Criminology And The Main Schools Of Thought, Classicism And Positivism

Positivist criminology emerged in the nineteenth century after people stopped relying on pure thought and reason and started to observe and analyze to understand the way things worked. “Positive philosophy was an explicit repudiation or reaction to the critical and ‘negative’ philosophy of the Enlightenment [Classicalist] thinkers” (Bohm 21). Positivism has two main elements: One “is the belief that human behavior is a function of forces beyond a person’s control [and] the second aspect of positivism is embracing the scientific method to solve problems” (Siegel 7-8). . Positivism is known for the use of science and the scientific method in their research. Positivists such as Lombroso, whom is considered the father of criminology, set the stage for examination of external forces

Criminologists have long tried to fight crime and they have developed many theories along the way as tools to help them understand criminals. In the process of doing so, criminologist have realized that in order to really understand why criminals are criminals, they had to first understand the interrelationship between the law and society. A clear and thorough understanding of how they relatively connect with criminal behavior is necessary. Therefore, they then created three analytical perspectives which would help them tie the dots between social order and law, the consensus, the pluralist and the conflict perspectives. Each provides a significantly different view of society as relative to the law. However, while they all aim to the same

Criminology is a field that has been researched prolong. Most of the information explaining crime and delinquency is based on facts about crime (Vold, Bernard, & Daly 2002, p.1). The aim of this paper is to describe the theories of crime and punishment according to the positivists Emile Durkheim and Cesare Lombroso, and the classical criminologist Marcese de Beccaria. The theories were developed as a response to the industrialisation and the modernisation of the societies in the 18th and 19th centuries and were aiming to create a rational society and re-establish social solidarity (Vold et al 2002, p.101). The criminological perspectives of crime and punishment will be discussed in a form of dialogue between the three theorists exploring

Criminology and the criminal justice system have framed a “taken-for-granted, common-sense” understanding of ‘crime’ and the ‘criminal’ (Tierney, 2010). ‘Crime’ is commonly understood as a violation of the criminal law; originating from religion and the sin of God and then moving towards Classicalism. Classicalism rests on the assumption of free will and recognises rational choice of the individual. It influences much of our system of justice today; especially aspects of due process. It argues that criminality is therefore part of nature; and order is maintained through law and punishments. We can see this through Beccaria’s approach of certainty, celerity and severity (Beccaria, cited in Newburn, 2013, pp116). Positivism, associated with theorists such as Lombroso, offered more of a scientific approach in identifying the causes of crime and could recognise impaired ability such as mental illness. It argues that ‘crime’ is

There are many different aspects of criminal justice policy. One in particular is the different theories of crime and how they affect the criminal justice system. The Classical School of criminology is a theory about evolving from a capital punishment type of view to more humane ways of punishing people. Positivist criminology is maintaining the control of human behavior and criminal behavior. They did this through three different categories of Biological studies, which are five methodologies of crime that were mainly focused on biological theories, Psychological theories, which contains four separate theories, and the Sociological theories, which also includes four different methods of explaining why crime exists. The last theory is

1). Criminology arose from the social scientific community over the year and has since come into its own discipline, it examines the entire process of lawmaking, law breaking, and law enforcing” (as cited in Akers, & Sellers, 2013). Criminology seeks to discover the depth of crime at both the micro and macro levels, from the individual’s natural biological and psychological characteristics, the nurturing of social and structural institutions, to policy, prevention and control.

This essay is going to explain the extent to which classicism and positivist criminology conflict with each other and whether they share one another. Also, this essay going to show examples how these theories affect our modern criminal justice system. These theories begin with the human nature of criminals, the definition of crime, the focus of analysis, the causes of crime, the response to crime, the operation of crime prevention and criminal justice systems.

In this paper I will be addressing and discussing the two schools of criminology, which respectively are the classical school and the positivist school. I will begin by comparing and contrasting the historical background of both schools using the founders of each school. I will then continue the paper by comparing their assumptions, their findings and their key policy implications. I will do this by explaining each school’s purpose and goal. I will then argue and explain how the classical school is respectively stronger than the positivist school for being straight forward, concise and unbiased.

“Classical Criminology was developed in the eighteenth century in opposition to the use of extreme and arbitrary punishments. Classical Criminology advocated a rational approach that punishment ought to be imposed only to the extent necessary to ensure a deterrent.” (Rowe, 2012: 191)

It is better to try and prevent crimes than it is to punish them, this is achieved by good legislation which guides men to their greatest, or least unhappiness possible (Beccaria, 1767). As mentioned previously, Beccaria’s utilitarian ideology has shaped the justice system in western societies for many decades. Therefore, Beccaria can be described as a very influential thinker. Without his contribution we could still have a system of capital punishment, and that is a worrying thought. However, we now seem fixed with utilitarian justice. It may be argued that it is now time to move towards restorative justice. There are also those such as Tullock (1974), who argue for a return to harsher sentencing. Some states in the US still consider the death penalty to be a legitimate punishment. So it can be said that Beccaria is undoubtedly a key thinker in criminology, but as with all key thinkers he is not without his critics.

Classicism is associated with the works of Cesare Beccaria (1738–1794), the father of the classical school of criminology and Jeremy Bentham (1748-1832) (Walklate, 2007). Both reformers of the classical school were demanding for more effective, rational and fixed system of justice. Brown, Esbensen and Geis (2012) highlights that, as classicists intended to reform the system and administration of justice, one of the key concepts was Beccaria’s doctrine of Egalitarianism. This refers to equality before the law, where offenders must first be convicted by the court of law to be subjected to punishment (White and Haines, 2004). As all individuals are equal before the law, this led to the rejection of individualised punishment, in which to eliminate judicial discretion; there cannot be individualised punishments (Mantle, Fox and Dhami, 2005).

Raising epistemological questions about the ideological foundations of criminology has been the objective of critical criminologists. Critical studies are extremely important in this respect as they 'keep us all on our toes with regard to our own

This paper is on the Classical School theory that emerged in the eighteenth century; two writes of this period were Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. Among the major ideas that descend from this theory are the concepts of humans as free-willed, rational beings, utilitarianism (the greatest good for the greatest number), civil rights and due process of law, rules of evidence and testimony, determinate sentencing, and deterrence. The writes during this period examined not only human nature but also social conditions as well. The Classical School, gave us a humanistic conception of how law and criminal justice system should be constructed. Law was to protect the rights of both society and individual, and its chief purpose was to deter criminal behavior, the law emphasized moral responsibility and the duty of citizens to consider full the consequences of behavior before they acted. This thinking required humans possessing free will and a rations nature.

Criminology is the scientific study of crime and criminals. Criminological theories have provided empirical insight into factors that explain crime. However, as research developed they noticed that not just one theory can adequately explain crime and delinquency. In the early stages of research, they found the neoclassical theory that evolved from the classical school theory that made the assumption of “free will,” and that humans acted on rational choice. It was later developed that biological theories rejected the idea of “free will” and believed that human behavior could be due to genetics or human development starting at a young age. I will be going into better detail about the theories and their underlying assumptions, and how both theories play a significant role into our current knowledge of crime today.

Just as there are many types of crimes, there are also many explanations for crime. The three frames of reference for explanations of crimes are the classical criminology approach, the positivist criminology approach, and the behavior of law. The most effective approach to explaining crime is the positivist approach since uncontrollable factors such as the environment, socialization, and education can make a person more prone to committing crimes.