• 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. 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. 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

  1. Inventing Reality: Dostoevsky's Crime and Punishment

    Since the outer reality does not offer him any hope, he is trying to make himself feel better by thinking that he is actually suffering by drinking alcohol. When talking to Raskolnikov, Marmeladov acknowledges that in drinking "it is not joy that [he] seeks, but sorrow only...[he] drinks, for he wishes doubly to suffer" (16).

  2. Modernity - a philosophical disposition

    Freud argues that we have an obsession in modern society with order and structure. Order and structure can lead to (1) obsessive and neurotic compulsion and (2) repression. Similarly Freud argues, that the repression of internal desires will lead to displaced aggression.

  1. What are "one-world theory"and "two-world theory"?

    The "one-world theory", in comparison, does not incorporate divinity - immortal soul, god, human nature and any of the ilks. The theory did not develop any utopian thought, or did not find the need to, because of the simple fact that relationship between one another is relatively more crucial.

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

    individual by his position in the world (his calling), NOT by trying to surpass worldly morality by monastic asceticism (80). Remember important part of Reformation: By faith, not works, shall ye be saved. You are justified by faith, etc. So all those indulgences earned by crawling on your knees up stairways, etc.

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

    In Moll Flanders, Moll steals a lady's gold watch, Moll is almost caught but she is not suspected of taking the watch. These soap opera like episodes create intimacy between the protagonist and the reader and they have a continuing appeal to a contemporary reader, as they cause excitement, tension

  2. A-Level Sociology Theory + Methods Revision.

    Alt/pop going against Heg = Heg - War! Alt/pop - No war. The other angle of Marxism that has developed in modern society is known as Structural Marxism. --> This sees class conflict as inevitable + largely perpetuated by the superstructure. I.e. ideology is used to justify certain beliefs, which prevent changes to the system.

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