During the Enlightenment period, Cesare Beccaria developed the Classical School of Criminology with help from philosopher Jeremy Bentham. With the similar philosophies of Beccaria and Bentham, the classical theory of criminology was then developed, creating a strict and proportional criminal justice system. Deriving from the Rational Choice Theory, the classical theory of criminology states that rational behavior can be controlled in order to deter criminal activity. This idea comes from the thought that humans have free will when making decisions, and often use the practice of hedonistic calculus when weighing out these decisions. Hedonistic calculus refers to when one believes that the benefit of committing an act outweigh the punishment, they will commit that act. On the contrary, if one believes the punishment outweighs the benefits they would receive, they will not commit the act. With the use of the Rational Choice Theory as well as hedonistic calculus, Beccaria and Bentham both recognized that if a crime was accompanied by a swift and certain punishment proportional to that specific crime, this would prevent offenders from committing that act. Relying on punishment for deterrence, not retribution, Beccaria and Bentham believed that crime could be prevented if the could-be criminal believed the punishment for the crime in mind outweighs the personal benefits they could have gained. Beccaria states that there are three main crimes: those that run contrary to social
Italian philosopher Cesare Beccaria is closely connected to rational classical criminology. Beccaria believed in fair and certain punishment to deter crime because he thought people were self-centered and egotistical. Fear of punishment would stop them from committing crimes. Beccaria thought that
The crime-control implications for this perspective are basically based upon creating effective punishment to eliminate crime. These measures must be humane and adhere to human rights to successfully keep criminals from committing the
According to Paternoster (2010), the majority of Beccaria’s original deterrence ideals concluded that self-interest to commit an offense could be stopped by legal punishments that are definite, relational, and immediate. Paternoster (2010), determined that Beccaria provided the rational authority with applied strategies to make legal systems more cogent and effective. However, according to Paternoster (2010), Beccaria fell short in providing a developed theory of crime or criminal conduct; he also failed to provide a theory of behavior other than the conception that offenses are motivated by self-interest.
Cesare Beccaria is the “Father of Classical Criminology” and justified punishment on the principle of utility. Beccaria focused on reforming the Criminal Justice System and believed that punishment should be for the better good for society, as well as the individual, and deter others from committing crime and prevent criminals from recommitting crime. He believes effective punishment must certain, swift, and severe to get the desired effect on society and the offender (Robert, Cullen, and Ball 2015). He is also the author of his book Of Crime and Punishment, which discussed his philosophy on the purposes
Classical school of criminology is testing and designing a system of punishment that would result in the minimum occurrence of crime. The Classical school also represents the development and application to thinking about crime and the ideas. In general, the will is free, there were no limitations. Hobbes conceived that fear was an elemental drive causing men to form societies and accept the necessary restraints (1958, p. 9.) Apparently upon Hobbes’s thought, fear affected the will of an individual action to commit a crime. In addition, fear of punishment would perhaps prevent crime from occurring. Punishment was a principal method of operating to create fear, and it was necessary to influence the will and to control behavior.
The classical perspective founded by Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham; stated that at people choose to commit crime after they considered the pros and cons that could be associated with a crime, and believed that the pros outweighed the cons (Tonry,2014). The theory relied on deterring criminal acts by assuring that the consequences of crime are absolute, harsh, and quickly administered (Tonry,2014).
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
Initially, the main belief was that criminal behavior was based on rational choice or thought, where criminals were believed to be intelligent beings and weighed the pros and cons before deciding to commit a crime; classicists Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham introduced this view. Essentially, these criminals would compare the risks of committing the crime, such as getting caught, jail or prison time, being disowned by family and friends, and so forth; and the rewards, such as money and new possessions. After making comparisons, the person would make a decision based on whether the risk was greater than the reward. This is like what is presented in an article on Regis University Criminology Program’s website, which states that a criminal “operates based on free will and rational thought when choosing what and what not to do. But that simplistic view has given way to far more complicated theories” (“Biological Theories Primer”). Nowadays, biological theories make attempts in explaining criminal behavior in terms of factors that are primarily outside of the control of the individual.
The Classical Theory focuses mainly on the individual and choices. Each individual makes decisions based on cost and benefit. Using Classical Theory, human behavior is explained in terms of the attempt to maximize pleasure and minimize pain (Williams & McShane 2004) and because the basis is for the concept of deterrence.
Cesare Beccaria published the well-known book On Crimes and Punishments in 1764. Beccaria’s thoughts are commonly referred to as the classical theory. (Shoemaker, 2009, p. 64-65) The work in On Crimes and Punishments inspired multitudes of criminal philosophers two in particular; Locke and Hume. These two believed that, “human nature was predicated upon the search for pleasure and the avoidance of pain, and that human action was consequently organized around calculative strategies aimed at utility maximization.”(Hayward, 2007, p. 233) This thought justification is how those who believe in the Rational Choice Theory get further away from the social issues that may affect the commission of crimes and try to keep it focused on the individual desires of pleasure and avoidance of pain. This thought process may also be in part to the societal want of the juvenile delinquent’s behavior to be solely their fault based on an economic standpoint because if it is individual fault society does not need to fund programs to fix it. As stated in the book The Reasoning Criminal: Rational Choice Perspectives on Offending, “… a rational choice perspective on criminal behavior- was intended to locate criminological findings within a framework particularly suitable for thinking about policy relevant research.” (Cornish & Clarke, 2014, p. 1) That is to say that yes, many philosophers may truly believe in Choice Theory but some were probably motivated more by economic
Classical criminological theory was introduced in 1764. The tenants of this theory became the backbone for the development of all criminological theories to come. After over 200 years have passed since its conception, is classical criminological theory still relevant to today’s society in explaining the causes of crime? This essay will address this question by discussing the major components of classical criminological theory while highlighting its strengths and weaknesses. The essay will also examine a more modern criminological theory, Merton’s anomie/strain theory, and decipher major differences between the two theories. This essay will also explain the aspects of classical criminological theory that are applicable or outdated in their
Cesare Beccaria (1738-1794) is probably most well known as the founding father of the school of classical criminology. He protested against the current legal system and pushed for those in power to see that individuals are rational beings and deserve rational repercussions. In his most popular work; Essay on Crimes and Punishments, he protested against the cruel punishments and suggested that they must only be equal to that of the crime itself and revolutionised the criminal justice system with his ideals on how to make the most effective punishment, without maximum damage of the individual. He believed that “Punishment is only justified to the extent that the offender has infringed the rights of others or injured the public good.” (Newburn, 2013) Although Beccaria viewed crime as an act of free-will and rational choice he did see that some individuals were pre-rational (meaning they were unable to be rational), for example children and also that there are sub-rational people (individuals with some rationality but not a full rational mind), this for example can be people with mental afflictions or diseases. Moreover he did not see that there can be a cause for crime which is due to situational problems, i.e. a big change in a person’s life which can cause them to commit crime, like death, financial problems, and birth of a child, family altercations and much more. Although Beccaria was not always right with his beliefs he was the
The Classical School of Criminology was developed by two utilitarian philosophers, Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham during the early 17th century. The Classical School of Criminology is an important theory in the framework of criminal behavior, with principle themes that include: criminal acts are of individuals free will and rational deliberation, calculating, and hedonistic beings. Criminals make a rational choice and choose criminal acts due to maximizing pleasure and minimizing pain. As well as minimizing crime, the would be offender must be convinced that the likely punishment for the crime would be swift, certain and proportionately (Paternoster & Bachman, 2001, p. 11).
Criminology earliest development traces back to the early 1700s, however did not fully bloom until the 1800s when criminal laws were being made and enforced (Altrichter, 2015). With this in mind, the first school to be developed through criminology was the classical school. The classical school was founded upon the thoughts and ideas of Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham (Altrichter, 2015). Cesare Beccaria implicated the idea that a crime is to be punished depending on its severity and rather not the criminal (Altrichter, 2015). Jeremy Bentham contributed to the classical school by stating that through a series of weighing the pleasure and pains of their results, this would increase or decrease the chances that a criminal would create a crime (Altrichter, 2015). The most notable idea that developed through the classical school is that criminals have a free will and can thinking
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.