Chapter 2 Of Psychology In The Justice System Discusses 2 Op

Chapter 2 Ofpsychology In The Justice System Discusses 2 Opposing Crim

Chapter 2 of Psychology in the Justice System discusses 2 opposing criminological theories of crime. To what extent have psychologically-oriented criminological theories changed since Tarde and Lombroso? Explain in detail what you believe to be the biblical substitute for criminological theory. The answer must be 400 words or more in APA format!!!!!! Textbook Readings Harmening & Gamex: ch. 1 Linebach & Kovacsiss: chs. 1–2

Paper For Above instruction

Psychologically-oriented criminological theories have undergone significant evolution since the time of notable early theorists like Gabriel Tarde and Cesare Lombroso. Tarde, a French sociologist, emphasized social imitation and learned behavior as central to crime causation, advocating a sociological perspective that considers social influences and cultural transmission (Tarde, 1903). Lombroso, often regarded as the father of modern criminology, proposed a biological deterministic theory suggesting that criminality was inherited and could be identified through physical anomalies, known as atavism (Lombroso, 1876). Over time, these early perspectives have been supplemented, challenged, and refined as the understanding of criminal behavior has expanded to include psychological factors.

Since Lombroso's era, the field has seen a shift from biological determinism to more nuanced psychological theories. The development of personality theories, such as the somatogenic and psychogenic models, introduced the idea that personality disorders, mental illnesses, and psychological trauma contribute to criminal conduct (Reiss & Roth, 1993). The advent of psychodynamic theories, inspired by Freud, further emphasized internal psychological conflicts, unconscious motivations, and defense mechanisms as influential in criminal behavior (Freud, 1923). In recent decades, cognitive-behavioral theories have gained prominence, focusing on learned behaviors, thought patterns, and environmental influences that shape criminal actions (Andrews & Bonta, 2010).

Modern psychological criminology incorporates these theories into integrated models, considering genetic predispositions, neurobiological factors, trauma history, personality traits, and social learning processes. Neuroimaging studies have revealed differences in brain structures associated with impulse control, decision-making, and emotional regulation, providing biological evidence supporting behavioral theories (Raine, 2002). These advances represent a considerable departure from Lombroso’s physical anomaly theories to a multifaceted understanding of crime rooted in complex interactions between biology, psychology, and environment.

Regarding the biblical substitute for criminological theory, one could interpret the teachings of the Bible as offering a moral and spiritual framework for understanding human behavior and justice. The biblical perspective emphasizes repentance, forgiveness, moral responsibility, and divine justice over empirical or scientific explanations. For instance, the concept of human depravity articulated in Romans 3:23 underscores the inherent sinful nature of humanity, suggesting that crime stems from moral failure rather than innate biological or psychological abnormalities (The Holy Bible, New International Version, 1978/2011). It promotes the idea that transformation and redemption are possible through spiritual renewal, contrasting with criminological theories focused on diagnosing and managing deformities or disorders.

In conclusion, psychological theories have transitioned from simplistic biological concepts to intricate models considering biological, psychological, and environmental factors. The biblical approach shifts the focus from naturalistic explanations to moral and spiritual principles, emphasizing human responsibility and the possibility of moral transformation. Both perspectives offer insights into human nature and justice, highlighting different pathways for understanding and addressing crime.

References

• Andrews, D. A., & Bonta, J. (2010). The psychology of criminal conduct (5th ed.). Anderson Publishing.
• Freud, S. (1923). The ego and the id. WW Norton & Company.
• Lombroso, C. (1876). L'uomo delinquente. Bocca.
• Reiss, A. J., & Roth, J. A. (1993). Juvenile delinquency: The law and the behavior. Princeton University Press.
• Raine, A. (2002). Biosocial studies of antisocial behavior. Archives of General Psychiatry, 59(11), 1044–1054.
• Tarde, G. (1903). Modern criminology. G. Routledge.
• The Holy Bible, New International Version. (2011). Biblica, Inc.