|
|
|
|
Until the 20th century, criminality was primarily thought about in terms of human nature. However, despite the persistence of the term in criminological research, sociological research shifted the discussion from human nature to human normality. That is, theories of criminality were no longer based on abstract discussions of traits that were present or absent in human beings, but were based on empirical research about patterns of the behavior of particular individuals in particular contexts. The "social ecology" of the late Chicago School can be read as a sociological response to theories of crime based on constitutional theories, but Edwin H. Sutherland's Differential Association Theory and Robert K. Merton's Strain Theory also stress the importance of examining the cultural and structural environments which individuals not only respond to, but which shape their particular ways of looking at the world. Since 1950, criminological theorists have traveled down two different paths. Many continue with the positivist orientation of the early sociologists, concerned with developing these early theories in order to determine the etiology of criminal behavior. Their opportunity theories and control theories all carry on these themes. Others have revived the legal perspective that criminologists associate with the classical school, questioning how the state identifies and responds to criminal behavior. "Conflict" theories, in fact, date back to Karl Marx, while more recent labeling theories and feminist theories raise questions about the relationship between social power and the role that the state and even the criminologist plays in defining and/or creating criminal behavior in society.
|
|
|
