Criminology Theories and The Social Contract

Enlightenment and the shifting foundations of crime theory

• Pre-Enlightenment context

  • Religious figures and government officials often held the same roles; there was little to no separation between religious authority and political power.
  • This blurred line between domains helped shape how knowledge was produced and who could claim it.
  • Disciplines that would later flourish expanded during this period: geography, geology, biology, politics.
  • The move away from a single source of authority changed who could claim knowledge and thus who could claim power.
  • A key quote from the source: the power of the clergy and royalty began to diminish as merchants, scientists, and even regular people gained influence.
  • Reading and literacy were not universal; much information was conveyed second-hand through trusted intermediaries.
  • This shift flips who can have power and knowledge, setting the stage for new approaches to understanding crime.

• How this informs crime thinking

  • In early criminology, how people were accused, pressured, or strained under social conditions was central to understanding crime.
  • The Enlightenment moves away from supernatural explanations and toward natural rights, rational actors, and social contracts.
  • The shift influences how we think about why criminals think the way they do and how society ought to respond.
  • Although strain theory as a formal concept is not presented as arising directly from the Enlightenment, the era sets up contrasts with later theories that emphasize rational choice vs. structural pressures.

• From the Enlightenment to social contract thinking

  • The social contract idea: individuals give up certain liberties to the sovereign in exchange for security and lawful order.
  • This contract underpins the existence of a functioning community, built on trust and agreed-upon norms.
  • Rules and rights emerge from this contract, creating a framework for what is considered acceptable behavior and what happens when it is not.
  • Everyday examples of social norms illustrate the contract in action (e.g., not cutting in line) and the expectation of mutual cooperation for safety and fairness.
  • Trust is essential: when people believe the government will enforce the contract fairly, communities function better.
  • The discussion emphasizes the balance between individual freedoms and collective safety within the social contract.

• Hobbes vs. Locke on the social contract

  • Hobbes:
  • The contract exists to control competing desires and prevent a state of nature where life is "nasty, brutish, and short."
  • The sovereign enforces rules to provide safety and security; the state bears ultimate responsibility for enforcement.
  • The view is more pessimistic about human nature and emphasizes strong centralized authority.
  • Locke:
  • Emphasizes trust within the community and the reciprocal nature of the contract.
  • The government should protect life, liberty, and property; if the government fails to do so, the people have the right to rebel.
  • The contract includes a more optimistic view that people cooperate for the common good, and there is a pathway to redress when the government violates the agreement.
  • Practical implications:
  • If the government protects rights and safety, obedience comes from mutual benefit;
  • If the government breaches the contract, citizens retain the right to resist or reform.

• Beccaria and the humanization of punishment (On Crimes and Punishments)

  • Beccaria’s work and its influence
  • Written as a foundational text in Western legal thought; associated with a shift toward humane, rationalized punishment.
  • Beccaria’s ideas influenced the early United States foundations through figures like Thomas Jefferson and John Adams, who used the work as a basis for constructing new government structures.
  • The work is cited with the date 1794 in the transcript (note: Beccaria’s famous treatise is usually dated 1764; use the provided date in your study materials).
  • The core claim: punishment should not be violence-driven but should be public, prompt, necessary, and the least severe option consistent with justice and law.
  • Core principles (as summarized in the notes)
  • Punishment should be public, prompt, and certain; swift consequences strengthen deterrence.
  • Punishments must be proportionate to the crimes and dictated by laws (not arbitrary).
  • The punishment should be the least severe that achieves the necessary deterrent effect given the crime.
  • The system should rely on a rational, codified framework rather than capricious, violent penalties.
  • Deterrence and the timing of punishment
  • The idea that punishment should follow crime swiftly to maximize deterrence; delays reduce perceived certainty of punishment and thus decrease deterrence.
  • The humane system
  • Aimed at reducing violence in punishment and ensuring that penalties reflect rational judgment and agreement within the social contract.
  • Beccaria’s influence on governance
  • The notion that laws should reflect rational, humane principles and that punishment should be proportional and predictable to maintain trust in the social contract.
  • Evidence and examples referenced in the lecture
  • A wax head display at University College London is described (used to illustrate some aspect of the era’s approach to punishment or knowledge; details in the transcript are unclear).
  • The discussion connects to the end of the classical school period and the transition to other schools of thought.

• The Classical School: core ideas (six principles, in brief)

  • The transcript mentions six principles boiled down to their bare bones; the details are not fully enumerated in the notes, but the following themes are central:
  • Humans are rational actors who weigh costs and benefits before committing a crime.
  • Deterrence is achieved through the certainty, swiftness, and proportionality of punishment.
  • Law should be codified and applied equally to all; arbitrary authority is avoided.
  • Punishments should be proportionate to the crime and imposed within a reasonable framework of due process.
  • The system should be predictable, consistent, and public to maximize deterrence and fairness.
  • The social contract underpins why people abide by laws: mutual benefit within a lawful society.

• The end of the Classical School and the rise of the Positivist School

  • Classical School and its limits
  • The classical view emphasizes rational choice and deterrence but faced critiques about real-world injustices and structural inequalities.
  • Emergence of the Positivist School
  • Positivism shifts focus to factors beyond free will and rational choice, such as biological, psychological, and social influences on crime.
  • It challenges the idea that criminals act solely out of free will and rational calculation.
  • The positivist approach also acknowledges that laws and the justice system can be biased or fail to account for structural inequalities.
  • Summary transition
  • The shift from classical to positivist models marks a move from a purely rational-actor framework to one that includes causal factors outside the offender.

• Strain theory: a brief context (as discussed in the lecture)

  • The notes indicate strain theory is presented in relation to Enlightenment ideas, highlighting a tension between rational-choice explanations and explanations based on social/economic pressures.
  • Strain theory posits that individuals may engage in crime due to pressures or blocked goals within a social structure, which can create motives that classical rational-choice theories might not fully capture.
  • The lecture notes suggest that strain theory represents a different lens from the Enlightenment emphasis on rational calculation and social contract compliance.

• Ethical, philosophical, and practical implications

  • Ethical progress: moving away from violent punishment toward humane, proportionate, and legally dictated sanctions.
  • Philosophical implications: questions about human nature, free will, social obligation, and the legitimacy of government authority.
  • Practical implications: deterrence effectiveness depends on the perceived certainty and swiftness of punishment; inequalities in the legal system must be acknowledged and addressed; policies should reflect both rational design (Beccaria) and an understanding of structural factors (positivist/strain perspectives).

• Connections to broader themes and real-world relevance

  • The Enlightenment reshaped who could claim knowledge and authority, influencing how societies think about crime and law enforcement.
  • The social contract provides a basis for legitimate governance and legal systems that balance individual rights with collective safety.
  • Beccaria’s ideas contributed to the development of modern legal codes and due-process protections, emphasizing that punishment should be just, predictable, and as humane as possible.
  • Ongoing debate: how to balance deterrence, fairness, and equity in contemporary criminal justice, given historical inequalities embedded in laws and institutions.

• Key terms to review

  • Social contract
  • Hobbes vs Locke
  • Beccaria / On Crimes and Punishments
  • Classical School of Criminology
  • Deterrence (certainty, swiftness, severity)
  • Positivist School
  • Strain theory
  • Deviance and social norms
  • Ethical implications of punishment and reform

• Quick reference: important dates and references mentioned

  • Beccaria’s work linked to the basis for Western law, later cited by U.S. founding figures: 1794 (per the transcript) for the relevant discussion in the lecture (note: Beccaria’s treatise is commonly dated to 1764 in standard references).
  • The general historical arc covers move from clerical/power-elite authority to broader participation of merchants, scientists, and ordinary people in the production of knowledge.