There are people with the ability to murder, steal, beat, and rape without feeling any sort of guilt. Criminals have been around forever, but what makes them do what they do? Are they born that way? Or does their environment play a large role in who they become? Throughout time, there have been debates back and forth over criminal pathology and behavior. Studies have been done by various scientists, just trying to determine the mindset of people who are considered evil and dangerous. The upbringing and possible signs of previous serial killers could be studied to better understand the causes of acts of deviance. However, every person is different, and every environment someone is raised in varies, making it almost impossible to detect and predict future criminals. There is still much controversy over whether criminals are created by nature or nurture.
“Nature theories assert that the etiology of criminal behavior is biologically based in genetic inheritance and the structure and functions of people’s brains” (Coyne and Wright). Several criminologists believe that criminals are regressing back to Darwinian behaviors of a predatory nature. This theory states that everyone is born with the ability to hurt others, and it is natural for humans to act like our cavemen ancestors and use physical violence to get what we want (Pagel). Several scientists have studied the idea of nature in criminal pathology, but the most influential was the Italian criminologist, Cesare Lombroso. He was known as “The Father of Modern Criminology,” and based most of his ideas on the positivist philosophy. Positivism is the belief that there is only truth in scientific knowledge and that everything should have mathematical and logical proof. He classified criminals into such categories as; born criminals, criminaloids, and insane criminals. Criminaloids would be classified as “occasional criminals” and would only commit crimes of passion. Insane criminals were said by Lombroso to be modern savages with no empathy for others. He also did in-depth research on female offenders. His theories ranged from an imbalance of human fluids and physical characteristics to brain size and shape. And his theory of atavism was his most popular theory, which was strongly influenced by his medical background. Atavism is the idea that criminals are born deviant (Arjunan). The nature theory is the belief that a criminal is born with a biological predisposition to commit crimes or acts of violence and has only been half of the story to explain criminalistic behaviors.
Albeit, most repeat criminal offenders are different, there are several examples of criminals with completely normal childhoods who still grew up to be violent. Ted Bundy, one of the most infamous serial killers and necrophiliacs of all time, had a fairly normal life leading up to him committing numerous murders. He was raised in Philadelphia, where he lived with his mother and grandparents. Ever since he was a young boy he had a fascination with macabre and knives. He was intelligent and charming and did very well in school. Although he grew up in an extremely religious household, when he became a teenager, he enjoyed peering into other people’s windows and stealing. While he studied at the University of Washington he was dumped by a girl he had been dating for quite some time. Often his later victims resembled his college girlfriend; they were attractive students with long, dark hair. Despite the efforts of parents to raise their children well, and no matter how normal and safe their environment is, if someone is born a psychopath, there is little that can stop them from following their demonic urges.
It’s well-known that if someone grows up in a bad environment with lots of violence and abuse, then he will have a greater risk of getting involved in a life of crime. So how big of an influence is environment on criminal behavior? With the advent of sociology, many of the theories explaining biological causes as the reason for criminal behavior were challenged and fell out of favor. Many believe that the use of nature and biology to explain the drive to commit crimes is an excuse to get out of the repercussions of an individuals’ actions. The most widely accepted theory states that crime is the result of differential socialization and is not caused by individual, heritable factors (Coyne and Wright). Common factors identified as contributors to crime in individuals are poverty, poor education, lack of parental involvement, large families, violence, and early abuse. These factors do not guarantee the individual will commit crimes, but the majority of prison populations are poorer people from worse-off neighborhoods (“Justification”). Steve Swinford, a professor of sociology at MSU, states that people are born with mostly “blank slates” and have many genetic inclinations, but certain environmental factors can trigger the inclinations to further develop into dominant forces. Swinford also states that crime is believed to be a cultural creation and actions depend on social interactions with others and the things that the individual experiences throughout his life. He states that every human has the capacity to commit acts of deviance, but many do not because of the fear of social repercussions. Such repercussions include; jail, disappointment of friends and family, and being looked down upon by society. Charles Manson was a cult leader who drove his followers to murder several people. Manson grew up surrounded by violence and early abuse which is believed to be the cause of his dangerous nature (“Nature...Are”). If all humans are born with the capacity to do harm and the ability to be violent then the way an individual is nurtured can be the determining factor of whether he has the ability to feel compassion and sympathy for others.
So can we predict who will be a criminal? If we can, is it ethically moral to test children? It has been argued that there are obvious signs in children that can provide insight into whether they will become repeat criminals or not, but it’s very easy to claim hindsight bias after the fact. Adrian Raine, a psychologist at U of Penn, has done several studies on criminal behaviors and what causes acts of deviance. She states that there is a connection between serotonin levels and aggression. Since most parents won’t consent to their children being a subject of a study involving taking antipsychotics, antidepressants or anticonvulsants, the researchers tested the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on aggression levels. These fatty acids are said to boost brain power and combat anti-social behavior (Landau). The way to look for possible dangerous characteristics and abnormal behavior in children is to learn by example. For instance, world renown cannibal and serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer had quite a normal childhood until a hernia surgery at the age of six left him a quiet loner who had a tough time fitting in with his peers. He would kill animals and save the bones for his collection, and he showed early signs of psychopathy along with an obsession with death (Montaldo). Looking at signs such as these can tell parents if their child’s habits are healthy or not. And if a child is killing animals and showing a reclusive personality, what should be done? Psychologists, sociologists, and criminologists are still in a heated debate over whether kids with weird passions or personalities should be treated. It could be a drastic overreaction to a child’s natural curiosity about death and crush their creativity, or it could be stopping a potential future killer. There are no current proven methods of testing children for psychopathy or criminal tendencies, so until there is, the debate will continue.
The cause of crime may never be determined. For now, however, crime is believed to be a 50/50 result of nature and nurture. Sheldon and Eleanor Gueck, famous criminologists state that, “the cause of crime is multifaceted and includes biological factors.” The theory of the three types of criminals follows the 50/50 belief. Life-course persistent offenders commit crime all their lives and genes are the most dominant influence over environment. If the drive is there in the mind, and is strong enough, nothing will get in the way. Adolescent-limited offenders are the criminals who commit crimes as kids and teenagers who eventually grow out of such behaviors. These criminals are mostly influenced by their environment. Finally, abstainers are the people who abide by the law their whole lives and never get into trouble. In this instance genes and environment influence the person equally as strong (Searles). Professor of Sociology with a criminology focus at MSU, Cody Warner, states that he believes a criminals’ upbringing and psychological chemistry play an equal role in determining who the person will become. The issue of nature vs. nurture has been a popular debate for centuries and may never be known for sure, but the mind of the criminal will always be a fascinating place.
“Nature theories assert that the etiology of criminal behavior is biologically based in genetic inheritance and the structure and functions of people’s brains” (Coyne and Wright). Several criminologists believe that criminals are regressing back to Darwinian behaviors of a predatory nature. This theory states that everyone is born with the ability to hurt others, and it is natural for humans to act like our cavemen ancestors and use physical violence to get what we want (Pagel). Several scientists have studied the idea of nature in criminal pathology, but the most influential was the Italian criminologist, Cesare Lombroso. He was known as “The Father of Modern Criminology,” and based most of his ideas on the positivist philosophy. Positivism is the belief that there is only truth in scientific knowledge and that everything should have mathematical and logical proof. He classified criminals into such categories as; born criminals, criminaloids, and insane criminals. Criminaloids would be classified as “occasional criminals” and would only commit crimes of passion. Insane criminals were said by Lombroso to be modern savages with no empathy for others. He also did in-depth research on female offenders. His theories ranged from an imbalance of human fluids and physical characteristics to brain size and shape. And his theory of atavism was his most popular theory, which was strongly influenced by his medical background. Atavism is the idea that criminals are born deviant (Arjunan). The nature theory is the belief that a criminal is born with a biological predisposition to commit crimes or acts of violence and has only been half of the story to explain criminalistic behaviors.
Albeit, most repeat criminal offenders are different, there are several examples of criminals with completely normal childhoods who still grew up to be violent. Ted Bundy, one of the most infamous serial killers and necrophiliacs of all time, had a fairly normal life leading up to him committing numerous murders. He was raised in Philadelphia, where he lived with his mother and grandparents. Ever since he was a young boy he had a fascination with macabre and knives. He was intelligent and charming and did very well in school. Although he grew up in an extremely religious household, when he became a teenager, he enjoyed peering into other people’s windows and stealing. While he studied at the University of Washington he was dumped by a girl he had been dating for quite some time. Often his later victims resembled his college girlfriend; they were attractive students with long, dark hair. Despite the efforts of parents to raise their children well, and no matter how normal and safe their environment is, if someone is born a psychopath, there is little that can stop them from following their demonic urges.
It’s well-known that if someone grows up in a bad environment with lots of violence and abuse, then he will have a greater risk of getting involved in a life of crime. So how big of an influence is environment on criminal behavior? With the advent of sociology, many of the theories explaining biological causes as the reason for criminal behavior were challenged and fell out of favor. Many believe that the use of nature and biology to explain the drive to commit crimes is an excuse to get out of the repercussions of an individuals’ actions. The most widely accepted theory states that crime is the result of differential socialization and is not caused by individual, heritable factors (Coyne and Wright). Common factors identified as contributors to crime in individuals are poverty, poor education, lack of parental involvement, large families, violence, and early abuse. These factors do not guarantee the individual will commit crimes, but the majority of prison populations are poorer people from worse-off neighborhoods (“Justification”). Steve Swinford, a professor of sociology at MSU, states that people are born with mostly “blank slates” and have many genetic inclinations, but certain environmental factors can trigger the inclinations to further develop into dominant forces. Swinford also states that crime is believed to be a cultural creation and actions depend on social interactions with others and the things that the individual experiences throughout his life. He states that every human has the capacity to commit acts of deviance, but many do not because of the fear of social repercussions. Such repercussions include; jail, disappointment of friends and family, and being looked down upon by society. Charles Manson was a cult leader who drove his followers to murder several people. Manson grew up surrounded by violence and early abuse which is believed to be the cause of his dangerous nature (“Nature...Are”). If all humans are born with the capacity to do harm and the ability to be violent then the way an individual is nurtured can be the determining factor of whether he has the ability to feel compassion and sympathy for others.
So can we predict who will be a criminal? If we can, is it ethically moral to test children? It has been argued that there are obvious signs in children that can provide insight into whether they will become repeat criminals or not, but it’s very easy to claim hindsight bias after the fact. Adrian Raine, a psychologist at U of Penn, has done several studies on criminal behaviors and what causes acts of deviance. She states that there is a connection between serotonin levels and aggression. Since most parents won’t consent to their children being a subject of a study involving taking antipsychotics, antidepressants or anticonvulsants, the researchers tested the effects of omega-3 fatty acids on aggression levels. These fatty acids are said to boost brain power and combat anti-social behavior (Landau). The way to look for possible dangerous characteristics and abnormal behavior in children is to learn by example. For instance, world renown cannibal and serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer had quite a normal childhood until a hernia surgery at the age of six left him a quiet loner who had a tough time fitting in with his peers. He would kill animals and save the bones for his collection, and he showed early signs of psychopathy along with an obsession with death (Montaldo). Looking at signs such as these can tell parents if their child’s habits are healthy or not. And if a child is killing animals and showing a reclusive personality, what should be done? Psychologists, sociologists, and criminologists are still in a heated debate over whether kids with weird passions or personalities should be treated. It could be a drastic overreaction to a child’s natural curiosity about death and crush their creativity, or it could be stopping a potential future killer. There are no current proven methods of testing children for psychopathy or criminal tendencies, so until there is, the debate will continue.
The cause of crime may never be determined. For now, however, crime is believed to be a 50/50 result of nature and nurture. Sheldon and Eleanor Gueck, famous criminologists state that, “the cause of crime is multifaceted and includes biological factors.” The theory of the three types of criminals follows the 50/50 belief. Life-course persistent offenders commit crime all their lives and genes are the most dominant influence over environment. If the drive is there in the mind, and is strong enough, nothing will get in the way. Adolescent-limited offenders are the criminals who commit crimes as kids and teenagers who eventually grow out of such behaviors. These criminals are mostly influenced by their environment. Finally, abstainers are the people who abide by the law their whole lives and never get into trouble. In this instance genes and environment influence the person equally as strong (Searles). Professor of Sociology with a criminology focus at MSU, Cody Warner, states that he believes a criminals’ upbringing and psychological chemistry play an equal role in determining who the person will become. The issue of nature vs. nurture has been a popular debate for centuries and may never be known for sure, but the mind of the criminal will always be a fascinating place.