also evolved as well as our knowledge on genetics, this only makes sense (Boundless,
The classical school is not concerned with why criminals are criminals, but seeks to reduce crime by using punishment as a means of deterrent, on the basis that individuals will choose to exercise their own free will and will employ rational decision making. By contrast, Ceasare Lombrosso (1835 – 1909) and the positivist school dismissed such ideas and theorised that criminality is a personality trait that one is born with and can be diagnosed by certain physical appearances, and is thus a more scientific method of establishing the reasons for criminal behaviour. However, this essay will concentrate on the strengths and weaknesses of the classical school.
To grasp and understanding biological positivism one must first gain knowledge on the history, aspects, and factors that make up positivism. This essay will be analyzed by using the three factors: classical criminology, biological factors, and criminal behavior. These factors will demonstrate how biological positivism evolved throughout the criminal justice system over time.
Such observers and scholars believe that much of the reasons that others believe Marx is a determinist is because the passages or pieces of evidence they find in Marx’s are taken out of context, and they take on a different meaning, deviating from the original purpose and idea that Marx was conveying.
Biological theory is the concept that focuses on certain biological characteristics that are thought to be associated with an increased risk of engaging in criminal or deviant behavior (Bernard, Snipes & Gerould, 2010). Early biological theories tended to focus on the physical appearance as a distinguishing trait of criminals, whereas modern theories primarily argue that biology is one of many factors that contribute toward criminal behavior (Bernard, Snipes & Gerould, 2010). Early rape theorist included that of Johan Lavater, Fran’s...
The foundation of our legal system rest upon the single philosophy that humans hold their own fate. Even though, we perceive in our daily lives the persistence of causation and effect. Even children understand the simplistic principle that every action will have a reaction. Despite this obvious knowledge, we as a society still implanted the belief that our actions are purely our own. Yet, with the comprehension of force that environmental factors impact our development, we continue to sentence people for crimes committed. Moreover, uncontrollable environmental influences are not the only deterministic factors we ignore in our societal view of crime. One’s biological composition can work against any moral motives that they
The Article “OVERCOMING THE MYTH OF FREE WILL IN CRIMINAL LAW: THE TRUE IMPACT OF THE GENETIC REVOLUTION” in the Duke Law Journal reports about the state of the criminal justice system in America with new genetic discoveries. The author Mathew Jones explains how some scientists have come to the idea that aggression and ones affinity to criminal behavior may be dependent on their genetic make-up. He explains that our system is based on the assumption that as a majority human beings have free will over the decisions in whether to act or not act in criminal behavior. He also foreshadows each side of the augment’s’ perception of its impacts.
Despite much controversy surrounding the notion of inherited criminal tendencies, there is much evidence to support such theories. Although Lombroso may have employed his theoretic atavisms in an attempt to provide a biologically deterministic method of reducing or preventing crime, they have ultimately lead to an abandonment of gravitas concerning such a notion. However, as myopic as Lombroso's theories of criminality being a hereditary trait appears (Mannheim, 1965) research has shown shared physical characteristics to be commonplace in explicating the argument of genetic criminal behaviour. Although Lombroso presented...
After Comte and Darwin developed their theories about the world, they were followed by several criminologists who also believed that science could answer many of the problems that were present in society, particularly in the field of criminology. One of these men was Cesare Lombroso, who was the first to actually focus on criminology as a science (Adler et al 2012). Lombroso believed criminals could be identified because of physical differences between them and non-criminal members of society (Adler et al 2012). In order to recognize these people he created what he called the "atavistic stigmata" which are characteristics exhibited by humans who were less developed (Adler et al 2012:66). Individuals who exhi...
These theories represent part of the classic psychological debate, nature versus nurture. Are individuals predisposed to becoming a criminal or are they made through their environment. There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown. The first theory to be explored is the hereditary theory, which stems from Cesare Lombroso (1876) father of criminology, (Feldman, 1993) whose studies were carried out by morphology.