Module 5
Reading Content
Before I read the chapter, this time I am going to start with what I already think of the psychological learning and developmental theories. No matter what the theory is I believe the answer to deviance will be found in something related to psychological and not a power theory. I think the power theories have merit but I am just not sure about it. I think that a certain amount of crime could be linked to IQ problems. Those with IQs low enough to not be able to tell the difference between right and wrong may commit a deviant act because they just do not know any better. Another category of people I can see this applying to be those who are mentally retarded. So before I read the chapter I think this is going to be a good theory.
I do not believe this theory is the “one”, because many criminals are very smart. But the author did make one very important statement; he said that low intelligence and low IQ led to crime. I can see that as being true every time.
I found it interesting that Goddard’s test in 1921 found a high portion of draftees had an IQ of 75 or lower. Being in the military I can contest that many service members are what I would call feebleminded. But his study or definition of feeblemindedness had to be off because there is now way that a third of America is feebleminded. The book says that because of this finding few criminologist and psychologist take this theory seriously. I would have to agree with that but only in the sense that they are trying to use this theory to explain all crime. I still think this is a good theory for those I outlined above.
The book goes on to talk about race and IQ. I know many have studied this especially since race has been a major issue in our country for the last one-hundered years. Most of the data for the test conducted years ago would be invalid because off the minorities not having the same opportunities for education as the whites. Now if they were to take a sample of equally educated people and give the same test and found that race made a difference on the tests then there might be something to it. Thus, I think that race and IQ are not something that we can speculate about until there is enough data.
I think the Behavioral Theories are very interesting and I agree with them very much. We learn so much from our parents and friends like right from wrong. I think that when a person grows up and learns that certain values or actions are acceptable then he will continue to do them. I do not believe that criminals are born but those with qualities that predispose them to crime learn criminal behavior then they will act that way.
Web content
From witchcraft to drug craft
The article started out very interesting because I have always like history. I knew that many people were killed for being witches. But I did not realize the number was that large. I knew that society used the “witchcraft” label a lot during that time to exterminate any deviants and / or undesirables. They used that cause to much like Hitler used his morbid cause to rid Germany of all non blond hair blue eyes people.
I had never learned about masturbation causing so many problems in the nineteenth century. I certainly makes since that it would during that age. I would imagine that many schools would not be so inclined to teach about that subject because of political correctness. Even in todays time which more accepting only accepts masturbation as long as nobody talks about it. I can also see why during that time they though it was deviant. It may put deviant thought into some people minds, particularly rapists and other sexual predators. During that time more of our society was also following the church doctrine much closer then most are today. I did find it comical that the article stated that they felt masturbation led to suicide, brain damage, hypo-chondria, and epilepsy. All I can think of is what were those people thinking. How could they really come to those conclusions unless its just what they said to keep people from doing it.
As you know I am a believer in the bio chemical theories. I can completely agree with most of this article. It is a fact that chemical imbalances in our brain lead to mental illnesses like schizophrenia and chronic depression. And it has been statistically proved that people with schizophrenia and chronic depression are more likely to commit crimes that those without.
The article also mentioned that there are over 330,000 people in mental hospitals most of them with schizophrenia that drug treatment has failed on. Now that makes me think a little. If this theory is genuine then why did the drug treatment fail on so many? But, this paper was written twenty years ago. We have come a long way in medical research in the last twenty years. In fact I recently read something that stated we have come the furthest in the last twenty years then we have in the previous 200 years. Now there I went and started to make excuses for why the data did not support my line of thinking. I guess this is just the theory I am choosing to make a leap of faith in. Everything in the “Cantrell flow of logic” says that it makes since but if the data does not support it then how could it be true?
The article goes on to illustrate several cases that deviants could not be distinguished from non-deviants. They were unable to tell the difference between those with chemical imbalances and those without chemical imbalances relating to deviant behavior. I think that would be a normal finding. The biomedical theory is not going to apply to all situations. This goes back to a problem that I have not seen written anywhere. Are criminologists looking for one theory to answer all questions relating to crime? And if so why.
Conclusion
As all the chapters in the book I liked this one very much. Like all of then it is some very interesting information to stop and think about. I continue to think most of it is very self-explanatory but it is interesting to read about the stats and theorists.
My conclusion is that after reading the chapter I do not feel as confident about the Intelligence and Crime Theory as I did before hand. I think it is a good theory for the mentally challenged but that is all. I am still a believer in the behavior theory because we learn so much from others. They teach us what society say is right and deviant. If we were to learn that it correctly that would be a behavior that could be changed.
Before I read the chapter, this time I am going to start with what I already think of the psychological learning and developmental theories. No matter what the theory is I believe the answer to deviance will be found in something related to psychological and not a power theory. I think the power theories have merit but I am just not sure about it. I think that a certain amount of crime could be linked to IQ problems. Those with IQs low enough to not be able to tell the difference between right and wrong may commit a deviant act because they just do not know any better. Another category of people I can see this applying to be those who are mentally retarded. So before I read the chapter I think this is going to be a good theory.
I do not believe this theory is the “one”, because many criminals are very smart. But the author did make one very important statement; he said that low intelligence and low IQ led to crime. I can see that as being true every time.
I found it interesting that Goddard’s test in 1921 found a high portion of draftees had an IQ of 75 or lower. Being in the military I can contest that many service members are what I would call feebleminded. But his study or definition of feeblemindedness had to be off because there is now way that a third of America is feebleminded. The book says that because of this finding few criminologist and psychologist take this theory seriously. I would have to agree with that but only in the sense that they are trying to use this theory to explain all crime. I still think this is a good theory for those I outlined above.
The book goes on to talk about race and IQ. I know many have studied this especially since race has been a major issue in our country for the last one-hundered years. Most of the data for the test conducted years ago would be invalid because off the minorities not having the same opportunities for education as the whites. Now if they were to take a sample of equally educated people and give the same test and found that race made a difference on the tests then there might be something to it. Thus, I think that race and IQ are not something that we can speculate about until there is enough data.
I think the Behavioral Theories are very interesting and I agree with them very much. We learn so much from our parents and friends like right from wrong. I think that when a person grows up and learns that certain values or actions are acceptable then he will continue to do them. I do not believe that criminals are born but those with qualities that predispose them to crime learn criminal behavior then they will act that way.
Web content
From witchcraft to drug craft
The article started out very interesting because I have always like history. I knew that many people were killed for being witches. But I did not realize the number was that large. I knew that society used the “witchcraft” label a lot during that time to exterminate any deviants and / or undesirables. They used that cause to much like Hitler used his morbid cause to rid Germany of all non blond hair blue eyes people.
I had never learned about masturbation causing so many problems in the nineteenth century. I certainly makes since that it would during that age. I would imagine that many schools would not be so inclined to teach about that subject because of political correctness. Even in todays time which more accepting only accepts masturbation as long as nobody talks about it. I can also see why during that time they though it was deviant. It may put deviant thought into some people minds, particularly rapists and other sexual predators. During that time more of our society was also following the church doctrine much closer then most are today. I did find it comical that the article stated that they felt masturbation led to suicide, brain damage, hypo-chondria, and epilepsy. All I can think of is what were those people thinking. How could they really come to those conclusions unless its just what they said to keep people from doing it.
As you know I am a believer in the bio chemical theories. I can completely agree with most of this article. It is a fact that chemical imbalances in our brain lead to mental illnesses like schizophrenia and chronic depression. And it has been statistically proved that people with schizophrenia and chronic depression are more likely to commit crimes that those without.
The article also mentioned that there are over 330,000 people in mental hospitals most of them with schizophrenia that drug treatment has failed on. Now that makes me think a little. If this theory is genuine then why did the drug treatment fail on so many? But, this paper was written twenty years ago. We have come a long way in medical research in the last twenty years. In fact I recently read something that stated we have come the furthest in the last twenty years then we have in the previous 200 years. Now there I went and started to make excuses for why the data did not support my line of thinking. I guess this is just the theory I am choosing to make a leap of faith in. Everything in the “Cantrell flow of logic” says that it makes since but if the data does not support it then how could it be true?
The article goes on to illustrate several cases that deviants could not be distinguished from non-deviants. They were unable to tell the difference between those with chemical imbalances and those without chemical imbalances relating to deviant behavior. I think that would be a normal finding. The biomedical theory is not going to apply to all situations. This goes back to a problem that I have not seen written anywhere. Are criminologists looking for one theory to answer all questions relating to crime? And if so why.
Conclusion
As all the chapters in the book I liked this one very much. Like all of then it is some very interesting information to stop and think about. I continue to think most of it is very self-explanatory but it is interesting to read about the stats and theorists.
My conclusion is that after reading the chapter I do not feel as confident about the Intelligence and Crime Theory as I did before hand. I think it is a good theory for the mentally challenged but that is all. I am still a believer in the behavior theory because we learn so much from others. They teach us what society say is right and deviant. If we were to learn that it correctly that would be a behavior that could be changed.
