More handpicked essays just for you.
Comparing the biological and social explanations of criminality
Genetic factors that effect criminal behaviour
Genetic factors that effect criminal behaviour
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
When it comes to the biological theories of crime, researchers can examine differences in brain function and development, genetic influences on behavior and conditions, that could potentially cause changes in behavior. While this form of theorizing started in the mid 1800's and was referred to as the Positive School of criminology, it brought a sense of awareness for scientists to examine the reasoning for criminal behavior. Scientists were trying to categorize different methods or perspectives regarding how to determine which individuals were most likely to commit a crime. In my opinion, this chapter was not the easiest to comprehend, but I did find it quite interesting in learning the numbering and definitions of the organs. I knew that we
Nature versus nurture has been argued in attempt to understand how criminals behave. The theory of what influences psychopath and serial killers’ violent and destructive pathways has not been agreed on till this day. Criminals such as psychopaths and serial killers have been researched for the past two decades. Scientists have found that genetics is a determining factor of who becomes a serial killer. It is important to understand the determinants involved within a serial killer, because if these social and environmental causes are discovered, they can be altered and controlled to reduce crime (Lykken, 1993). With more studies, we would therefore prevent mass murders and could assist in significant reductions of crime within society.
Crime causation began to be a focus of study in the rapidly developing biological and behavioral sciences during the 19th century. Early biological theories proposed that criminal behavior is rooted in biology and based on inherited traits. Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian army prison physician, coined the term “atavism” to describe “the nature of the criminal”...
When we look at how fragile each one of our lives are, we need to take a minute and realize the different characteristics that form us into who we are today. Studies have shown that there are characteristics within the behavior of an individual that can be linked to the specific behaviors demonstrated by an offender that would classify them as a psychopath. Along with other research that looks into an individual’s genetics to see if that plays a role in defining or making a psychopath. John Allen Muhammad, also known as the D.C. sniper, was labeled as a psychopath when he terrorized D.C. for two weeks, taking thirteen victims and killing ten of them. This paper will go over the behaviors that constitute psychopathy, and the behaviors that indicate psychopathic individuals such as John himself. It will also go over John’s life history of what caused him to commit these acts of violence.
The most vivid example of the biological determinism is the theory of Cesare Lombroso. Lombroso based his theory on the assumption that criminals have certain physiognomic features or abnormalities. Lombroso wanted to be able to detect future criminals in order to isolate them from the society. This gave criminology a strong push to create new methods of dealing with criminals and prevent crimes. Lombroso implied that prisoners had common facial characteristics. If to exaggerate criminals in Lombroso’s theory can be identified through the shape of their skulls, asymmetry of the face and head, large cheekbones, ears and lips, long arms and a twisted nose. Lombroso’s theory is the oldest one and it can without a doubt be called the main background data for the whole process of the development of criminology. Lombroso stated that men are more inclined to commit crimes due to the conservatism and the narrow-mindedness of their interests. According to Lombroso women have less social contacts and this is what predetermines their conservatism. Thi...
Nature vs. nurture has been one of the oldest and most debated topics among psychologists over the years. This concept discusses whether a child is born into this world with their developmental work cut out for them or if a child is a “blank slate” and their experiences are what shape them into who they are. Over the years and plenty of research, psychologists have all mostly come to agree that it’s a little bit of both. Children are both born with some genetic predispositions while other aspects of the child’s development are strongly influenced by their surrounding environment. This plays into the criminal justice system when discussing where criminal behavior stems from. Is a criminal’s anti-social behavior just part of their DNA or is it a result of their upbringing? The answer to this question is not definite. Looking at research a strong argument can be made that criminals developed their anti-social patterns through the atmosphere in which they were raise, not their DNA.
Crime and biology are interrelated through various factors such as biological predisposition, location, family interactions, friends, body type, etc. These factors alone do not necessarily link to criminal behavior, but they can be one reason for someone’s criminal tendencies. Likewise, a person’s genes can predispose them to criminal behavior; however, people still have free will to choose to engage in criminal activity. Adrian Rane, a distinguished bio-psychologist, states, “despite strong resistance in many quarters, there is now little scientific doubt that genes play a significant role in antisocial behavior” (Hickey, 2013, p. 27). Both body type and biological predisposition can play a role in criminal activity, yet they are not the reason
Cesare Lombroso, medical criminologist, headed the school. Enrico Ferri and Raffaele Garafolo were Lombroso’s disciples, both of whom also headed, as well as had their own opinions on the biological crime theory. Lombroso argued that “criminality was a biological trait found in some human beings” (Boundless, 2015, 1). Today, the biological theory emphasizes the relationship between genetics and crime. The biological theory of crime has evolved over the years in the sense that, initially, the theory was primarily based on physical features. In contrast, it is now primarily based on genetics. As technology has also evolved as well as our knowledge on genetics, this only makes sense (Boundless,
...& Snipes, J. (2010). Biological Factors and Criminal Behavior.Vold's theoretical criminology (6th Ed.). New York: Oxford University Press.
1. Cesare Lombroso applied the methods of natural science (observation, measurement, experimentation, statistical analysis) to the study of criminal behavior. Lombroso rejected the classical theory of crime, associated with Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, which explained criminal activity as freely chosen behavior based on the rational calculation of benefit and loss, pleasure and pain. Critically analyze both schools of thought and provide an opinion as to what theory you believe is more relevant.
In this article the two authors research the connection between genetic factors and criminal behavior. They look at the causes that make someone act in a criminal way. There are several factors looked at in connection to the cause such as social factors and environmental variables. The social factors being the more examined of the two. They hypothesized that other factors in performance or alone with environmental variables would lead to better understanding of why some people become criminal. The genetic factor of influence due to mental disorders was posed to have a slight role in affecting people to show criminal behavior. Another cause looked at was the combination of genetic and environmental factors, with a possible result of having a higher risk for criminal behavior.
In conclusion it is shown through examinations of a average criminals biological makeup is often antagonized by a unsuitable environment can lead a person to crime. Often a criminal posses biological traits that are fertile soil for criminal behavior. Some peoples bodies react irrationally to a abnormal diet, and some people are born with criminal traits. But this alone does not explain their motivation for criminal behavior. It is the environment in which these people live in that release the potential form criminal behavior and make it a reality. There are many environmental factors that lead to a person committing a crime ranging from haw they were raised, what kind of role models they followed, to having a suitable victims almost asking to be victimized. The best way to solve criminal behavior is to find the source of the problem but this is a very complex issue and the cause of a act of crime cannot be put on one source.
There are various theories within the biological explanation as to why individuals commit criminal behaviour, these include: genetic theory, hereditary theory, psychosis and brain injury theory. In the next few paragraphs examples of each will be shown.
Different schools of thought propose varying theoretical models of criminality. It is agreeable that criminal behaviour is deep rooted in societies and screams for attention. Biological, Social ecological and psychological model theories are key to helping researchers gain deeper comprehension of criminal behaviour and ways to avert them before they become a menace to society. All these theories put forward a multitude of factors on the outlooks on crime. All these theories have valid relevancy to continuous research on criminal behaviour.
While a person’s surroundings shape them, basic human nature sets the limits. Human nature, while complicated, encompasses aspects that help construct and drive it. One’s nature serves as a force that aids everyday decisions. It plays a much more important role in the life of a person than one realizes. Human nature guides the course of one’s actions and thoughts. Agatha Christie’s Murder on the Orient Express and Murder at the Vicarage both demonstrate that, ordinarily, in societies people obey social and moral laws; however, if following these rules does not enable a person to satisfy their needs, human nature turns and allows justice, greed, fear and in some cases, innate evil to lead to criminal action. Expand
Theories that are based on biological Factors and criminal behavior have always been slightly ludicrous to me. Biological theories place an excessive emphasis on the idea that individuals are “born badly” with little regard to the many other factors that play a part in this behavior. Criminal behavior may be learned throughout one’s life, but there is not sufficient evidence that proves crime is an inherited trait. In the Born to Be Bad article, Lanier describes the early belief of biological theories as distinctive predispositions that under particular conditions will cause an individual to commit criminal acts. (Lanier, p. 92) Biological criminologists are expected to study the “criminal” rather than the act itself. This goes as far as studying physical features, such as body type, eyes, and the shape or size of one’s head. “Since criminals were less developed, Lombroso felt they could be identified by physical stigmata, or visible physical abnormalities…characteristics as asymmetry of the face; supernumerary nipples, toes, or fingers; enormous jaws; handle-shaped or sensible ears; insensibility to pain; acute sight; and so on.” (Lanier. P. 94). It baffles me that physical features were ever considered a reliable explanation to criminal behavior. To compare one’s features to criminal behavior is not only stereotypical, but also highly unreliable.