Criminological Theories Of Mead's Theory Of The Criminal Self

Self is one’s awareness of ideas and attitudes about one’s own personal and social identity. Identity is shaped at a young age from interpreting concepts about one’s own self from others (Mead, 1934). The present study will compare Freud’s psychoanalytic theory of personality the (id, ego, and, superego) to George Herbert Mead’s social self-theory the (“I” and “me”). The study will give an overview of both theorist and discuss each approach in relationship to each other, and defining the key concepts. According to Schultz and Schultz, (2008) the id is defined as the source of psychic energy and the aspect of personality allied with the instincts. The ego is defined as the rational aspect of personality responsible for

This essay will outline how crime theories are able to assist in recognizing the causes of criminal activity, as well as demonstrating two criminological theories to two particular crimes. Overviews of trends, dimensions and victim/offenders characteristics of both crime groups will be specified. The two particular crimes that will be demonstrated throughout this essay are; Violent Crime (focusing on Assault) being linked with social learning theory and White Collar crime (focusing on terrorism) being linked to General Strain theory. In criminology, determining the motive of why people commit crimes is crucial. Over the years, many theories have been developed and they continue to be studied as criminologists pursue the best answers in eventually diminishing certain types of crime including assaults and terrorism, which will be focused on.

One point of view holds that the social responsibility perspective believes that individuals are fundamentally responsible for their own behavior and that they choose crime over other, more law-abiding courses of action (Schmalleger, F., 2015, p. 15). This perspective places the cause of crime directly on the individual and presumes that the individual is exercising their free will. The social responsibility perspective on crime also relies on theories about individual faults leading to criminal behavior, and that in terms of the criminal, victim, and justice system individuals play a role within the social aspect of crime. These theories suggest criminals are different from noncriminals for biological or psychological reasons, the difference between this perspective and the social

Mead’s “theory of self” is based on the perspective that the self emerges from social interactions, such as observing and interacting with others, responding to others' opinions about oneself, and internalizing external opinions and internal feelings about oneself. The social aspect of self is an important distinction. That’s because other sociologists and psychologists of Mead's time felt that the self was based on biological factors and inherited traits. This was the normal and conventional type of mindset from psychologists at the time. According to Mead, the self is not there from birth, but instead it is developed over time from social experiences and activities.

George Herbert Mead and Erving Goffman are two theorists in the study of sociology that have impacted the way we see sociology today. Their works, when closely examined, actually share some extreme similarities. Both of these men seemed very interested in the perception of self in the eyes of others as well as yourself. “Mind, Self, and Society” is an article written by Mead which was placed in the book entitled “Social Theory: The Classic Tradition to Post-Modernism” which was edited by Farganis with the copyright of McGraw-Hill in 2004. This primarily deals with the development of one’s self, or their identity. “Presentation of Self in Everyday Life” is an article written by Goffman which was arranged to be in the book “Inner Lives and

Psychodynamic (Psychoanalytical) theory was developed by Sigmund Freud in the late 1800’s and has gained increasing popularity in the history of criminality (Siegel, 2005). Freud believed that every individual carries “[the] residue of the most significant emotional attachments of our childhood, which then guides our future interpersonal relationships” (Siegel). Freud theorized that the personality is a three-part structure made up of the id, ego, and super ego. These three components work together in creating a behavior. The id creates the demands, the ego put the demands created by id into a larger context using reality, and finally the superego suppresses the id and attempts to make the ego behave morally, rather than realistically. Psychodynamic theory is significant to criminology because it explains “criminal” or “abnormal” behavior is the result of irregular development of the psyche.

Four principal scholars explored the symbolic interaction theory, George Herbert Mead, Charles Horton Cooley, William Isaac Thomas, and Herbert Blumer (Smith & Hamon, 2012). George Herbert Mead proposed that through interaction with others, we learn about ourselves—this is done through three stages; play stage, game stage, and generalized other (Smith & Hamon, 2012). He identifies the movement between “I” and “me.” “I” being the spontaneous, immediate reactions to a situation, “me” being the roles learned from prior experiences (Smith & Hamon, 2012). Charles Horton Cooley had the idea of the “looking-glass self”—which explains individuals consider how they appear to others in order to create their own concept of themselves (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The third scholar, William Isaac Thomas, was known for the definition of the situation, which led to the idea that understanding perspective of the people involved in the situation was necessary to understand human behavior in general (Smith & Hamon, 2012). The Thomas Theorem stated

Incomplete psychological development is a focus of these theories. The conscience of the criminals is weak, and the line between right and wrong is so narrow for them, which results in misbehaving. On the contrary, having an overbearing conscience can result in the same behavior, or misbehavior, and many more problems arise. Sigmund Freud, the man considered to be the father of psychoanalytic psychology, believed that each human had an Id, Superego, and Ego. The Id, meaning ‘it’ in Latin, was thought to be the instinctual aspect of the cognitive mind. The Superego was considered to be the perfectionist, always looking to fit social norms and never make a mistake. Finally, the Ego, or mediator, was believed to be the ‘middle man’ of the three.

Criminals are born not made is the discussion of this essay, it will explore the theories that attempt to explain criminal behaviour. Psychologists have come up with various theories and reasons as to why individuals commit crimes. 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.

Criminological theories play a major role in our criminal justice system. Each theory tends to help criminologist to question and understand about crime in general. From if criminal are biological to what are causes and influence many individual to commit crime. With so many theories to consider criminologist can make argument about which one can be apply to in today’s society, and their strength and weakness. This paper will compare and contrast how Travis Hirschi and Howard Becker theory explain criminal behavior.

formulate a self concept or idea of what we are like (Saunders, 2013 , p.67). Mead essentially

Human nature is very peculiar and different based on a multitude of reasons ranging from the atmosphere in which they are raised in or even psychological troubles that can affect their day to day living. A child raised with an abrupt childhood and a child raised in a well-educated family are both likely to become future incarcerated individuals due to deviant behavior. Genetics has no role in determining criminality however social interaction with the world and individuals can be a leading factor in a person’s criminogenic nature. Crime within the world is indeed prevalent everywhere and is just as common as it was in the Victorian or Egyptian era. However, to prevent the expansion of a broad and wide topic, this essay will stay microscopic and study the comprehension of Edwin Sutherlands “Differential Association theory” and Gresham Sykes and David Matza’s “Techniques of Neutralization”. Various sources and scholarly written articles alongside Barry Cartwright’s text-reader “Sociological Approach to Crime and Deviance” will be used to support the key responses to specified questions on the main topic.

A common theory in criminology and in sociology suggests that class and race are vital roles regional crime rates. Previous research indicates that the distribution of class and race within certain residential areas has a key role in the outcome of certain violent acts. In his study, Income Inequality, Race, and Place: Does the Distribution of Race and Class within Neighborhoods Affect Crime Rates, John R. Hipp states “Specifically, studies have tested how the distribution of economic resources across neighbor-hoods, as measured by income or poverty, affects neighborhood crime rates or the how the distribution of racial/ethnic minority members across neighborhoods, as measured by the percent nonwhite, and so on, affects neighborhood crime rates (Hipp 2007). While one may traditionally assume that minorities neighborhoods yield a more intensive crime rate, this is not necessarily true.

The two aspects of the Self according to Mead is the “me and “I”. The “me” is our social self and the “I” is our response to the “me”. The “me” is the interaction of the individual with other people and the “I” is the response of the individual to the community. The “I” subjective self and “me” is the organized self. The “I” is impulsive and subjective. The “me” is more objective, organized, gives direction and is less emotion. One example is that the “me” the individual may understand by watching significant others and teachers. That after high school in the US you usually go directly to college. The “I” might responded to maybe there is a better way, it might be better to travel or work for a year

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