Positivism in Criminology - Case Study Example

 Introduction Positivism is the philosophical concepts developed by a French philosopher August Comte (1798-1857). Other philosophers who contributed to the school of positivism include Mill, the Vienna Circle, Schlick, and Hempe. The root of positivism is empiricism. The main principle of positivism is that experience is the only object of human knowledge. He said that behaviours are affected by biological, psycho social and social traits. Comte did not believe in the existence of God and metaphysics. He emphasized that everything is relative. Data was collected in order to explain different types of individuals and social phenomena. Positivists use scientific techniques to explain about events and behaviours of people (Scott, 2008). The theory was critical in explaining human behaviour, particularly criminal tendencies. Comte focused on criminal behaviour rather than the legal system; he was interested in ways of preventing criminal behaviour. Positivism in criminology was associated with positivist’s, such as Cesare Lombrosso, recognized as “the father of modern criminology”. He used physiognomy theories, and was influenced by Charles Darwin (Tibbetts, 2012). Positivism was one of the many schools of thoughts that arose in the 18th century in order to explain about criminology. The other schools are the classical and the Chicago school. These different principles of thoughts were based on different paradigms. Unlike the positivism, classical theory believed that people had the free will to choose whatever they wanted to do. There are various assumptions made in the positivism theory. John Mill in the naturalism theory said that social sciences should have the same structure as natural sciences. Natural sciences such as chemistry and physics cannot be compared with social sciences such as sociology and psychology. However, Mill insisted that all are sciences, and to obtain objectivity in the social sciences they should use the same structure as that of the sciences. Another principle of positivism is the unity of science. It said that all theories should be summarized into one theory. Another principle by Carl Hempel and Mill is about explanations, regularities and law. It said that the law should use scientific explanations in their work. Causation is a part of the positivistic theory. It was developed by Hume; however, it has been criticized for putting a lot of attention on the causation regularities than the real causation mechanisms themselves. The causation principle tries to show the relationship between various variables. They analyze the connections between variables in different contexts. The variables were the various concepts of the human behaviours and after doing that the positivists were confident that they had attained the goal of positivism. For instance, Durkheim claimed to have discovered laws of human behaviour that governed suicide rate by studying various variables involved such as the economic recession. There are three types of positivism namely social, logical and critical positivism. Social positivism was the work of Comte; it was the assertion of the three stages of intellectual development. The first stage is the theological stage, which was disputed by Comte; the second stage was the metaphysical stage. The third stage was the scientific/ positivist stage, which Comte totally supported. He said that, unlike the other sources, science provided the empirical evidence and regularities. Legal positivism asserts that the contents of law depend on the social facts and not by its merits (Austin, 1832) the answer to whether a society has a legal system depends on the presence of certain structures of governance. Critical theory was Hegel’s work, which was grounded on Marxist views. He criticizes the human society, the state, human behaviours and the social systems. Positivism has been criticized because of reasons such as ignoring the concept of individual shaping the society. Some influential individuals have contributed good things to the society. Not all things can follow the scientific rule. Some aspects of society needs to be studied on a different paradigm, however, the positivistic method brought empiricism and objectivity. Positivism is related to criminology. Criminology is a collection of knowledge that deals with crime. It includes the sequential process of making laws, reacting towards the laws and breaking the laws. Cesare Lombrosso, recognized as “the father of modern criminology”, who used phrenology and physiognomy theories Cesare Lambrosso replaced the notion of free will with determinism. The positivist school of criminology sought answers to criminology through scientific means and rationality. He believed that there are “criminal born” people. These people had biological traits related to crime. Unlike normal human beings, people with criminal tendencies had physical features like those of the apes, they were not fully developed. He said that criminals lacked moral sense, and used slang a lot. Lambrosso’s principles may have empirical prove, but they do not make much sense. It has been kept alive though by the constant criticisms. However, this does not end the relationship between positivism and crime. Positivism has three different hypothesis, determinism, differentiation and pathology. Determinism is a principle in which an individual has no control over their criminal behaviour. Differentiation means, criminals can be identified from non-criminals by recognizing features or characteristics and pathology. This suggests that the difference between offenders and non-offenders is the result of something that went wrong with them at a biological, psychological or social level (Newburn, 2007). From this, it is noticeable that positivism used three different forms of scientific knowledge biological, sociological and psychological. The question nevertheless arises, whether all these positivistic theories help to explain the causes of criminal behaviour and whether it can be fully understand. One cause of crime could be linked with the biological theory. Lambrosso said that criminals possessed certain different features and characteristics which could be passed down from generation to another. As Lombrosso stated that, “criminals were born not made” (Newburn, 2007). Lombrosso viewed criminals as not entirely developed or intelligent human beings, which could be a cause of atavism, which is a reappearance of characteristics through generations described as throwbacks. Lombrosso’s work also focused on biological factors, where he identified four main types of criminals. These are, born criminals people with atavistic features, insane criminals, including epileptic, idiots and imbecile and criminals of passion; biological theory indicated that criminal genes could be inherited through generations (Newburn, 2007). The positivism theory also gives an account of crime being handed down from generation to generation. The positivistic theory focused on twin studies, which emphasised that it is impossible to establish the main aspects of behaviour in identical twins monozygotic and non-identical twins dizygotic, as both types can be brought up in the similar social and environmental influences. However, it can be said that identical twins show similarity in criminal behavioural patterns than non-identical twins. As Lange stated, (1929), that there is considerable resemblance within identical twins behaviour. As he examined male adults twins and compared with non-identical, also Christiansen (1977) found similar results, however, he ruled out possibility to study twins due to same upbringing environment and that it is possible to inherit the genes (Newburn, 2007). Studies were carried out not just on the twins, but also on adopted kids. The effect of nurture had a strong effect on the children; this might lead to criminal tendencies being passed down to that child. This theory also studies XY chromosomes and body typing to help prove the biological concepts that are crime related. Though Lambrosso’s method is stereotypical, it has proven effective in identifying criminals in the society. Positivism also deals with the social aspects of the society. Crime is present not only in the majority of societies, but it exists in all societies (Durkheim 1964). Durkheim's view is that all societies face crime and that this is just a part of life. It stresses that certain factors within one’s environment and social structure are responsible for crime. Factors in the environment and the social structure such as poverty, poor and overcrowded housing, high density, and high levels of unemployment are causes of crime. Areas in that experience high crime rates are areas that have a higher number of the unemployed population. Social structure refers to the institutions in the society, particularly the economic system. Other institutions include family, education and politics. The social structure cannot deliver equal opportunities to all individuals. Some have more resources than they need while others cannot afford basic needs. This is why people resort to measures such as crime. The capitalistic system has resulted in other crimes such as corruption, stealing and misuse of public funds. Anomie assumption can help to underline the effects of criminal activity that could happen when the society collapses because of the financial and industrial crisis (Williams, 2008). As giving an example, it is worthy to mention Merton (1962), who aimed to explain why social structures put certain pressure on people in a community, which it would cause them to show deviant, conducts because people were in certain circumstances that they would have no choice, but to commit crimes. In contrast, (Taylor 1971) argued that Merton failed to look at social issues of crime, failed to analyse and identify the problem in American capitalism, therefore, Taylor argues that the crime issue is still unsolved (Newburn, 2007). Psychological positivism has effects on crime. It shows how certain psychological traits are related with causes of crime. Sigmund Freud’s psychoanalytic theory identified the three types of individuals; he talked about the id, ego and the superego. These individuals have to be constantly checked, particularly the superego. If the superego becomes too much individuals will end up committing crimes because, at that time, they cannot differentiate between what is good and evil. Mental disorders and personality disorders fall under psychological positivism with regard to criminology. Extreme cases of mental and personality disorders make people susceptible to committing crimes (Jack, 2012). To support how psychological positivism clarifies the causes of criminal behaviour, it is good to look at social learning theory, which focuses on how individuals can become criminals. Bandura’s theory (1977) emphasised that some people are becoming criminal due to the pleasure they see someone with higher status they would like to copy and act out the crime themselves, thus act on impulsive desires. The characteristics of criminal behaviour can be brought up in environment which criminal activity is acceptable, for example, peers, family or friends, for whom criminality is a norm (Newburn, 2007). To conclude, positivism is effective to explore causes of criminal behaviour, facts suggest that there are different types of traits that can lead to criminality such as personality, biological or sociological theories. However, some may argue that certain scientific theories cannot be seen as areas of research to measure causes of crime. Charles Goring clarified that Lombroso’s theory cannot prove that a physical appearance will help to identify criminals from non-criminals. However, Sampson and Laup suggested that the causes of crime lie upon the society and the environment, which could be a cause of crime and certain circumstances. Positivism has contributed a lot to criminology, but it has its shortcomings. Biological positivism has been considered a failure of 'empirical determinism' by the positivism critics. Crime is a social construct that varies in accordance to time and culture. The general flaws that have been criticized in the biological positivism concept include the following. Determinism is based on causal laws; they did no deal with free will. Most criminal activities are as a result of personal choice. Most criminals do not follow patterns of certain variables. They just act in a spur of the moment to satisfy the immediate needs because they choose to do so. The biological positivism aspect gives a scientific approach towards criminology. Physical features analyzed by Lambrosso do not automatically make a person a criminal. If built people were considered criminals, what would happen to people such as wrestlers and people who go to the gym? There is no biological explanation that can explain about crime. Crime is a social construct and is better off explained with social principles (Eysenck 1998). Other critics of positivism say that the ‘scientific inquiry’ used by the positivists must accept the qualitative aspects of crime. The positivism is too empirical, and objective, ( Becker 1963) the positivism theory emphasizes on criminal statistics and try to establish relationships instead of looking at the reasons behind those crimes. Crime is not an intrinsic quality, but it is socially learned. The positivism theory is more concerned with the methodology than the process of criminalization itself. This is quite an irony because positivism, which claims to be objective ,seems to miss the point. Positivism has simplified some of the causes of crime, but some of the theories and principles do not make sense. Psychological and social positivism claims of criminology, however, do make sense more than the biological claims. Positivism provided another perspective in criminology which has been influential in understanding criminal behaviours. Despite its shortcomings, the theory has invaluable knowledge that is still being applied in the current day legal system. Deductively, positivism can give us the causes of crime. Reference list Austin, J. 1832, The Province of Jurisprudence Determined. Ed. W.E. Rumble, 1995. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Jack, D, 2012, Psychological Explanations. Theories of Criminal Behaviour [Lecture to BA Criminology, Policing and Forensics Year 2]. 25 October 2012 Jack, D., 2012, Classicism and Positivism. Theories of Criminal Behaviour [Lecture to BA Criminology, Policing and Forensics Year 2]. 11 October 2012 Newburn, T., 2007, Criminology. ed. Nevada: Devon Scott, D., 2011, Penology. ed. New York, NY: Sage Williams, K., 2008, Textbook on Criminology. 6th rev. ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press Read More