Key Criminology Schools of Thought - Positivist and Classical - Essay Example

Introduction Criminology is an area of investigation that explains crime from an empirical or scientific perspective. Those conducting research in this field focus on crime, how people commit crime, why they commit crime and the resulting outcomes of crime. This papers will investigate the two key criminology schools of thought (positivist and classical), their perspectives and views of human nature, justice and reason for sentencing crime suspect. The discussion will also outline the profound differences and similarities between the two schools of thoughts. Discussion The key ideological disparity between positivist theorists and classical theorists is how the two categories differentiate how some individuals are increasingly more prone to crime than others. For instance, classical theorists believe that individuals engage in criminal acts entirely on their own will while positivist theorists assert that people commit crimes outside their free will (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball 45). Classical school of thought that developed in the 17th century anchored on philosophy of utilitarianism. Cesare and Jeremy, as well as other classical thinkers, believed that human beings have free will to direct the choice of their actions, and the deterrence is anchored on the idea of a person as a hedonist being that seeks satisfactions and prevents discomfort, and a ‘reasonable calculator’ estimating the cost and advantages of each action’s results (Hagan 10). Therefore, the school of thought objects the chances of irrationality and involuntary desires as triggering aspects. In addition, they believe that punishment (of adequate difficulty) can prevent human beings from criminal acts, as the loss (sentence) outweighs advantages, and the difficulty of penalty should be equal to the offense. Classical philosophers suggest that the more swift and precise the penalty (sentence) is, the more efficient it is in preventing crime attitudes. Cesare and other classical philosophers asserted that criminal attitudes or behavior could be reduced through human nature basics (O'Brien and Majid 47). According to classical theorists, criminal behavior is regulated by people’s self-interests. Theorists argued that rational human beings join a social contract where they recognize that maintaining a harmonious society would benefit them. Cesare and his colleagues sought to minimize criminal acts and behavior through reforms to the system of criminal punishment that they saw as hostile, unreasonably excessive and ineffective deterrent. The key purpose of sentencing was to deter criminal behavior among people. Classical theorist believed that the most crucial efficient deterrent from crime would be abrupt penalties instead of a long sentence of trials (Shteir 10). They considered criminal acts as irrational behaviors that resulted from individuals who could not behave from their free will or in society’s interests. They contended that penalties should be constantly imposed for certain criminal acts, with no unique circumstances, to show people that crime will cost them since there are fixed effects. Classical school proponents sought fair and equal justice for crime suspects. Prior to classical ideology, judges punished offenders at their own interests irrespective of the crime severity, an act that made some people perceive the system of a criminal sentence as tyrannical. Consequently, Cesare and his colleagues struggled for penalties for certain offenses to be controlled by legislative arm and forbid unleashing power. They believed that if legal officers could use legislatively authorized penalties, trials would be swift and there would be fair justice because offenders would receive faster and fair punishment (O'Brien and Majid 50). The classical theorist thought that combating crime is increasingly crucial than punishment, but by setting clear system of punishment offenders would utilize their reasoning to realize that criminals behavior is against their self-interests. Similarly, classical thought is highly influenced by Western justice system. Positivist theorists, on the other hand, presume that crime acts or behavior is driven by both outside and internal attributes outside a person’s control. Positivist approach employs empirical approaches to investigate people’s behavior, (Hagan 56). For instance, they apply scientific approaches to investigate internal and outside aspects of various crime types like theft and murder. Positivists aim at describing the natural environment surrounding people. According to them, physical traits, psychological factors and social aspects influence crime behavior. Positivists concentrate on a deterministic aspect of the human nature, criminal behavior rather than legal aspects and crime prevention through reformation or offenders treatment. Sociologist agree that positivist approach aided to illustrate to the legal courts and community that criminal behaviors needed a rehabilitation chance due to social, physical and psychological aspects that influence the making of decisions and actions, (Shteir 15). These determinism thoughts persistently affect the sentencing practices and principles today. This is because criminal defense is surrounded by various psychological factors that try to demonstrate a person’s loss of self-control is because of factors beyond his power. Positivists focus on the components of justice in ensuring a harmonious society. Therefore, the only way to ensure justice for all people and combat crime is to eliminate different factors that cause crime. While classical theorists focus on reforming the system of criminal justice, positivist theorists focus on scientific investigation of criminal. The positivists perceived people as deterministic, psychological, physical and social, whereas classical philosophers perceived people as utilitarianistic and free in nature, (O'Brien and Yar 52). According to classical thinkers, the only way to ensure justice is through punishment while positivists see the elimination of crime causes as the way of ensuring justice. Similarly, positivists and classical theorist conceptualize social control differently. While classical theorists suggest that law makes punishments increasingly severe to override crime benefits, positivists suggest that offenders and their conditions are essentially unique as compared to others. Finally, while classical theorists advocate for punishment of criminals, positivists suggest their rehabilitation. Classical approach is the most appropriate criminology thought because its interest was on the legal process and making of law rather than creating more criminals. Classical approach is purely utilitarian: the extensive pleasure is for the extensive number (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball 49). People engage in criminal acts out of their own interests and are aware of resulting outcomes of their actions. Therefore, people weigh present pleasure possibilities against future pain and make a choice whether or not to engage in illegal behaviors. Punishment is a way of deterring offenders from pursuing criminal acts, and it (punishment) should be more severe than the happiness of criminal benefits. Thus, penalty should be higher than the happiness gained from an illegal act. The laws are made to create pleasure for all people; therefore, because punishment brings pain, it is rational if it deters more evil than it brings. Conclusion In conclusion, therefore, although the two schools of thoughts are diametrically different based on methodology and criteria of explaining crime and criminal aspect, they play a profound part in the criminology field. The approaches are crucial to describe crime, how humans engage in crime, why they engage in criminal behavior, and the resulting outcomes of crime. They focus on the view of justice and reasons for sentencing criminals. Similarly, the classicist aim was a system of criminal justice reformation while positivist aimed at scientific analysis of criminal actions. Therefore, both schools’ influences have a primary role in understanding present and modern criminology debates as their legacy still accounts in the present criminological and sociological controversies. Works Cited Hagan, Frank E. Introduction to Criminology: Theories, Methods, and Criminal Behavior. Thousand Oaks, Calif: Sage Publications, 2008. Print. Lilly, Richard, Francis Cullen, and Richard Ball. Criminological Theory: Context and Consequences. Newbury Park, Calif: Sage Publications, 2009. Print. O'Brien, Martin, and Majid Yar. Criminology: The Key Concepts. London: Routledge, 2008. Print. Shteir, Vay. "Positivist Roots of Criminal Law and the West German Criminal Law Reform." Rutgers Camden Law Journal. 10 (1979): 613-641. Print. Read More