Crime and criminal profiling What is criminality? Different perspectives of crime are important for the explanation of why individuals engage in deviant behavior and only a few become monsters in our society.
What are the Biological Theories of Crime? Rohit Bura Biological Theories of Crime The positivists who used experimental or inductive method in making generalisations rejected the concept of 'free will' advocated by the classicists and the neo-classicists and laid emphasis on the doctrine of Biological psychological factors crime.
They paved the way for a philosophy of individualised scientific treatment of criminals, based upon the findings of the physical and social sciences. Lombroso, Ferri and Garofalo were three major positivists who laid stress on the physiological incapacity of an individual or the biogenic or hereditary aspects of criminal behaviour.
Heredity is the parental contribution made through 46 chromosomes. Of these, two determine sex of the infant and 44 affect other qualities of the body. Combinations and permutations among genes determine an infant's particular genotype, that is, genetic contribution of an organism.
Lombroso, an Italian physician and professor of clinical psychiatry and criminal anthropology, and described as the "father of criminology", propounded the theory of evolutionary atavism also called theory of physical criminal type, or theory of born criminals in Thus, according to Lombroso, atavism and degeneracy are the basic causes of crime.
Initially, Lombroso came out with only one type of criminals the born criminals a term which, in fact, was introduced by Ferri but later on he identified two other types of criminals too: Although Lombroso obviously emphasised the biological causes of crime, he did not entirely neglect, as erroneously claimed by many critics, the sociological causes.
While going through his later works, one reaches this obvious conclusion. Lombroso's research had serious methodological problems. Of these, Reid op. One, he depended on collection of facts which were limited to organic factors. Although, he realised the importance of psychic factors, yet he found them hard to measure.
Two, his method was mainly descriptive and not experimental. Three, his generalisations about atavism and degeneracy left a large gap between theory and fact. Four, his method was largely one of analogy and anecdote, from which he drew his conclusions.
Such a method is unscientific for drawing generalisations. Instead, we must replace punishment by treatment. A panel of experts should diagnose the condition of the individual and prescribe appropriate treatment.
He thus holds that punitive response, as advocated by classicist theorists, is applicable. Charles Goring, an English psychiatrist and philosopher, criticised Lombroso's theory on the basis of his own study in which he measured the characteristics of 3, English convicts and a large number of non-criminals in He maintained that there was no such thing as a 'physical criminal type'.
However, he himself explained crime on the basis of hereditary factors Goring's work was also criticised because Reid, He measured intelligence not by the available Simon-Binet tests but by his own impression of the mental ability of criminals; 2 He completely ignored the impact of environment on crime; 3 The sample of non-criminals which included undergraduate university students, inmates of a hospital, mental patients and soldiers was defective; and 4 He was violently prejudiced against Lombroso.
Garofalo and Ferri had supported Lombroso in his biological school. Garofalo in his book Criminology, published in its English translation appeared intalked of physical differences between criminals and non-criminals, but he differed from Lombroso in the emphasis he Lombroso placed on the physical abnormality of the criminal.
Garofalo was not sure whether or not physical abnormality of the criminal was caused by physiological factors. Rejecting Lombroso's 'physical anomaly', he focused on 'psychic anomaly' of the criminal and referred to 'moral degeneracy'.
He admitted that environmental factors might play a role in individual's criminality but there was one element organic deficiency in the criminal which was inherited or somehow acquired early in infancy.Psychological theories of crime begin with the view that individual differences in behavior may make some people more predisposed to committing criminal acts.
These differences may arise from personality characteristics, biological factors, or social interactions. Biological theories purport, that criminal behavior is caused by some flaw in individual’s biological makeup.
According to Raine Study, the causes may be Heredity, Neurotransmitter dysfunction and brain abnormalities, which could be caused either by the first two or trauma.
Biological theories of crime attempt to explain behaviors contrary to societal expectations through examination of individual characteristics.
These theories are categorized within a paradigm called positivism (also known as determinism), which asserts that behaviors, including law-violating behaviors, are determined by factors largely beyond individual control.
Biological theories tend to ignore such environmental and psychological factors though they may equally may play a role in explaining such behaviour.
Therefore, it is better to think of ‘biological factors’ rather than theories in explaining crime. Biological theories tend to ignore such environmental and psychological factors though they may equally may play a role in explaining such behaviour.
Therefore, it is better to think of ‘biological factors’ rather than theories in explaining crime. Comparing Biological and Psychological Approaches to Crime I was interested in assessing two different approaches to the important issue of crime in society.
The articles I chose seek to find different causes to crime via psychological and biological approaches respectively.