Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Essay on positivism criminology
Biological theory in criminology
Essay on positivism criminology
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Essay on positivism criminology
In my previous paper, I talked about the problem of child psychopaths. I discussed how they turn into adult psychopaths that commit crimes with little to no remorse. In this paper, I will discuss the theories behind child psychopaths and their links with crime. The two main theories that I will be discussing are biological positivism and general strain theory. These two theories seem to best explain the two different types of psychopaths. I will also discuss a third theory which combines biological positivism and general strain theory to create the interdisciplinary theory of biosocial criminology.
Psychopaths are believed to be divided into two types (Skeem, et al, 2011). The first is primary psychopaths. Primary psychopaths are thought to exhibit psychopathic traits that are caused by biological factors. Secondary psychopaths, the second type of psychopath, are thought to exhibit psychopathic traits that are caused by adverse environmental factors.
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...
... middle of paper ...
... variant of MAOA that exhibit deficiencies is the MAOA-L. MAOA-L predisposes a person to psychopathic traits. However, there has to be something that triggers that gene. Moreover, males are more likely to have it than females, which would explain why psychopaths are mostly male.
In conclusion, there are two theories that explain the two types of psychopaths. Biological positivism, which means that psychopaths have a biological deficiency, explains why primary psychopaths commit crimes. The second theory, General Strain Theory, which brings for the idea that negative stimuli caused strain of psychopaths is used to explain secondary psychopaths. There is also a third theory, that combines the two theories previously mentioned, that leads some researchers to believe that biological positivism and the general strain theory combined explain the origins of psychopathy.
According to the Federal Bureau of Investigations website, psychopathy has been described as the single most important clinical construct in the criminal justice system. It goes on to say that the need to understand psychopathy cannot be overstated (FBI, 2013.) From environmental influence to biology, psychopathy can be looked at from several different angles. This paper examines current thinking about how the brain and its structures contribute to psychopathy.
Identifying the mystery of the psychopath can prove to help the them and the general public. Early awareness of the common psychopaths among us will reduce the impact on society. Further research is still needed to better help the psychopath and the general population.
Crime causation began to be a focus of study in the rapidly developing biological and behavioral sciences during the 19th century. Early biological theories proposed that criminal behavior is rooted in biology and based on inherited traits. Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian army prison physician, coined the term “atavism” to describe “the nature of the criminal”...
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
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.
Scientists have many theories concerning psychopaths. Scientists do not have a definite clear cut answer on what is the cause of psychopathy but they have many ideas: nature and the nurture of the person. Nature is the gene that the person carries. The nurture of the person when they were a child simply means how they were treated when they were growing up and/or how they were raised. Some scientists even consider it a possibility that it could be a mixture of the two.
People are uniquely different and because of this reason, they do have different behaviors. Crime is one kind of behavior that an individual can engage in. They are punishable by the law and may be prosecuted by the state (Helfgott, 2008). There are different theories existing that try to explain the actions of criminals. They deeply explain what causes an individual to commit a criminal activity. This paper discusses some examples of the biological theories, social theories and psychological theories of crime.
For this paper I plan to first define and outline the features of psychopathy. Then I will explore how traits of psychopathy are measured and present in children and adolescents and subsequently what relation there is between the expression of these traits in both 9childhood and adolescence and later criminality. Finally I plan to conclude my paper with possible interventions to help prevent persistent delinquent and criminal behavior as well as exploring any criticisms of measuring psychopathy and interventions in both adults and children.
Depictions of psychopaths today have become exaggerated based off of what you see in movies and films. The psychopaths in movies are believed to be dangerous or have an anti-social personality disorder. Not all psychopaths can be defined in that manner. Psychopaths are identified as people who are emotionally unstable. They are ultimately suffering from a chronic mental disorder with abnormal or violent social behavior. There have been studies ultimately wondering if a psychopath is born, or is it raised? Genetics and environment combine to produce conditions that create psychopathology. By paying attention to environmental variables we can potentially reduce the amount of people who become dangerous psychopaths.
Biological crime theory describes that an individual is born with the desire to commit a certain crime. Evolutionary factors influence an individual’s involvement in criminal behavior. “Biological theories focus on aspects of the physical body, such as inherited genes, evolutionary factors, brain structures, or the role of hormones in influencing behavior” (Marsh, I, 2006, 3). Murderers that are innate to kill are born with factors such as mental illnesses that are the driving force as to why one may kill. Because of the biological crime theory, some individuals, though rare, are able to plead insanity. This is because the actions of the individual are said to be beyond their control (Ministry of Justice, 2006, 3).
Nature versus nurture has been argued in attempt to understand how criminals behave. The theory of what influences psychopath and serial killers’ violent and destructive pathways has not been agreed on till this day. Criminals such as psychopaths and serial killers have been researched for the past two decades. Scientists have found that genetics is a determining factor of who becomes a serial killer. It is important to understand the determinants involved within a serial killer, because if these social and environmental causes are discovered, they can be altered and controlled to reduce crime (Lykken, 1993). With more studies, we would therefore prevent mass murders and could assist in significant reductions of crime within society.
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...
Criminologists and sociologist have long been in debate for century's to explain criminal behaviour. The two main paradigms of thought are between 'nature' and 'nurture'. Nature is in reference to a learnt behaviour where a multitude of characteristics, in society influence whether a person becomes deviant such as poverty, physical abuse or neglect. Nurture defines biological features which could inevitability lead to a individuals deviant or criminal behaviour, because criminality is believed by biological positivist to be inherited from a persons parents. However, I believe that criminal behaviour is a mixture of characteristics that lead to deviant acts such as psychological illness & Environmental factors. Therefore, this essay will aim to analyse both biological positivist and psychological positivist perspectives in hope of showing to what extent they play a role in criminal behaviour. Firstly, the essay will look at Cesare Lombroso's research on physical features and how these ideas have moved on to then develop scientific ideas such as genetics to explain criminal behaviour. Secondly, the essay will focus on external factors which may be able to explain criminal behaviour such as the social influences, life chances and Material deprivation.
Theories that are based on biological Factors and criminal behavior have always been slightly ludicrous to me. Biological theories place an excessive emphasis on the idea that individuals are “born badly” with little regard to the many other factors that play a part in this behavior. Criminal behavior may be learned throughout one’s life, but there is not sufficient evidence that proves crime is an inherited trait. In the Born to Be Bad article, Lanier describes the early belief of biological theories as distinctive predispositions that under particular conditions will cause an individual to commit criminal acts. (Lanier, p. 92) Biological criminologists are expected to study the “criminal” rather than the act itself. This goes as far as studying physical features, such as body type, eyes, and the shape or size of one’s head. “Since criminals were less developed, Lombroso felt they could be identified by physical stigmata, or visible physical abnormalities…characteristics as asymmetry of the face; supernumerary nipples, toes, or fingers; enormous jaws; handle-shaped or sensible ears; insensibility to pain; acute sight; and so on.” (Lanier. P. 94). It baffles me that physical features were ever considered a reliable explanation to criminal behavior. To compare one’s features to criminal behavior is not only stereotypical, but also highly unreliable.
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.