Introduction to Theories of Crime PDF

Introduction to A theory is a set of interconnected statements that explain how 2 or more Theories of Crime – events are related to one another. 1960's to the Theories often derive from experiences, knowledge passed down, or even Present...

Introduction to A theory is a set of interconnected statements that explain how 2 or more Theories of Crime – events are related to one another. 1960's to the Theories often derive from experiences, knowledge passed down, or even Present common sense. What is Theory? A theory consists of 3 things: 1. An explanation framework describing the relationship between 2 or more variables. 2. A strategy for assessing whether the observed facts fit the proposed explanation (the empirical testing of the theory). 3. A body of recommendations or policies mapping out effective courses of action to respond to the outcome that is being explained. A social scientist uses an explanatory framework that describes why things happen and how things can be addressed. A good scientific theory will include a mechanism for testing to ensure that social fact matches with the theory. This could be done through observation, experiments, interviews, ethnographic studies etc. Understanding Ontology: This is the study of being or existence – what is out there that we Theories – Breaking can know about. it Down Ontology made it so that sociologists can study society rather than using theories on just one individual. Epistemology: This defines “how” we know about the world. Aka what tools do we use to know the truth. This can be classified through rationalist or empiricist thought. Rationalists: They believe that knowledge is the product of rational reflection and common sense. (I think, therefore i am). Subjective experiences not needed to know the truth. Math mostly uses this. Empiricists: They argue that experience is the foundation of knowledge and understanding. Knowledge is the product of sensory perception. Concepts: Ideas or terms that one is dealing with in theory. May be concrete or abstract – gender, alienation, society, crime, deviance, class etc. Stanley Cohens and the “Holy grail” Stanley Cohen (1942-2013), a sociologist and criminologist at the London of Criminology School of Economics, is known for his concept of "moral panics" and his (1988) critiques of criminology. In his book Against Criminology (1988), Cohen critiques modernist and critical criminology, emphasizing the importance of being deeply familiar with a discipline’s history to critique it effectively. Classical vs. Positivist Criminology Classical School: Focused on rational choice and deterrence through punishment.  Positivist School: Aimed to identify and address individual/social causes of crime to suggest solutions. Positivism sought to make criminology a scientific discipline. Cohen’s Critique of Positivism Criminology’s history repeats themes from the Classical and Positivist Schools. Positivist criminologists aimed to find the "causes" of crime to eliminate it, but Cohen argued these findings justified pre-existing methods of individual control (e.g., imprisonment). Despite theoretical shifts, the practice of using prisons persisted, evolving in purpose (deterrence → incapacitation → rehabilitation). Continuity in Criminological Theories Theories over time tend to justify current practices rather than propose entirely new solutions. Critiques of positivism in the 1960s, influenced by broader social movements, revisited humanitarian ideals of classical criminology, focusing on protecting individual rights. Examples include labelling theory, Radical Marxist Criminology, and Realism/Neo-classicism. Key Takeaway Criminological theory does not progress linearly; earlier ideas resurface and are reformulated in new contexts. Theories should be read with an understanding of their connections to historical assumptions and prior philosophies. What is Modernist Criminology Modernist Criminology emerged at the end of the 19th century and includes theories covered in CC290 (Theories of Crime I). Despite their diversity, modernist theories share common commitments: Realist Perspective: Crime is real and viewed as a significant social problem requiring solutions. Faith in instrumental reason: Rationality and scientific methods are used to understand crime, emphasizing a rationalist approach. Vision of the technocratic state: The state is seen as the primary body for maintaining social control and regulating populations. Commitment to progress and social engineering: Science and discovery are viewed as tools to solve social problems, focusing on finding causal theories of crime for expert-driven solutions. Punishment: is seen as irrational and unproductive when aimed solely at retribution.  State-centered politics: Research and theory aim to inform state policy for implementation through state mechanisms. Individualistic: Crime is attributed to individual pathology or social deprivation, with solutions centered on individualized correctional treatment within a welfare framework. Overall, modernist criminology emphasizes data collection on individual causes of crime and relies on state intervention to address and solve crime-related issues. Caputo and Hatt Caputo and Hatt present a 4-quadrant model of criminology as a means of (1996): Toward a categorizing the styles of theorizing modern crime: Post-Critical Criminology Class Notes: Criminological Theories and Critiques Microsynchronic theories focus on why certain individuals commit crimes at a specific moment in time. These theories emphasize micro-level factors like biological or psychological issues and how learned values influence decisions regarding crime. Macrosynchronic theories examine why crime rates or organized criminal activities vary across societies. They often explore structural factors, such as higher crime rates in disadvantaged neighborhoods. Microdiachronic theories investigate how individuals come to be labeled as criminals. They focus on micro-level interactions, the labeling process, moral entrepreneurs, and the social construction of criminality. Macrodiacronic theories study the dynamics of how criminality and criminal justice change over time. These theories question why certain behaviors are considered harmful and how societal values shape the focus of the criminal justice system, such as its emphasis on street crime over white-collar crime. Critiques of the Modernist Paradigm Modernist theories focus heavily on individual motivations for crime, emphasizing intervention and rehabilitation without addressing structural issues like poverty. Structural problems, such as economic inequality, are treated with individual solutions, which fail to address root causes. Modernist theories often ignore crimes of the powerful and white-collar crime, focusing instead on street crime and legitimizing harsh punishments for marginalized groups. Critical Criminology Sought to address modernist shortcomings but faced its own limitations: o The shifting role of the state, as globalization and corporate influence grew.  o Overly abstract discussions that lacked practical applications or direct impact on individuals. o Weak empirical foundations, as critiques of positivism were not paired with alternative research methods. o Neglected the role of criminologists, assuming their objectivity without addressing their biases or perspectives. Transition to Post-Critical Theories Modernist criminology, including labeling theory and critical criminology, is being reconsidered. The course will explore “post-critical” theories and the debate between modern and post-modern thought. These critiques will form the basis of class discussions in the coming weeks. David Garland and Modernist criminology traditionally focuses on finding causes and cures Richard Sparks for street crime, but this approach can be limiting given the broader scope (2000) of harms and concerns in today’s world. “Criminology, Pursuing only positivistic, scientific theories of crime neglects the social Social Theory and and structural factors surrounding crime, such as power dynamics and the Challenge of governance. our Times” Garland and Sparks highlight a paradox: despite increased criminology students, research funding, and output, the influence of criminological research on public policy has declined. For example, policies like Canada’s "tough on crime" approach persist despite research showing such strategies are ineffective, demonstrating the dominance of populist political approaches. Criminology is defined as organized ways of thinking and discussing crime, criminals, and crime control, existing in three key areas: o Academia o Government (crime control and criminal justice) o Culture (media and political discourse) This course will explore how these three areas intersect, influence, challenge, and sometimes contradict each other. Garland and Sparks outline the evolution of modern criminology and emphasize the responsibility of criminologists to engage in public discourse and educate society about their findings. Gerben Bruinsma (2016) - “The Gerben Bruinsma’s Address to the European Society of Criminology Proliferation of Crime Causation Bruinsma critiques the excessive number of competing theories in Theories in an Era criminology, highlighting that many are not thoroughly tested, refuted, or of Fragmentation discarded. Summary of Major Schools of Thought (Enlightenment to 1960s) Pages 661–663 provide an overview of key criminological theories, serving as a refresher for students familiar with CC290 (Theories of Crime I). Core Propositions of Modernist Criminology All causal crime theories rest on the following propositions: o Responses to external societal forces o Lack of internal/external control o Learned criminal behavior over non-criminal o Rational cost-benefit analysis o Breakdown of control/support processes in neighborhoods Despite these core ideas, Bruinsma argues criminologists poorly test these assumptions and fail to eliminate invalid theories. Critique of Criminological Theories Many theories lack scientific rigor and clear definitions. Theories often generalize findings from narrow populations to broader groups without empirical validation. Significant overlap exists among theories, leading to redundancy. Key concepts (e.g., poverty, low self-control) lack standardized measurement. Most theories remain untested or are only partially tested using pre- existing datasets. Factors Contributing to Proliferation of Theories Interdisciplinary Nature: Contributions from diverse disciplines result in numerous theoretical perspectives. Complexity of Crime: Crime encompasses diverse behaviors, making it difficult to develop a universal theory. Ethical and Practical Limitations: Studying crime experimentally is often unethical and impractical. Specialization and Fragmentation: Researchers focus on specific types of crime, leading to narrowly focused theories. Diversity in Approaches: Lack of communication among criminologists with differing ideologies hinders critique and theory refinement. Steps Forward Bruinsma emphasizes the need for criminologists to rigorously test theories, narrow them down to those with empirical validity, and discard those lacking explanatory power.