Core Characteristics of the Positivist Paradigm

Prep workshop Exam structure - Part A (mini mid term of 3rd of course) - 10 MC - 5 analytical - 1 short answer - 5 bonus question - Part B cumulative - One 3 part question 2 pages Strategies for success MC question Read all options carefully Use process of elim Manage time Look for key words Written questions general key Dont rewrite entire question Answer all component Write consily and anactiallly Critique/analtical question River Parable Characteristics of all theories toegether (cumalative) POSITIVISM (PARADIGM) BASIC CHARACTERISTICS: more on the person than the act 1. INDIVIDUAL (ACTOR)’s BEHAVIOUR Micro level Psychological makeup 2. DETERMINISM Influenced by circumstances to where free will is not very relevant Absolute Individual were seen as determined by physical Hard determinism 3. DIFFERENTIATION Comparison between differences between people Racist, classic sexist lens DIVISIONS IN POSITIVISM a) BIOLOGICAL Behavior, thoughts, and emotions are shaped by biological processes such as genetic inheritance, brain chemistry, and evolutionary influences. such as how brain injuries or genetic disorders affect mental health or criminality. b) PSYCHOLOGICAL mental illnesses and psychological conditions are viewed from a medical perspective, with an emphasis on diagnosis, treatment, and intervention based on scientific evidence c) SOCIOLOGICAL Social behavior, institutions, and structures can be studied scientifically, and that society operates according to observable and predictable laws, similar to the natural world. Applies scientific methods to the study of social behavior and institutions, aiming to uncover patterns or laws in human society through empirical research. POSITIVISM INDIVIDUAL = DETERMINED Classical responsibility on the act itself Positivism on the behaviour so determined by biological ? = DIFFERENCE METHOD = BIOGRAPHIC - RECONSTRUCTION PURPOSE = DISCOVER ‘DIFFERENCES’ SEARCH FOR CAUSES OF HUMAN BEHAVIOUR Slide 5 POSITIVISM AS A METHOD A. NATURAL SCIENCE METHOD This method involves observation, hypothesis testing, experimentation, and the use of empirical data. In social sciences, it emphasizes collecting data that can be observed, measured, and quantified, aiming to identify patterns or "laws" similar to those in the natural world. B. LINK THEORY TO ACTION This idea stresses the importance of not just developing theoretical models but also connecting them to practical, actionable outcomes. It also implies that scientific knowledge should not be just abstract but should lead to policies, interventions, or changes in practice. C. NON-PARTISAN Non-partisanship is about maintaining objectivity in the research process, avoiding the influence of personal, political, or societal biases. This ensures that findings are based on empirical evidence rather than subjective beliefs or preferences. D. CUMULATION In positivism, knowledge is seen as cumulative — meaning that new discoveries build upon previous ones. This allows for the continuous refinement and improvement of theories. The process is akin to adding pieces to a puzzle, where each piece contributes to a clearer overall picture. CLASSIFICATION → JUDGMENT Slide 6 LOMBROSO CONSTITUTIONAL MODEL = biology of individual CRIMINAL MEN = atavistic throwbacks (↓ evolved) STIGMATA = ANOMALIES CRIMINALS vs NON-CRIMINALS atavism = "primitive" not as evolvded THE BORN CRIMINAL: 20% - ears like chimpanze - small long short flat like ape chin, - dark hair murderers , - large, hooked, or irregularly shaped nose, - larger or abnormally shaped feet feet, - thick, heavy lips, sharp, aggressive, or glassy. eyes Slide 7 LOMBROSO RACIST He linked physical traits, such as skull shape and facial features, to specific racial groups and argued that people from these groups were more likely to be criminals - African descent, as well as some Indigenous populations, as having "primitive" features CLASSIST - he working-class or poor as more likely to commit crimes. His theory suggested that criminal behavior was linked to poverty and lower social classes, associating economic hardship with criminality. SEXIST - women were biologically and psychologically less criminal than men but framed their "natural" role as passive and nurturing - - - THE FEMALE OFFENDER Women who committed crimes were often described as "masculine" or exhibiting "atavistic" features, like a strong jawline, a pronounced forehead, or thick hair on the body. Lombroso also believed that criminal women were mentally "deviant" and often labeled them as mentally ill or abnormal. LOMBROSO ALGOMETER The device was intended to measure pain threshold, which Lombroso thought might correlate with criminal tendencies. He believed that criminals had a lower threshold for pain, reflecting their “primitive” nature. Slide 8 20th CENTURY BIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM Scientists & theorists → reflect & reinforce gendered stereotypes GLUECKS (1934) - reproductive stereotypes boys were more prone to criminal behavior due to their biological makeup, including testosterone levels and inherent tendencies toward aggression. girls and women as less criminal and more aligned with traditional roles as caregivers and nurturers. POLLAK (1950s) hormonal and sexual stereotypes hormones, particularly testosterone, played a key role in differentiating male and female criminality. women's hormones were seen as making them more "passive" and less prone to aggression. women’s criminality was often tied to emotional instability or sexual frustration EARLIER BIOLOGICAL POSITIVIST SOLUTIONS 1. “TREATMENT” (COMPLEX POWER) REHABILITATION 2. “EUGENICS” (PROBLEMATIC POWER) ELIMINATION - STERILIZATION ASSESSMENT 1. FOCUS ON INDIVIDUAL / MICRO LEVEL 2. IGNORES SITUATIONS 3. INDIVIDUAL = TOO PASSIVE -Overly Deterministic: Does not account for choice/agency or change 4. SUBJECTIVE SCIENCE 5. DISCRIMINATORY (Labelling) -Problematic assumptions of “difference” linked to “causality” 6. INTRUSIVE 7. ABUSES OF SCIENCE (Power to Prevent) 8. ABUSES BY THE STATE (Power to Prevent) Critiques Not Criminally Responsible (NCR) - legal defense where a person is found not guilty of a crime due to mental illness or incapacity at the time of the offense. - source of public concern and debate, particularly around issues of fairness, mental health, and public safety MAOA / Warrior Gene – Controversial - linked to aggressive behavior in some individuals - This gene codes for an enzyme that helps regulate neurotransmitters such as dopamine and serotonin. - people with certain genes are inevitably predisposed to violent behavior, which can reinforce harmful stereotypes or even be misused in legal contexts. Difference’ imposed in residential schools - Students were stripped of their cultural identity, language, and traditional practices. - Difference based on racial hierarchies that devalued Indigenous cultures, and this legacy of forced cultural assimilation continues to affect Indigenous people today Coerced and non-consensual sterilizations - often from marginalized communities (including Indigenous peoples, disabled individuals, and poor women), were sterilized without their informed consent - LeiLani Muir - Sterilized age of 14 without her informed consent. She was a resident of the Alberta Provincial Training School in a facuity for individuals with intellectual disablities. - told she was undergoing an "operation" to remove the appendix - Eugenics program The program aimed to prevent people deemed "unfit" or "inferior" from reproducing, often targeting individuals with disabilities or those from marginalized communities. - 1999, the Alberta government issued a formal apology to Leilani Muir for the harm she suffered Problematic Pre-natal diagnoses - determine if a baby has any genetic conditions or health issues, such as Down syndrome, spina bifida, or other genetic disorders. - tests lead to pressure for selective abortion based on perceived abnormalities or disabilities. Social Control Theory SOCIAL CONTEXT 1960s = challenge of values and rules = defence of values and rules What makes people conform? - Changes the question asked (vs. deviate) RECKLESS’ CONTAINMENT THEORY INNER CONTAINMENT = components of the “self” - mental, emotional, and cognitive systems within an individual that control or guide responses to external stimuli and help maintain social and personal stability. self-control, self-regulation, moral reasoning, and internalized values. OUTER CONTAINMENT = social environment - external factors, primarily the social environment, that influence an individual’s behavior. This could include family, friends, schools, workplaces, communities, and laws. These factors provide structure, rules, and expectations that guide behavior. Internal forms of containment = more important/influential; - individual's internal mechanisms for managing behavior and emotions are more significant than external factors. This view is rooted in psychological theories such as self-control and self-regulation - people who develop strong internal containment (such as a robust sense of responsibility, emotional regulation, and self-discipline) are more likely to make decisions aligned with social norms and personal values, regardless of external pressures NEUTRALIZATION TECHNIQUE Neutralize behaviours suspend commitment to values temporarily or intentionally disengaging from the moral or ethical principles that typically guide behavior. This suspension can occur when an individual faces a situation where their usual values are in conflict with their desires or impulses. bond to deviant values individual starts to embrace beliefs or behaviors that go against societal norms. This could involve adopting a lifestyle, worldview, or set of beliefs that are in opposition to the expectations held by mainstream society. re-negotiate relation to value shows that the individual's view of values can evolve, either through a return to societal norms or a transformation into new, alternative values. HIRSCHI’S SOCIAL CONTROL THEORY - Conformity = strong internalized norms + desire for approval D - Deviance = broken or weakened bonds to society people’s commitment to conformity individuals who are committed to conformity have more to lose by engaging in deviant behavior. someone who has invested heavily in education, family, and career is more likely to conform to societal rules because the consequences of deviating would risk losing these investments importance of the social bond people's behavior is influenced by the strength of their attachments to society and its institutions. The stronger the bond, the less likely individuals are to engage in deviant behavior. four components of the social bond are: 1. Attachment: The emotional bonds people have to family, friends, and community. Strong attachments create a stake in conformity because individuals don't want to disappoint or hurt those to whom they are emotionally connected. 2. Commitment: The investment individuals make in conventional activities, such as education, work, or community involvement. The more committed a person is, the more they have to lose if they deviate. 3. Involvement: The degree to which individuals are busy with conventional activities, leaving less time or energy for deviant behavior. For example, a person involved in extracurricular activities or work is less likely to engage in delinquent behavior. 4. Belief: The acceptance of societal norms and values as legitimate and worthy of adherence. People who believe in societal rules are more likely to follow them. Weakened bonds → ↑ risk of deviance varying degrees of morality (continuum) people operate on a continuum of moral values, meaning that individuals might hold differing views on what is considered "right" or "wrong," and this influences their behavior. moral reasoning can vary widely between individuals. Some people may internalize strict moral guidelines (e.g., following all laws), while others may be more relativistic, adjusting their actions based on personal values, the situation, or cultural norms. SOLUTIONS common sense approaches social activities participation social policy (‘preventative’ recreation) quality socialization CLASSIFICATION Consensus Micro Theoretical Positivistic Assumes Deviance is Natural ASSESSMENT Optimistic - individualistic micro level responses - do not problematize the influences of social, economic, political or cultural powers on the socialization of individuals do not represent a major shift in explanations or responses to deviance - do not address complexity of conformity - do not address extreme control that corrupts conformity SOCIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM RECONSIDERED Matza Reconsiders Positivism Early 1960s Questions hard determinism in Positivist CRM Other social sciences have moved away from hard determinism (e.g. sociology) Modern CRM ≠ ‘modern’ Matza = contribution of sociology to demonstrate the relation between society and “delinquents” - Review of biological and sociological positivism Learning, subcultures, peers, maturity DETERMINISM versus DRIFT (à la Matza) DETERMINISM HARD ⚫Absolute determinism ⚫No choice (constraint) ⚫ Bio / Psy Positivism ⚫Conditional influence SOFT ⚫Choice & constraint (drift) ⚫Classical + Soc Positivism DRIFT CONTINUUM Freedom(soft) —------------------------------------ Constraint (hard) DELINQUENT DRIFT (Matza Emphasizes SOFT determinism Some people are freer than others People are not wholly free to choose nor completely constrained / compelled / committed Alternative Image = DRIFT Drift = between freedom and control Underlying influences of delinquent drifter Conditions that make the delinquent drift possible (sociology) DRIFT (2 Layers/Examples Freedom vs. Constraint Soft vs. Hard (Determinism) Conformity vs. Deviance CONTRIBUTIONS OF SOCIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM Explanations include community, societal and structural conditions; - Solutions start to recognize social and economic factors - Macro and Micro LIMITATIONS OF SOCIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM Consensus limits macro level changes - Solutions reinforce the status quo - Reactive & individualistic No attention to structural inequalities No challenge to power dynamics Social factors but not societal conditions - Still too much determinism (causality) - Correction is often at individual level Limited potential of social programs aimed at individual CRITIQUING PAST AND [STILL] PRESENT POSITIVIST BIASES INSTITUTIONALIZATION, DISCRIMINATION, EXCLUSION Whitewashing” in the title refers to the idea of concealing or downplaying the problematic, racist, and pseudoscientific aspects of Lombroso’s work. Cesare Lombroso established a Museum of Criminal Anthropology at the University of Turin, where he displayed artifacts, skulls, and photographs of criminals and individuals he considered to represent his "criminal types. This is Not My Story, But Yours," reflects the idea that while the memoir is about Russ Moses’ personal experiences, the story of residential schools is one that belongs to all Indigenous peoplesintergenerational impact of residential schools, showing how the trauma experienced by children continues to affect Indigenous families and communities today. highlights the resilience and strength of Indigenous communities. Moses emphasizes how many children, despite the traumatic environment, found ways to survive and maintain their identity in subtle ways. Moses advocates for healing and reconciliation shed light on the painful histories of residential schools, as well as the ongoing work of truth and reconciliation. Contexts & Critiques of Positivism THEORETICAL LAYERS Paradigm: Positivist Main Theory: Social Control Sub-Theory Bond (Hirschi) Concept: Attachment LABELING (1960s) CRM focus changed - redefined ‘crime’ Shifted from BEHAVIOUR (positivism) to REACTION (labeling) labeling does not take crime for granted depends on observer’s perception and reaction QUESTIONS Positivism: ‘Why do some people rather than others commit crime?’ Labeling: ‘What is the process by which individuals come to be defined as ‘criminal’ or ‘deviant’? FOCUS ON ALL PARTICIPANTS ACTORS + REACTORS: Power affects how people are defined and criminalized LABELING challenges the CONSENSUS recognizes value / interest CONFLICT ‘ deviant’ / ‘criminal’ = social constructs no inherent deviance - rather it is a response to a labeling process criticizes Positivist Criminology for sustaining discrimination and poverty - symptoms / ‘drowning bodies’ CONTEXT: 1960s – civil rights movement SOCIAL ORDER: Challenges CONSENSUS Considers CONFLICT ? = What is the process by which individuals come to be defined as deviant? CRIME: Certain individuals are more likely to be labeled SOLUTION: Minimize interventions Micro (+ Macro) = Transition to Critical CRM CRITICAL/CONFLICT CRM MACRO Crime = result of systemic inequality = consequence of position in society CONSENSUS Consensus State = neutral Equality CONFLICT Conflict State = biased Inequality Positivism Classical CRITICAL CRIMINOLOGY LOOKS AT: crime = outcome of conflict & domination power distribution socialization that reproduces the distribution of power relations that maintain power ideologies that legitimate power SOLUTIONS: Transformative Justice = emancipation / liberation free from discrimination Critical CRM = radical transformation of social structure eliminate inequality and oppression Saul Alinsky’s Parable: A man is walking down the riverside when he notices a body floating down stream. A fisherman leaps into the river, pulls the body ashore, gives mouth to mouth resuscitation, saving the person’s life. A few minutes later the same thing happens, then again and again. Eventually yet another body floats by. This time the fisherman completely ignores the drowning person and starts running upstream along the bank. The observer asks the fisherman what on earth is he doing? Why is he not trying to rescue this drowning body? ‘This time,’ replies the fisherman, ‘I’m going upstream to find out who is pushing these poor folks into the water.’ UPSTREAM Macro Proactive Conflict DOWNSTREAM Micro Reactive Consensus CONSIDER • QUESTION ASKED (CONVENTIONAL / CRITICAL) LEVEL OF ANALYSIS (MICRO / MACRO) VIEW OF THE SOCIAL ORDER (CONSENSUS / CONFLICT) DEFINITION OF ‘CRIME’ / ‘DEVIANCE’ / ‘CONFORMITY’ DEPTH OF SOLUTION / INTERVENTION (PARTIAL, REACTIVE) FOCUS OF SOLUTION / INTERVENTION (INDIVIDUAL, SOCIETY) [UN]INTENDED CONSEQUENCES (DIFFERENTIATION → DISCRIMINATION] CONSIDER “A DIFFERENCE THAT MAKES NO DIFFERENCE IS NO DIFFERENCE” (WILLIAM JAMES) “THE MORE THINGS CHANGE, THE MORE THEY REMAIN THE SAME WHAT MAKES THEORIES ‘POSITIVIST’? • DETERMINISM = COMMON DENOMINATOR • DIFFERENTIATION (PRESUMED) • CONSENSUS-BASED • PRIMARILY MICRO (SOMETIMES ALSO PARTIALLY MACRO) INDIVIDUAL = EXPLAINED AND/OR RESPONSIBILIZED COHEN’S (1988) ARTICLE FAILURES OF CRIMINOLOGY” • ANACHRONISTIC • UNEVEN PROGRESS, CONTINUITY, CHANGE • UNDERCURRENT OF CLASSICAL & POSITIVIST CRM • GRADUALISM, NET WIDENING • FAILURES: - 1. PSYCHOLOGICAL BIAS 2. CLINICAL MODEL 3. POLITICAL TIMIDITY IMPOSSIBILISM VS. OPTIMISM “WE DON’T HAVE TO DISCOVER THE PHYSIOLOGY OF THE MOSQUITO BEFORE WE THINK OF DRAINING THE SWAMP.” (COHEN, 1988: 53) ECOLOGICAL / CHICAGO SCHOOL • CONTEXT: 1920s – rapid social changes, projects, migration • SOCIAL ORDER: Consensus • ? = Why do some people commit crime? • CRIME: community disorganization → deviance • SOLUTION: community cohesion • ASSESSMENT: Micro & Individual, Consensus PROCESSUAL / LEARNING CONTEXT: 1920s – 1930/40s: Depression • SOCIAL ORDER: Consensus • ? = What is process by which people engage in deviance? • CRIME: learning in association → deviance • Sutherland : criminal behavior leaarned Glacier: Intensity of Associations ,Degree of Identification, Strength of Identification SOLUTION: change association, un/re-learn • ASSESSMENT: Micro & Individual, Consensus FUNCTIONALISM CONTEXT: Late 1800s Origins (Durkheim); 1950s Depression & WWII (Parsons) • Society as a System SOCIAL ORDER: Consensus • ? = How is crime necessary and functional? • CRIME: normal response to abnormal circumstances • Crime challenges outdated norms and laws, which can lead to changes in societal values. crime contributes to social cohesion. By violating societal norms and laws, criminals prompt society to come together in condemnation of the act. SOLUTION: socialization, profit, persuasion, coercion • ASSESSMENT: Macro, Consensus STRUCTURAL THEORIES CONTEXT • 1940s/1950s - Economic growth; but not everyone could reach goals SOCIAL ORDER • Consensus; but questioned strain between structure & individual ? • Why does criminal activity persist? CRIME • Strain between legitimate means and the dominant goals (MACRO) ANOMIE ◼ pathological state of organic society CULTURAL GOALS ACCEPTABLE MEANS CONFORMIST + + INNOVATOR + RITUALIST + RETREATIST REBEL + + - CONFORMITY - People accept both cultural goals and cultural means - INNOVATION - most crime takes the form of innovation - RITUALISM - scaling down of expectations of success - RETREATIST individual “drops out” , in” society but not “of” society - REBELLION replaces socially legitimized values with new ones SOLUTION •Increase access to legitimate means CLASSIFICATION •Macro/Micro, Individualized, Consensus SUBCULTURAL THEORIES CONTEXT •1950s/60s; Prosperity & Urbanization - deteriorating central urban areas SOCIAL ORDER •Consensus ? •Why does criminal activity persist? CRIME •Lower ‘class’ + Disorganized community + Deviant Association + Unequal Access = Recipe for generating gang deviant SOLUTION •Increase access to legitimate opportunities •Reduce access to illegitimate opportunities CLASSIFICATION •Micro / Macro (Bridging), Consensus CONTROL THEORIES • CONTEXT: 1960s values challenged • SOCIAL ORDER: Consensus • ? = Why do people conform? • CRIME: broken/weak bonds to society • SOLUTION: socialization, participation • ASSESSMENT: Micro (Individual), Consensus BIOLOGICAL & PSY & PSY PERSPECTIVES • CONTEXT: Throughout 20th Century • SOCIAL ORDER: Consensus • ? = Why do some people commit crime? • CRIME: difference, determinism • SOLUTION: Treatment, Eugenics • ASSESSMENT: Micro (Individual), Consensus, Abuse of Science & State CRITIQUES OF SOCIOLOGICAL POSITIVISM (‘Umbrella’ of Theories) Consensus • Micro, Partially Macro • Acknowledges social factors but many solutions are limited because they remain focused at the individual level • Determinism, Differentiation • Partiality, Reactive (addresses symptoms) • Minimal Effect LABELING (overview only for critiques) CONTEXT: 1960s – civil rights movement • SOCIAL ORDER: Challenges CONSENSUS Considers CONFLICT • ? = What is the process by which individuals come to be defined as deviant? • CRIME: Certain individuals are more likely to be labeled • SOLUTION: Minimize interventions • Micro – Macro – Transition – Bridging Gap CRITICAL/CONFLICT CRM (overview only for critiques) Context: 1970s (post civil rights) Social Order: Conflict / MACRO (power) ? = What are the dynamics by which crime and social control change over time? Crime: result of systemic inequality SOL’N = transformative justice (radical) to eliminate inequality, oppression