Criminology
Riley is extremely curious about the characteristics that set individuals apart from one another. She has made observations, such as the fact that some people are exceptionally tall while others are exceptionally short. While others are more reserved than extroverts, some people are really outgoing. In addition, she has seen how some people wind up breaking the law while others do the right thing all the time. Riley is curious about what differentiates one person from another and, more specifically, she has recently been pondering the question of why certain individuals engage in criminal behaviour while others do not.
Criminology is the academic study of criminal behaviour and legal retribution. It attempts to provide responses to questions such as "What causes people to commit crimes?" There is no straightforward response to that inquiry, just as there is no simple method to determine the reasons behind why one person is outgoing while another is reserved. But there is a school of thought within the field of criminology that places an emphasis on the biological differences that exist among individuals and how those differences might influence their propensity to commit crimes. Let's take a more in-depth look at that hypothesis.
Biological Theory of Criminology
Riley has observed that some individuals are not involved with the criminal justice system at all, whereas others are. She is curious about the things that set each of them apart from the other. Is it possible that some people, regardless of their height or other physical characteristics, are just destined to engage in criminal activity?
During the 19th century in Italy, Cesare Lombroso pondered the very same question. He was a pioneer in the field of criminology and is credited with helping to develop the biological theory of crime, which postulates that people who commit crimes are biologically distinct from their contemporaries. Lombroso's theory is being investigated in both genetics and neuroscience today, which are two of the most important scientific fields.
The mapping of human DNA has provided researchers with both new information and new questions. While many researchers are searching for the specific gene that can cause certain diseases, some others are looking for the gene that could cause criminal behaviour.
Research on twins has revealed that there is likely some form of genetic influence at play. For instance, a number of studies have demonstrated that non-identical twin siblings who were brought up apart have a lower risk of engaging in criminal behaviour than identical twin siblings who were brought up apart. The fact that identical twins share all of the same DNA while other siblings only share part of their DNA suggests that there may be a "law-breaking gene" somewhere in the human body, but researchers have not been successful in locating it as of yet.
The study of the brain, also known as neuroscience, is the subject that the biological theory of criminology is looking into as a second potential application area. Scientists are getting better and better at mapping the human brain and discovering differences in the brains of different people as brain imaging techniques become more detailed and less invasive. To this point, research has demonstrated that there are some structural and chemical differences between the brains of people who break the law and the brains of people who obey the law when compared to the brains of people who follow the law.
For instance, one study found that people who commit crimes have less activity in the part of the brain that is responsible for arousal and fear. The hypothesis is that because they have less fear of the possible outcomes of their actions, they engage in irresponsible behaviour.
Limitation
Wow! Riley is of the opinion that the biological theory of criminology appears to have some degree of credibility. After all, who is she to argue with scientists who are discovering differences in the brains and genetic makeup of people?
Well, not so fast, Riley. The biological theory of criminology, despite being supported by some compelling scientific evidence, is also marred by a number of deficiencies. For one thing, there were previously other biological theories that have since been proven to be incorrect. In the late 19th century, for instance, it was common for people to believe in phrenology, which was a pseudoscience that asserted the personalities of individuals could be mapped according to the shape of their heads. Phrenologists believed that particular bumps and ridges on the skull could reveal whether or not a person was predisposed to engage in criminal activity due to their biological make-up. Since that time, it has been shown to be false, but the fact that it was ever believed makes Riley wonder if the science of today could also one day be shown to be false.
Another flaw in the biological theory of criminology is that it does not offer any evidence to support its claim that criminal behaviour is caused by biological factors. That is, it cannot tell us if the biological differences cause the criminal activity, if the criminal activity causes the biological differences, or if something else causes both of these things. Alternatively stated, it cannot tell us if the criminal activity causes the biological differences.
Consider it in this way: we can say that people who may break the law have a specific biological abnormality, such as less activity in the part of the brain that causes fear, but this is not the case for every person, and not everyone who exhibits that symptom is likely to break the law. Therefore, we do not know what is causing it, nor do we understand why some of the time it matters while other times it does not.
The biological theory of criminology has a number of flaws, but one of the most significant is that it excuses people from taking responsibility for their actions. If someone commits a crime and then tries to justify it by saying things like "But it's just because my brain is wired differently" or "It's because I have a law-breaking gene," then they are not taking responsibility for their actions. Because of this, there is a debate going on within the system of criminal justice because some defendants argue that they should not be found guilty because the crime they committed was caused by their biology. This discussion is likely to continue even as scientists uncover additional data regarding the influence of biology on criminal behaviour.
Conclusion
Criminology is the academic study of criminal behaviour and legal retribution. According to the biological theory of criminology, people who break the law and people who don't are fundamentally different from each other on a biological level. It is currently focused on two major areas: genetics, as researchers look for the specific gene that might predispose someone to crime, and neuroscience, as researchers look for brain differences between criminals and people who have never committed a crime. Despite the fact that there is evidence suggesting that there are some biological differences, the biological theory of criminology has a number of flaws. One of these flaws is the fact that other biological theories, such as phrenology, have been proven to be incorrect. The biological theory exonerates people from responsibility while the biological research does not provide any evidence that could be considered causal.
Reading Outcomes
As soon as you have finished going through this reading you should be able to:
- Explain the biological basis of the criminal justice system.
- Gain an understanding of the two primary areas of research in the field of biology that make use of this theory.
- Provide a synopsis of some of the evidence that lends credence to this theory.
- Determine the problems that exist with the theory.