Early Perspectives Flashcards
Enlightnement Era
Societal beliefs relating crime concerned religion, sin, the devil
- Superstition
Demonology
Everything that happened was a result of forces of good and evil
2 explinations for the role evil spirits play
Temptation: humans have free will and make their own decisions (Adam and Eve).
- Those who are sinful are weak and morally inferior
Possession: wrongdoers are possessed by evil spirits and cannot choose between good and evil.
- Severe and fatal methods to expel evil spirits
THEORY
A set of concepts and their nominal definitions or assertions about the relationships between these concepts, assumptions, and knowledge claims.
- Can be proven or disproven
- Set of verifiable principles about a thing or behavior
- A lens, way to look at a situation or phenomenon
Scientific Revolution
Caused a change in thinking during the Enlightenment
- Systematic doubt
- Verification of ideas
- Scientific method
- “we ought to inquire”
Enlightenment Philosophers’ view of SOCIETY
Society is composed of free and rational human beings.
Humans are HEDONISTIC
(Pleasure seeking and pain avoiding)
- self-centred
The social contract theory
Basic assumption that human beings ought to be (relatively) free to make decisions
What punishments help prevent crime (3)
- swift
- certain
- slightly greater than pleasure gained from action
Specific Deterrence
Tailored to individual so they do not repeat offense
Restrictive Deterrence
Trying to deter crime from certain areas
Celerity of punishment
Speed of punishment
Exemplarity
to make an example of
Classical Theory of Crime
Citizens giving up some of their freedowm to the state, in return, being granted protection and security
Neoclassical Theory/Criminology
Sought out more flexibility in the justice system.
- individualizing sentences
- offender characteristics
- extenuating circumstances
Penalties must be swift and certian
Deterrence
Crime prevention (the fear of punishement)
Why was the influance of classical school not all positive?
Beccaria’s insistance that the punishement should “fit the crime, not the person” backfired and presented gross injustices. Monentairy fines were not adjusted to an individual’s income and extenuating factors were not taken into account.