Classical Vs.

Positivist Criminology
In the mid-eighteenth century, social philosophers started arguing for a more rational approach to
criminal punishment. They sought to eliminate the cruel public executions, which was designed to
scare people into obedience. This moderate view was developed by Cesare Beccaria. Cesare
Beccaria was an Italian scholar that firmly believed in the concept of utilitarianism. Utilitarianism is
the view that peoples behavior is motivated by the pursuit of pleasure and the avoidance of pain.
(Siegal, 2010)
According to Beccaria, crimes occur when the potential pleasure and rewards from illegal acts
outweigh the pains of punishment. Beccarias theory was that in order for punishment to be effective,
it must be public, prompt, necessary, the least possible in the given circumstances, proportionate
and dictated by law. The Classical Theory has several elements to it.
1) People have free will to choose criminal or lawful solutions to meet their needs or settle their
problems.
2) Crime is attractive when it promises great benefits with little effort.
3) Crime may be controlled by the fear of punishment.
4) Punishment that is or is perceived to be severe, certain, and swift will deter criminal behavior.
(Siegal, 2010)
In the nineteenth century, a new vision of the world was taking place. This view was challenging the
validity of the Classical Theory. This was an innovative way to looking at the causation of crime. This
was the Positivist Theory.
Cesare Lombroso became known as the father of criminology. He became famous in the nineteenth
century because he claimed to have discovered the cause of crime. Lombroso wrote The Criminal
Man that was published in 1876. In his book, Lombroso claimed that the dead bodies of criminals
revealed that they were physically different than normal people. He claimed that criminals have
abnormal dimensions of the skull and jaw. Lombroso believed that criminals were born with traits
and did not commit crimes on free will as the classical school of criminology would suggest.
(Unknown)
If criminality was inherited, Lombroso claimed that certain physical characteristics could be
distinguished. These would be large jaws, low sloping forehead, high cheekbones, flattened or
upturned nose, handle shaped ears, hawk-like nose or fleshy lips, hard shifty eyes, scanty beard or
baldness, insensitivity to pain, and long arms in relativity to the lower limbs. After much successive
research and analysis, Lombroso modified his theories. He identified two other types of criminal: the
insane criminal and the criminaloid. He concluded that insane criminals bore some of the
characteristics but were not born criminals. They became criminal as a result of an alteration of the
brain which upsets their moral nature. Criminaloids had none of the physical characteristics of the
born criminal but became criminals later in life. (Unknown)

These criminaloids also tended to commit less serious crimes. They were further categorized as
habitual offenders who became so by contact with other criminals, the abuse of alcohol or other
distressing circumstances. Lombroso was also an advocate for humane treatment of criminals. He
argued for the removal of born criminals from society for their own and societys protection, for
rehabilitation for those not born criminals and was against capital punishment. (Unknown)
Each school of thought has impacted the criminal justice system today. They are both in force. Both
of these theories did away with the cruel, inhumane treatment of criminals and the reformation of the
death penalty. Our Constitution is based on the classical school of thought. The positivist school of
thought made it possible to get criminals the help they need to be rehabilitated. The systems
sentencing guidelines are based on the classical school of thought with the concept let the
punishment fit the crime. (Siegal, 2010)

In criminology, the Positivist School has attempted to find scientific objectivity for the measurement and
quantification of criminal behavior. As the scientific method became the major paradigm in the search for
all knowledge, the Classical School's social philosophy was replaced by the quest for scientific laws that
would be discovered by experts. It is divided into Biological, Psychological and Social.
Contents
[hide]

1 Biological positivism

1.1 Physical characteristics

1.2 Intelligence

1.3 Other medical factors

2 Psychological positivism
3 Social positivism
4 References

Biological positivism[edit]
If Charles Darwin's Theory of evolution was scientific as applied to animals, the same approach should be
applied to "man" as an "animal".

Physical characteristics[edit]
Historically, medicine became interested in the problem of crime, producing studies
of physiognomy (see Johann Kaspar Lavater and Franz Joseph Gall) and the science
of phrenology which linked attributes of the mind to the shape of the brain as reveal through the skull.
These theories were popular because society and any failures of its government were not the causes of
crime[citation needed]. The problem lay in the propensities of individual offenders who were biologically
distinguishable from law-abiding citizens. This theme was amplified by the Italian School and through the
writings of Cesare Lombroso (see L'Uomo Delinquente, The Criminal Man and Anthropological
criminology) which identified physical characteristics associated with degeneracy demonstrating that
criminals were atavistic throwbacks to an earlier evolutionary form. Charles Goring (1913) failed to
corroborate the characteristics but did find criminals shorter, lighter and less intelligent, i.e. he found
criminality to be "normal" rather than "pathological" (cf the work of Hooton found evidence of biological
inferiority). William Sheldon identified three basic body orsomatotypes (i.e. endomorphs, mesomorphs,
and ectomorphs), and introduced a scale to measure where each individual was placed. He concluded
that delinquents tended to mesomorphy. Modern research might link physical size and athleticism and
aggression because physically stronger people have the capacity to use violence with less chance of
being hurt in any retaliation. Otherwise, such early research is no longer considered valid. The
development of genetics has produced another potential inherent cause of criminality,
with chromosome and other genetic factors variously identified as significant to select heredity rather than
environment as the cause of crime (see: nature versus nurture). However, the evidence from family, twin,
and adoption studies shows no conclusive empirical evidence to prefer either cause.

Intelligence[edit]
There are a number of reputable studies that demonstrate a link between lower intelligence and
criminality. But the evidence is equivocal because studies among the prison population simply test those
criminals actually caught, which might be because they failed to plan the crimes properly or because they
were unable to resist interrogation techniques and admitted their crimes. If their intelligence is poor, they
are also less likely to be deterred.

Other medical factors[edit]

Testosterone and adrenaline have been associated with aggression and violence, and the arousal and
excited state associated with them. The excessive consumption of alcohol can lower blood sugar levels
and lead to aggressiveness, and the use of chemicals in foods and drinks has been associated with
hyper-activity and some criminal behaviour.

Psychological positivism[edit]
Sigmund Freud divided the personality into the id, the primitive biological drives, the superego, the
internalised values, and the ego, memory, perception, and cognition. He proposed that criminal behaviour
is either the result of mental illness or a weak conscience. John Bowlby proposed an attachment theory in
which maternal deprivation was a factor that might lead to delinquency. This has been discounted in

favour of general privation (Michael Rutter: 1981) or "broken homes" (Glueck: 1950) in which absentee or
uncaring parents tend to produce badly behaved children.
Hans Eysenck (1987) stated that, "... certain types of personality may be more prone to react with antisocial or criminal behaviour to environmental factors of one kind or another." He proposed three
dimensions of personality: introversion/extroversion, neuroticism, and psychoticism. For these purposes,
personality is the settled framework of reference within which a person addresses the current situation
and decides how to behave. Some traits will be dominant at times and then in a balanced relationship to
other traits, but each person's traits will be reasonably stable and predictable (see Marshall: 1990 and
Seidman: 1994). Hence, once conditioned into a criminal lifestyle, the relevant personality traits are likely
to persist until a countervailing conditioning force re-establishes normal social inhibitions. Some forms of
criminal behavior such as sexual offences, have been medicalised with treatment offered alongside
punishment.

Social positivism[edit]
In general terms, positivism rejected the Classical Theory's reliance on free will and sought to identify
positive causes that determined the propensity for criminal behaviour. Rather than biological or
psychological causes, this branch of the School identifies "society" as the cause. Hence, environmental
criminology and other sub-schools study the spatial distribution of crimes and offenders (see Adolphe
Quetelet, who discovered that crimes rates are relatively constant, and the Chicago School which, under
the leadership of Robert E. Park, viewed the city as a form of superorganism, zoned into areas engaged
in a continuous process of invasion, dominance, and succession). Meanwhile, mile Durkheimidentified
society as a social phenomenon, external to individuals, with crime a normal part of a healthy society.
Deviancy was nothing more than "boundary setting," pushing to determine the current limits of morality
and acceptability.

In criminology, the Classical School usually refers to the 18th-century work during the Enlightenment by
the utilitarian and social contractphilosophers Jeremy Bentham and Cesare Beccaria. Their interests lay
in the system of criminal justice and penology and, indirectly through the proposition that "man is a
calculating animal", in the causes of criminal behaviour. The Classical school of thought was premised on
the idea that people have free will in making decisions, and that punishment can be a deterrent for crime,
so long as the punishment is proportional, fits the crime, and is carried out promptly.

Contents
[hide]

1 Reform
2 The social contract
3 Beccaria
4 Bentham
5 Spiritual explanation of crime
6 Commentary
7 See also
8 References

Reform[edit]
The system of law, its mechanisms of enforcement and the forms of punishment used in the 18th century
were primitive and inconsistent[citation needed]. Judges were not professionally trained[citation needed] so many of
their decisions were unsatisfactory being the product of incompetence, capriciousness, corruption or
political manipulation. The use of torture to extract confessions and a wide range of cruel punishments
such as whipping, mutilation and public executions were commonplace. A need for legal rationality and
fairness was identified and found an audience among the emerging middle classes whose economic
interests lay in providing better systems for supporting national and international trade.

The social contract[edit]

John Locke considered the mechanism that had allowed monarchies to become the primary form
of government. He concluded that monarchs had asserted the right to rule and enforced it either through
an exercise in raw power, or through a form of contract, e.g. the feudal system had depended on the
grants of estates in land as a return for services provided to the sovereign. Locke proposed that
all citizens are equal, and that there is an unwritten but voluntary contract between the state and
its citizens, giving power to those in government and defining a framework of mutual rights and duties.
In Leviathan, Thomas Hobbes wrote, "the right of all sovereigns is derived from the consent of every one
of those who are to be governed." This is a shift from authoritarianism to an early model of European and
North American democracy where police powers and the system of punishment are means to a more just
end.

Beccaria[edit]
In 1764, he published Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments") arguing for the need to
reform the criminal justice system by referring not to the harm caused to the victim, but to the harm
caused to society. In this, he posited that the greatest deterrent was the certainty of detection: the more
swift and certain the punishment, the more effective it would be. It would also allow a less serious
punishment to be effective if shame and an acknowledgement of wrongdoing was a guaranteed response
to society's judgment. Thus, the prevention of crime was achieved through a proportional system that was
clear and simple to understand, and if the entire nation united in their own defense. His approach
influenced the codification movement which set sentencing tariffs to ensure equality of treatment among
offenders. Later, it was acknowledged that not all offenders are alike and greater sentencing discretion
was allowed to judges. Thus, punishment works at two levels. Because it punishes individuals, it operates
as a specific deterrence to those convicted not to reoffend. But the publicity surrounding the trial and the
judgment of society represented by the decision of a jury of peers, offers a general example to the public
of the consequences of committing a crime. If they are afraid of similarly swift justice, they will not offend.

Bentham[edit]
In this context, the most relevant idea was known as the "felicitation principle" of utilitarianism, i.e. that
whatever is done should aim to give the greatest happiness to the largest possible number of people in
society. Bentham argued that there had been "punishment creep", i.e. that the severity of punishments
had slowly increased so that the death penalty was then imposed for more than two hundred offences
in England.[1] For example, if rape and homicide were both punished by death, then a rapist would be
more likely to kill the victim (as a witness) to reduce the risk of arrest.
Bentham posited that man is a calculating animal who will weigh potential gains against the pain likely to
be imposed. If the pain outweighs the gains, he will be deterred and this produces maximal social utility.
Therefore, in a rational system, the punishment system must be graduated so that the punishment more
closely matches the crime. Punishment is not retribution or revenge because that is morally deficient: the
hangman is paying the murder the compliment of imitation.
But the concept is problematic because it depends on two critical assumptions:

if deterrence is going to work, the potential offender must always act rationally whereas much
crime is a spontaneous reaction to a situation or opportunity; and

if the system graduates a scale of punishment according to the seriousness of the offence, it is
assuming that the more serious the harm likely to be caused, the more the criminal has to gain.

Spiritual explanation of crime[edit]

Spiritualistic understandings of crime stem from an understanding of life in general, that finds most things
in life are destiny and cannot be controlled, we are born either male or female, good or bad and all our
actions are decided by a higher being. People have held such beliefs for all of recorded history, primitive
people regarded natural disasters such as famines, floods and plagues as punishments for wrongs they

had done to the spiritual powers.[2] These spiritual powers gained strength during the Middle Ages as
they bonded with the feudal powers to create the criminal justice systems. Under a spiritualistic criminal
justice system, crime was a private affair that was conducted between the offender and the victims family.
However this method proved to be too revengeful, as the state took control of punishment. Spiritual
explanations provided an understanding of crime when there was no other way of explaining crime.
However, the problem with this understanding is it cannot be proven true, and so it was never accepted.

Commentary[edit]
The idea of man as a calculating animal requires the view of crime as a product of a free choice by
offenders. The question for policy makers is therefore how to use the institutions of the state to influence
citizens to choose not to offend. This theory emerged at the time of the Enlightenment and it contended
that it should focus on rationality. But, because it lacks sophistication, it was operationalised in a
mechanical way, assuming that there is a mathematics of deterrence, i.e. a proportional calculation
undertaken first by policy makers and then by potential offenders. This School believed that there are
constants of value in pain and gain that can swing a decision to offend or not to offend. But not everyone
is the same nor has the same view of what constitutes a price worth paying. It also had a
certain utopianism in assuming that the policing system could rapidly grow and deliver a better service of
investigation and detection. If certainty of punishment is to be achieved, there must be a major investment
in policing.
As other Schools of thought developed, Classicism slowly grew less popular. But it has seen revival
through the Neo-Classical School and the theories of Right Realism such as theRational Choice Theory.