Lecture 1: Introduction and the Classical Theories
What is science
In order to understand what is science we always have to grab the methodological bits
because mostly, coming from natural science as the true science, historically speaking, is has
been almost always considered something scientific when it could have been a kind of
structurally observed, structurally described, structurally be analyzed through different types
of methodologies in term of promising the kind of universal predictability, a universal
understanding, a universal generalizable information about particular phenomena in society.
However, criminology is a little bit distinct field in those terms, although it start also its
methodological roots and recognition, scientifically speaking, as a discipline in those kind of
methodological fundamentals, it has a much more qualitative stake on exploring social
phenomena of deviance.
So with the increase of knowledge, methodologically speaking, not just philosophically, with
this systematic study of particular behavior, this science seems to try to look for trends,
among other things, through its classification and classification based statistics, observations,
experiments which are all fundamentally based in the methodological objectives of social
science. So the scientific approach of law and the scientific approach of social science came
far later into this kind of methodological fundament. And in terms of the disciplinary
recognition of criminology as an independent discipline.
What is criminology?
When we talk about criminology, we consider it as a systematic study of the nature, extent,
causes and control of lawbreaking and deviant behavior. We make a big distinction in terms
of the criminological definition of crime and deviance and the focus of our study from the
conceptual understanding of legal studies. We are much broader in terms of understanding
social and harmful behavior than just taking the framework of penal law. We are also
crossing these boundaries and looking at the social interaction and how in terms of social
interactions, the construction of harm and deviance have been interpreted in a very contextual
framework.
What do criminologists study?
In general Sutherland describes criminology as science that deals with the establishment of
rules and laws. So how do we create laws, why do we forbid/allow, criminalize or
decriminalize particular behavior that examines who commits such offences and crimes? So
who is engaged into these criminal organization criminological patterns? Criminalization or
decriminalization processes as an object or as a victim of these kinds of social interactions?
And in what way, as well as the reactions to them of the government and the population. So
we also consider how we punish particular and how we do not respond or do not punish
particular deviant behavior. And how we, socially speaking, react in terms of the population,
think of many groups, hacktivist groups, who are taking an individual or group action against
social deviants they consider unacceptable and how actually we formulate theories about
these kinds or phenomena.
,Is it a discipline?
Criminology revises its methods and knowledge from many disciplines, so therefore we
consider it as an interdisciplinary discipline. So fundamentally we rely a lot on qualitative
studies, qualitative primary data collection methods.
Empirical research
Empirical research covers social scientific methods where criminologists acquire information
about a crime and deviance based on participatory observations. So these testable hypotheses
we can define in advance that are supported or refuted through empirical research is one of
the core objectives of criminology. And this research forms are the basis for understanding,
explanation, prediction, prevention and criminal justice policy and the law enforcement
system as well.
Kwalitative:
These methods are intended to understand the meaning of criminal activities or actors
- Interviews
- Participatory observation
Kwantitative:
These methods include figures, counts and effect of measures
- Secondary data analysis
- Survey research
(When) is criminology scientific?
We consider criminology scientific when we focus on a particular crime or dagame
borrowing theoretical frameworks from other disciplines. And when we can understand how
policymakers can be influenced by media and politics so intellectually, thematically
speaking, you see this kind of generated information through different and main kinds of
media debates. The dominant the score media analyzes political economic discussions and
patterns that generate particular law enforcement outcomes and criminalization or
decriminalization processes, and the analysis through this kind of interdisciplinary methods
and theories focussing on different types of stakeholders and therefore the core of our
relationships in terms of differentiation and definition of crimes and deviant behaviors and
the social acceptance of a border crossing and marginalized deviant behavior such as graffiti,
such as real crimes, as we say, and we can also question, of course, to what extent is this a
kind of independent scientific finding? But in general, we consider criminology as the science
of deviance and the interdisciplinary, inter methodological or kind of transnational
methodological construction of crime.
Political and social changes
We don’t see crime as something static. We don’t see deviance as something universal. We
see it as something generally, contextually and in time and age terms, embedded and socially
politically sensitive construction. So when we look at the late modern processes of
,globalization, the communication revolution, we see that there are many political and social
shifts that legitimize this new type of interdisciplinary approach on harm, created or
generated by new types of deviant behavior. And therefore, you also have to look at the
contextualities of these kinds of deviant behaviors and how these contextualities correlate
from macro structural patterns, from pandemics to privatization of individualism towards all
kinds of shifting perceptions of security and safety and how this kind of internalization or
internationalization of terrorism and terrorist fears create and contribute a new type of
approach towards crime and a new type of approach from social political NGO’s towards
deviance and the acceptance of deviance and the response of deviance. So therefore we need
to understand from a macro level structure to the micro-level, what is actually going on in the
field and what is actually generating different types of responses in different contexts and
how these are correlated with the contemporary understanding of responses to crime and
deviance.
Subconclusion
So what we actually would like to emphasize that although criminology sounds like a really
vague discipline and you can question its legitimacy as an independent study, it’s important
to see how it’s moving towards a more inclusive and expensive type of criminology than a
hardcore study of crime that views crime more also as harm, regardless of the regulatory
system. Comparative and global criminology is moving toward recognizing the
interconnectedness of people in different countries and cultures.
Classical period 17th century
People were born into a particular position in society, in terms of power, in terms of access.
People were born as ‘social types’ with associated rights and privileges such as status, wealth
and power. There is a fundamental change happening when, of course, with all the colonial
economic powers, with all the changes in the aristocracies and the new eagerness of engaging
with material cultures, the power positions are shifting and a new kind of wealthy middle
class is getting created in the late feudal European context. Of course, you can all link these
kind of processen to the failure of guest or class structure to the Enlightenment period, to the
French Revolution and to all the values that are born with this transition of the 17th century,
when people actually try to get rid of the born entitlement of particular aristocratic groups, of
making the law, of having the privileges and well lower classes, working classes start to even
in terms of social Caesar’s (?) getting into a more dependent position and therefore this new
middle class was actually funded by European aristocracies there in the merchant generation,
the merchant class of the 17th century colonial late colonial class has tried to kind of justify
their legitimacy and their security in this new quiet depolarised shift in the North European
welfare context. So while we oftentimes think of the Enlightenment context and historically
always over romanticize this concept of Freedom.
In these absolute monarchies we can see or I would even dare to say a new really vulnerable
group is growing is society who would like to cover their own security by justifying a new
type of philosophy which is coming from the English French context. So you will see these
new non elites, but also more powerful and more recognized than the Peasants Social Central
Merchant Group trying to engage with the newer philosophies and therefore try to support a
, new kind of administrative system which is resolving what we call currently the classical
period in law and criminology. So you see that there is this arbitrary, barbaric and very strict
response to all kinds of crimes of these late monarchies in the federalist structure. Corporal
punishment and dealth penalty were widely used. The torture to force confession was a daily
practice, and we all know how in just these kind of legal or penal procedures and have been
or recognized or legitimized, it’s not the core aim to remove this kind of methology from the
law enforcement structure, but to legitimize a new type of administration. So the first step is,
in the classical period, is that it’s not necessarily an over romanticised idea of having the
freedom, giving the equality to everyone but more to generate the new type of administrative
legal structure which is more predictable, more reliable, and less church dependent, which
can ensure the security of the new classes in the late 60s and early 70s century.
Therefore, in order to understand how this legitimacy process is taking place for these new
administrative egalitarian thinking, which is later on resolving the most popular law
enforcement theory of the rational choice theory, you have to see how the new terminologies
are contextually getting different classifications than the previous era. So while we were
previously talking about the aristocracy and the poor, now we are talking about
differentiation between the poor in order to understand who us the deserving and undeserving
group in society and how to kind of invent a new type of legislative system to treat the people
on a more fair, more equal level considering breaking law, considering committing crimes
and creating harms. So when we talk about the poor we start to recognize that there are poor
people who do deserve a penalty and those who do not. So therefore, new categories are
increasing in terms of the decent and the indecent. Decent considered those who are already
suffering some kind of disabilities, some kinds of wounded soldiers or disease people who
are blind, who are orphans or poor children, or who are elderly poor, people who are less able
to participate the normative ethics of the everyday life societies compare to the indecent poor,
who are considered as vagabonds, homeless, beggars, riotous women who are morally less
justified in terms of committing crimes.
Decent poor:
- People who suffer from diseases
- wounded soldiers
- disables
- blind
- orphans and poor children
- elderly poor
Indecent poor:
- Vagabonds
- homeless
- beggars
- riotous women
