In this essay, I will be aiming to accurately compare and contrast the strengths and weaknesses of both the biological and sociological explanations of crime. Firstly, I will give a brief overview of what both the biological and sociological explanations of crime mean. I will then create a paragraph that explains the strengths and weaknesses of the theories within the biological explanation of crime; such as Lombroso’s ‘Criminal Man theory’ and Sheldon’s ‘body type’ theory Chromosome’ theory as they are relatively controversial topics within Criminology. I will then form a paragraph regarding the strengths and weaknesses of the psychological explanation of crime, by discussing theories such as ‘psychoanalytic theory’ and ‘social learning theory’. I will then conclude the essay by summarising the content of the essay and giving my own point of view on the situation.
Biological explanation of crime
The first biological explanation of crime that I am going to look at is Cesare Lombroso’s. Lombroso (1835-1909) was an Italian criminologist who completely rejected the thesis of ‘Classical School’, which suggested that crime was in fact a specific characteristic developed by human nature and instead had the idea that criminality, was actually inherited. From this idea, Lombroso developed his own theory of deviance, the criminal man theory (1876); which suggests that by looking at someone’s constitution; such as their physical appearance, it will indicate whether they’re a ‘born
This can be applied to the behaviors of criminals. According to Fishbein (1990, pg.37), “behavior [is] primarily attributed to inherited predispositions and genetic influences.” Nurture is the environmental influence that shape human behavior (Fishbein, 1990, pg.37). Human genetics and environmental factors contribute to the uniqueness to a person’s behavior. However, there are underlying qualities in a criminal’s historical background. Aspects of the nature and nurturing of a criminal behavior includes some problems with earlier biological explanations and some recent biological explanations which have overcome the weaknesses of
1. Describe and the biological and psychological factors that contribute to crime and deviance within our society today. There are many factors that suggest that abnormal human traits tend to lead someone to the life of crime. The trait theories are divided into two groups – biological makeup and psychological ideals. The biological makeup tends to say that they the physical and mental makeup of someone tends to make them either lead a life of crime or know the difference. Cesare Lombroso studied “scientific” factors of crime and came up with some very interesting theories about the mental/physical aspects of criminal traits and activities.
Biological factors alone are not a sufficient reason why crime occurs. An example would be looking at testosterone and adult deviance. Most studies have shown no correlation with circulating testosterone and behavior. However, there is significance to examining biological factors. The answer lies in the fact that biological explanations of crime understate the important role of social conditions. (Conklin, p 93). When looking at biological and social combined, there is a moderately strong relationship between testosterone and social integration while growing up. Social integration can be fragmented due to less social opportunities by being in lower-class status, unmarried, and an unstable work history. (Conklin, p 96).
There are many perspectives in which one can analyze and understand why a person decides to commit a crime. Some perspectives are social learning theory, strain theory, classical and rational choice theory, deterrence theory, biological and psychological positivist theories, among others. However, for the purposes of this paper, the biological and psychological theories will be discussed.
The aim of this essay is to compare, contrast and evaluate two sociological theories of crime causation and two psychological theories of crime causation.
Goring claimed that he found no evidence to support Lombroso’ theory but he was criticised for being violently prejudiced against Lombroso [Newburn, 2007:126].
The biological theories are essential to the criminal justice profession so that they won't assume that a person's genetic characteristics cause a person to commit a crime. However, there are born criminals and “these types of criminals are the most dangerous, and can be identified through his or her stigmata or identifying characteristics” (Akers, Sellers, See, & Kieser, 2013, p. 10). Biological theories are the bases for severe criminal behavior mostly found among people who are born with an innate impulse to commit a
First, psychological theory suggests that a person’s environment and past can influence their ability and desire to commit crime while biological theory suggest a person’s DNA makeup could influence their ability to commit crime. “Biological theories within the field of criminology attempt to explain behaviors contrary to societal expectations through examination of
There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include:
The principles of the biological theories allow us the understanding that all biological theories should evaluate common factors that relate to each other from one biological theory to the other (Schmalleger, 2012). The first parts of the biological theory assess the importance for the theories to make a connection between criminal behavior and the human brain and a person’s personality and the studies of neurology and neurochemistry. This meaning that a person’s ability to control antisocial behavior stems from their environment and the and family genes gives the person directly into right and wrong. There is also a standard that should evaluate the connection between different groups such a sex and racial makeup that that of criminal behavior as well as human instinctive behavior (Dretske, 2014). The link between the evolutionary development of a person criminal behavior or ability to
The causes of crime seem to be indefinite and ever changing. In the 19th century, slum poverty was blamed; in the 20th century, a childhood without love was blamed (Adams 152). In the era going into the new millennium, most experts and theorists have given up all hope in trying to pinpoint one single aspect that causes crime. Many experts believe some people are natural born criminals who are born with criminal mindsets, and this is unchangeable. However, criminals are not a product of heredity. They are a product of their environment and how they react to it. This may seem like a bogus assumption, but is undoubtedly true.
The search for causes of crime forms the basis of most criminological studies. There are numerous explanations for crime: psychological, evolutionary, genetical,
Behavioral neuroscience or biological psychology employs the principles of brain pathology to the study of human behavior through genetic, physiological, and developmental operations, as well as, the brain’s capacity to change with experience. Since the second world war, crime was largely attributed to mostly economic, political, and social factors, along with what psychologists termed at the time, the “weak character” of mental disturbance, and brain biology was rarely considered. However, new advances in neuroscience and technology have allowed a number of studies that link brain development, impairment, and injury to criminal violence. This emerging field of psychology explores the brain at a microscopic level, focusing studies on the roles that the brain’s neurons, circuitry, neurotransmitters, and basic biological processes play in defining and molding all human behavior.
For the most part, biological theories of crime and deviance have had an unsuccessful and undistinguished career among sociologists. The Italian physician Cesare Lombroso suggested that someone who is born criminal possesses atavism or primitive evolutionary characteristics that produced violent, savage, and apelike tendencies in humans (Goode, p. 27). In addition, biological theories of deviance see crime and deviant behavior as a form of illness due to pathological factors to certain individuals. The biological theory is another example of Charles Whitman actions. Smart, strong, and talented, Charles Whitman seemed like a perfect all-American boy stereotype.
Biological theory states that the individual will have certain traits will be transmitted from parent to children through genetics and not from social learning. Along with the juvenile having similar facial characteristics, which some believe also predisposes them to criminal behavior (Palmerin, 2012).