What are two early approaches to explaining crime? How are they relevant today?

Question

What will be an ideal response?

Answer 1

Since the earliest days of human civilization, antisocial and criminal acts have been associated with demonic possession or other evil supernatural forces. Indeed, the horrific nature of some crimes makes it easy to assume that those who commit these crimes are not only inhumane but also inhuman. This view was gradually replaced by ideas from the Enlightenment. Classical school scholars agreed that to control behavior, society needs a clearly defined set of laws and punishments, a fair legal process, and prisons for those who violate the laws. They claimed that there were three important aspects of punishment: severity, certainty, and celerity (swiftness). For punishment to deter potential criminals, these three elements had to be correctly calibrated to specific criminal acts.

These older views remain relevant today. For example, serial killers, mass murderers, sex offenders, and terrorists are often characterized as “monsters,” and some imply their behavior is thought to be unexplainable except in terms of pure evil. The classical school of thought remains a feature of the contemporary criminal justice system, although the increasingly punitive nature of the justice system defies many of the principles first articulated. Interestingly, many of the deterrence principles initially offered by Beccaria and Bentham have been supported by more modern research on rewards and punishments in psychological learning theory.