• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

The classical and positivist approaches to criminological theory

Extracts from this document...


The classical and positivist approaches to criminological theory were both highly influential in their definition of and approach to dealing with crime and criminal punishment. For centuries scholars and theorists have attempted to adopt a new and effective approach to criminal punishment, in the hope that one can understand and thus know how to deal with criminal behaviour in an effective manner. Yet, while the two theories are rather different, they also contain similarities, and both influence the criminal systems of even today around the world. In an attempt to compare and evaluate the two, a brief explanation is necessary, in order to understand exactly how they differ and combine on certain elements. The classical approach to criminal behaviour was the first to move away from the concept of classifying crime as a sin. It thus brought the shift from unfettered power to punish criminal behaviour on a spiritual level to a reason-based approach, with checks on authority. In contrast, the positivist approach adopts a statistical based approach, under which societal factors are assessed to determine which characteristics are more likely to cause crime. At once, one can see the fundamentally different bases upon which each theory is propped. ...read more.


And one can thus see how the former sought to focus on removing the causes of crime whereas the latter sought ways to punish criminals effectively yet fairly. Yet this is not to say that the classical approach does not seek to prevent or reduce crime. Indeed, punishment was seen as a deterrent; it merely proposed that the intensity of punishment was not necessarily a calculus of the intensity of deterrent effects. Thus, theorists such as Bentham proposed that punishment should outweigh the pleasure deduced from crime, but still on a minimal level; only that which is enough to deter others. Furthermore, concepts such as the speed with which punishment is administered and the publicity of it is seen as more productive of deterrence as the severity. The differences between the two theories are somewhat reminiscent of the eras in which they emerged. The classical theory occurred at a period of religious dominance, where corporal punishment was widely adopted, and the 'eye for an eye' concept allowed the torture of criminals based on the extent of their sinful behaviour. But this proved to be difficult to monitor, and punishments simply depended on the subjective opinion of the authoritative figure administering sentences. ...read more.


The positivist approach was too simplistic also, but on a different plane than that of the classical approach. Lombroso's attempt to classify criminal behaviour into four categories was helpful, but seemed too simplistic and rounded to lead to anything revolutionary. Where the classical approach was arguably too philosophical, the positivist approach appeared to anthropological, thus overlooking factors such as the social contract and concepts of utilitarianism to understand how to administer punishment on a more effective level. Having compared these two approaches to criminology, one can begin to understand their fundamental differences, yet also their similarities. Of course, one has only scratched the surface on these rather complex theories and the concepts they encapsulate, but the overall basis of their approaches is accurate, and appropriately profound enough to understand. Here we have two seemingly entirely different approaches, with some similarities and basic concepts. It is easy to understand how they differ, yet difficult to envisage why they failed to be slightly more realistic in their propositions and promises. However, only through these errors can one formulate different aspects of various theories and understand the different problems that emerged in the field of criminology throughout the decades. 1 P89, first book. 2 First book, p92 ?? ?? ?? ?? ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our GCSE Sociology section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related GCSE Sociology essays

  1. A-Level Sociology Theory + Methods Revision.

    Weber vs. Marx - Authority vs. Power Weber looks at social arrangement from the perspective of the individual in society. He asks "Why do people follow certain social rules + accept unfair social arrangements". He disagrees with Marx on powers + coercion and changes the focus to AUTHORITY.

  2. Inventing Reality: Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment

    belong to and consequently, are constantly seeking shelter in another type of reality: their inner world. Katerina Ivanovna is another character that is almost defeated by a reality where she had to continuously struggle with poverty and an endless series of humiliations.

  1. Evaluation of the difference between Positivist and Interpretivist methodologies

    This can be seen in Weber's research into the relationship between the Protestant work ethic and Capitalism.[17] People having no choice in how they behave because external objective forces cause their behaviour, seems to be the mainstay of the positivist theory, such as when Emile Durkheim tried to prove a

  2. Max Weber: Basic Terms (The Fundamental Concepts of Sociology)

    Both inner-worldly asceticism and mysticism ultimately condemn the social world to absolute meaninglessness (or, at least they hold that God's aims concerning the world are utterly incomprehensible). The rationalism of religious and organic doctrines of society cannot stand up under this idea; for it seeks to comprehend the world as

  1. Capital Punishment

    An argument that people bring up is ultimately we are all going to die, so why should it them look down upon when a juvenile should be sentenced to a judge upon a fair trial, for which the juvenile has committed a serious crime.

  2. Compare the ways in which crime is presented in Moll Flanders and Roxana?Assess how ...

    domestic duties, instead they distance themselves from the morals of society and beautify their lives by either using men or stealing valuable objects to fulfil their needs. The novels are written in an autobiographical format, where the protagonist gives a chronological sequence of events in their life.

  1. The Horror and Sci-fi genres: General Theoretical Approaches.

    Terminator films, appears to be one valuing blatant materialism, in which the nuclear Family unit is slowly dying and human relationships themselves, both family and otherwise, are breaking down in favor of a new value system, one of identification with possessions and technology.

  2. Modernity - a philosophical disposition

    According to Marx, commodity fetishism is instead of seeing the relationship between people in society, there is a transformation where relationships become based on exploitation. People begin work hard to purchase the fruits of their labor not realizing that they are giving value to the very source of their bondage.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work