Positivist Perspectives and Crime Control - Essay Example

Positivist Perspectives and Crime Control Introduction The problem of crime, and how best it can be controlled, has been an issue of great concern to governments and societies since time immemorial. The challenge of controlling crime has led social scientists to venture into formulating theories and models with which to explain this phenomenon and by which to control this recurrent act. Many approaches have consequently emerged each offering its own explanation. This presentation is only going to deal with positivist perspectives and it is going to specifically focus on the three major positivist approaches in criminology which are: Biological positivism, Psychological positivism and Social positivism. Positivist Perspectives The origin of positivism in social sciences can be traced to the philosophy espoused by Auguste Comte and to the philosophies that were developed later based on his. Comte argued that human thought develops through three stages which are: theological, metaphysical and positivistic. In the positivistic stage, supernatural beings and metaphysical abstractions are repudiated in favour of naturalistic, empirical explanations. For positivism, sense perception represents the only admissible basis for knowledge as well as thought. Anything that transcends natural phenomena or properties of knowable things is excepted. Therefore, the always speculative metaphysics is rejected and so does theology (Gottfredson 1990, p. 414). Positivism therefore consider science as the basis for human knowledge and thus it exudes optimism in the ability of science to solve all human problems, crime being one of those problems. In the modern world, positivism continues commanding a lot of influence in as far as explanation and control of crime is concerned. It approaches the problem from a variety of perspectives all of which present different dimensions based on the basic tenets of positivism (Theodore 1981). As the scientific approach continued to become the major model in search for knowledge, the classical school’s social philosophy was replaced by the pursuit for scientific laws that would be discovered by specialists. Therefore, the positivist approach came to be divided into three major perspectives which are: Social, Biological and Psychological perspectives. In the biological perspective, the physical characteristics of an individual are important in understanding their criminal behaviour. Historically, medicine became concerned with the problem of crime. It therefore produced studies such as physiognomy and phrenology. With phrenology, attributes of the mind came to be linked with shape of the brain which is determined by the shape of the skull. The argument hence was that the society and any perceived failures of the government were not the reason for crime. It attributes the problem of crime to the predilections of individual offenders who are biologically recognisable from law-abiding citizens. This theme can be traced to the writings of Cesare Lombroso (Marshall 1990, p.46). He identified physical features associated with degeneracy, postulating that criminals were atavistic regressions to an earlier evolutionary form. However, Lombroso’s postulate have been criticised as being statistically unsound with no recognition of environmental factors that affect the individual’s physical development. It has also been criticised for lack of outright distinction between criminals and non-criminals. Lombroso has also been criticised for ignoring the stigmatising effects of physical disparities whereby criminal tendencies are encouraged through exposure to social interaction that is negative. On the other side, Charles Goring failed to verify thesecharacteristics but he found that criminals were lighter, shorter and less intelligent. In short, he found criminal tendencies to be normal and not necessarily pathological. About William Sheldon, he established three basic body or somatotypes; which he called mesomorphs, endomorphs and ectomorphs. He introduced a scale to establish where each person was placed. He reached at the conclusion that criminals leaned towards mesomorphy. Modern research tend to link athleticism and physical size with violence because physically powerful people have the ability to employ aggression with less possibility of being hurt in any retaliation (Seidman 1994, p. 523). The great advancement in genetic engineering technology has produced another innate cause of criminality. Chromosomes and other heredity factors have variously identified it as significant to select heredity instead of environment as the cause of crime. Nevertheless, prove from family, twin, and adoption research shows no convincing empirical evidence to choose either side. However, Sheldon’s perspective has been criticised for ignoring effects of the environment on physical development, such as the effect of a lower class diet and does not put into consideration the fact that criminal subcultures selectively recruit new members preferring physically fit members. It is also criticised for ignoring the stigmatic impact of body type on interactions of social nature. In biological positivism, focus has also been given to intelligence as tool for analysing criminal behaviour. Several reputable studies have tried to demonstrate a connection between lower intelligence and criminal tendencies. However, such evidence is ambiguous because studies on prison populations basically tests those delinquents actually caught which might be probably because they failed to plan and execute the criminal acts properlyor because they were unable to dodge cunning interrogation techniques and confessed their crimes. If they are of poor intelligence, they are also less likely to be dissuaded. Biological perspective also considers other medical factors. For example, testosterone and adrenaline have been linked with violence and aggression and the excited and arousal state in attendant. Over consumption of alcohol can diminish sugar levels and result in aggressiveness. The use of chemicals in drinks and foods has been linked with hyper-activity and criminal behaviour. Psychological positivism has also made major attempts in offering explanations about crime and on how it can be controlled. In his work, Sigmund Freud divided the personality into three categories. The id represents the primitive biological drives. The superego is the epitome of internalised values whereas the ego embodies perception, and memory. Freud proposed that criminal behaviour stems from either a weak conscience or from mental illnesses. For John Bowlby, maternal deprivation was the factor that he identified as leading to criminality. What he proposed is the attachment theory. However, this has been discounted in the favour of privation whereby uncaring parents or absentee ones are likely to bring forth badly behaved children. In 1987, Hans Eysenck opined that certain types of personalities may be more predisposed to respond with criminal behaviour towards different kinds of environmental factors. He suggested three perspectives of personality (Seidman et al 1994, p.86). These dimensions of personality are introversion/extroversion, psychotism and neuroticism. For him, personality is the settled platform of reference on which a person addresses the situation he or she is currently in and chooses how to behave. Some traits will be predominant at times and some other times exist in a balanced proportion. However, every person’s trait will be reasonably stable and predictable. Therefore, once conditioned into a lifestyle of crime, the involved personality traits are likely to persevere until countervailing conditioning power reinstates normal social inhibitions. That is why some forms of criminalities, such sexual offences, have been put on medication with treatment and punishment being offered concurrently (Danziger 1979, p. 218). Psychological positivism has not gone without criticism. Critics point out that this perspective focus solely on abnormal or defective personalities. They also argue that it pays insufficient attention to the dynamics in the actual social environment of offending. Social positivism sets out to identify positive causes of the proclivity to criminal behaviour. This perspective, thus, identifies the society as the cause of criminal behaviour. Its sub-schools, such as environmental criminology, analyses the spatial reach of crimes and offenders. Therefore, people like AdolpheQuetelet discovered that crime rates are relatively constant. Meanwhile, Emile Durkheim regarded society as a social phenomenon that is external to individuals (Hall 1936, p. 8). For him, crime is part of a healthy society and deviance was a push to determine the limits of morality and acceptability. Positivism and U.K’s Criminal Justice Policy Positivist perspectives on crime form a key part of criminology in the modern world. It is simply the study of crimes and factors leading and pertaining to it from a scientific angle. Therefore, it found areas concerning criminal justice proper; which constitutes the courts, the police, probation, rehabilitation and parole. This percolates right into the existence of laws. The rehabilitation of criminals is a central feature of the United Kingdom’s criminal justice system. In every prison; work to rehabilitate prisoners takes place, but in varying degrees.This practice of rehabilitating offenders in the U.K was born by the Penitentiary Act of 1779. It was later to be reinforced by the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act of 1974 (Hough & Roberts 1998, p.179).Since then, the focus has been on correction rather than on punishment. Rehabilitation takes place within prisons and on Resettlement Programs after release of a prisoner, and help continues to be offered by the Probation Service. The main focus is on preventing reoffending by reforming the character of the individual offender. The rehabilitation techniques differ according to the specific kind of offence and offender’s nature. For example, psychological rehabilitation focuses on the mental problems that an offender might be experiencing. The above, as an example, is pertinent to Psychological positivism approach that focuses on the individual’s character as its point of investigation. The Criminal Justice Bill of 1925 prolonged probationary services as they had been provided for in the Criminal Justice Act of 1877. In 1932, a departmental committee, rooted for different treatment of habitual criminals and those delinquents in their early stages of criminal life. This is in line with positivist’s view that focus of analysis of criminal behaviour should be directed at individual offenders and such analysis should endeavour to establish objective explanations of criminal behaviour. Therefore, probation became increasingly used as an alternative to imprisonment. Proscription of corporal punishment had also been included in the unsuccessful Criminal Justice Bill of 1938. After the Second World War, in 1948, the Criminal Justice Act proscribed corporal punishment. Britain adopted an approach towards crime and criminals that focused on treatment model. This model owed a lot to the positivist’s attempt to transform social sciences such that they adopt the scientific method in their investigations of social phenomena(Cavanadino, Crow &Canavan 1999, p. 14). Indeed, the positivist approach abhors punishment as a tool of rehabilitating criminals and instead, proposes treatment that focuses on the attributes of an individual offender. This period thus departed from the earlier period which had put emphasis on punitive and incapacitative efforts. However, the treatment model was subjected to increasing theoretical attacks in the 1970s for taking a too individualised approach in trying to conceptualise criminal behaviour and offenders. In the United Kingdom, a significantly large part of its recent criminal justice system is shaped by the 18 years of Conservative government, between 1979 and 1997 (Cavanadino, Crow &Canavan 1999, p. 13). Within that period, criminal justice policy underwent a series of developments which roughly corresponded to different Conservative administrations and impacted considerably on various aspects of criminology.Though it is hard to briefly summarise the four-fifths of the twentieth century that anticipated 1979, most of the years from the Second World War up to then, werecharacterised by increased optimism about how best to deal with the problem of crime and offenders. Even before the war, there was a growing interest in Britain to call corporal punishment to a halt. This is attributed to the rising influence of psychotherapy and psychiatry that brought its influence in the evolving probation services which embraced casework approach towards criminals. With the problem of crime still in existence, a search for new criminal justice policies that will help in reducing crime rates must continue. Conclusion Positivism’s emphasis is on the use of science as the basis for all human knowledge. The theory is effective in as far as proffering a model for the explanation of criminal behaviour and criminality is concerned. Its approach to the problem of crime from different dimensions offers a strong base on which governments can devise effective criminal justice systems that will facilitate the potential creation of a crime free society. References Cavanadino, M., Crow, I, & Canavan, J 1999, ‘Criminal Justice: Strategies for a new century’, Waterside Press, Winchester. Danziger, K 1979, ‘The Positivist Repudiation of Wundt’ Journal of the History of the Behavioral Sciences, Vol 15: pp. 205–230. Gottfredson, M, 1990, ‘Substantive Positivism and the Idea of Crime’ Rationality and Society, vol. 2 no. 4 412-428, University of Arizona University Hall, J1936, ‘Criminology and a Modern Penal Code’, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (1931-1951), Vol. 27, No. 1, pp. 1-16. Hough, M., Roberts, J 1998, ‘Attitudes to Punishment: Findings from the British CrimeSurvey’, HMSO, London. Marshall, W, Laws, D, & Barbaree, H, (eds.), 1990, Handbook of Sexual Assault: Issues, Theories, and Treatment of the Offender, Plenum Press, New York, NY. Seidman, B, Marshall,W, Hudson, S, & Robertson, P 1994, ‘An Examination of Intimacy and Loneliness in Sex Offenders’. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 9, 518-534. Theodore, K 1981, ‘Social Constructionist and Positivist Approaches to the Sociology of Emotions’, The American Journal of Sociology Vol. 87: No. 2 pp. 336-362 Read More