Compare and Contrast the Classical and Positivist School

Compargon and contrast the ideas of Classical criminologist (e. g. Beccaria and Bentham) with those of the primordial rationalist (e. g. Lombroso, Ferri Garofolo). IntroductionDuring the mid to late seventeenth century explanations of discourtesy and punishment were embraced by umteen philosophers Thomas Hobbs (1588-1679), John Locke (1632-1704), and Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712-1778) and such theorizer as Beccaria (1738), an Italian who was passing recognised by his great victory through his judge Dei delitti e delle pene (On Crimes and Punishment) publicised in translations of 22 languages, effectively departure huge impressions on the legal thoughts on members of the European and US night club (Hopkins hit 2009), developing the theory of Classical criminology and Lombroso (1835) an Italian psychiatrist and a physician who brought frontward the theory of the Positivists criminology. This essay go away present the two secernate theories within criminology, these are the Classical and the Positivist theory of criminology, presenting a brief admittance to each instill of thought with the theories and their theorist, comparisons will drawn presenting contrasts to each theorys tenet, with their methodological, scientific and philosophical approaches to crime, with the same choose to reduce and control crime. Hale,C. ,et al (2005 p. 62).The school of thought Classical criminology developed during the clock of enlightenment through the ideas of a theorist named Cesare Beccaria (1738-94), who studied crimes, twist behaviour and punishments, with beliefs that those who ordinate crime hold responsibility for themselves and are uninfluenced by external f deed of conveyanceors grammatical construction the foundations for other successful proponents and advocates such as Cesare Lombroso (1836-1909), an Italian psychiatrist aspirant who presented suppositional explanations to crime and criminality though scientific methodology adapting the contras ting theory of the prescribed Contrastingly, the positively charged school believed that the decisions people construct when committing a crime are in the main matched by means out of their control. These means that affect an mortals condition to make rational decisions cannister be based on physical, that is for role model their race, social, such as weak social bonds at school or the amily, biological, that is having ancestral abnormalities and psychological factors such as mental health disorders (Pond p. 23).. Through Beccarias observational studies witnessed many discrepancies within the government and public affairs, and ostracized the inhumaneness and inequality shown to individuals within monastic order, where the punishment of crimes were judged on the social status of an individual (Hopkins slay 2001). Beccaria believed the Criminal as Calculator foreground the importance that every criminal is an individual and is aware of what is good from bad, what is rig ht from wrong, spirit definitions of criminal behaviour in companionship consequently each individual is adequate n the calculations that he or she makes, presenting the archetype of Free will Choice and the Hendonistic Calculas principle where the distinct actions of an individual are careful through a pleasure and torture scale, with this Beccaria made further contributions towards Benthams theory of Ulitiarianism (which is based on the assumption that the supreme aim of all human activeness is happiness), disputing that creating new legislations indicating that a clear legal philosophy should baffle out which is easily decrypt by its societal members to understand and set by legislators, Beccaria views that the prevention of crime is separate than the punishment, however, punishment must be dealt with swiftly not limiting or exceptional what is necessary for the prevention and deterrence of crime, therefore resulting in the greater happiness of the bulk (McLaughlin and Muncie, 2006), however there should be unprejudiced judges fixing strict punishments in proportion to the unplayfulness of the crime, for example, petty crimes and thievery should be dealt with heady fines and punishableties and more serious crimes administered with corporal punishment and labour (Hopkins Burke, 2009).With this Beccaria developed further studies within the Social strike theory, the voluntary agreement of the members of an organised society and its government securing mutual protection and welfare regulating the relation among its members, explaining that the previous methods of torture through capital punishment was unnecessary, he deemed these barbaric and inhumane, through this Beccaria began developing ideas that the crime itself should be dealt with efficiently not the criminal, gum olibanum the individual should be penalised for the crime committed. from each one and every individual member of society whether an abiding member or criminal has equal rig hts and this always remains.Beccarias real school of thought brought about scholars Bentham (1748) an slope juror and philosopher who defensively argued that punishment should be a deterrent for criminals, that penalties be fixed to inflict the sum of pain in surfeit of the pleasure that had derived from the criminal act (Hale, Hayward Wahidin and Wincup, 2005) and Howard (1726) who was influential upon Prison reform (1779), but crime and criminal behaviour act to present itself still necessitated explanations as to wherefore crime was still on the hoist Lombroso provided foundations for many other proponents such Ferri (1856), a biologist who wrote a new penal code for Mussolini which was instantly revoked due to his positivist approach and Garofolo (1852). Conclusion References Hopkins Burke, R. (2009) An Introduction to criminological Theory, (3rd ed. ) Cullompton, Devon Willan Publishing Hale, C,. Hayward, K,. Wahidin, A and Wincup, E. (2005) Criminology, Great Britain Oxf ord University stub out