The classical and neo-classical approaches are two important foundations for understanding criminal behavior. These theories strongly influenced modern criminology, forensic psychology, and the criminal justice system. Both approaches focus on free will, choice, and punishment, but they differ in how they view personal circumstances and responsibility.
The Classical Approach
The classical school of criminology began in the 18th
century through the work of thinkers like Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy
Bentham (Beccaria, 1764; Bentham, 1789). They believed crime happens
because people make rational decisions. According to this view, crime is
not caused by supernatural forces or biological defects—it is a choice.
Key Assumptions of the Classical Approach
- Free Will and Rational Choice: Individuals choose their actions
freely and think before acting. They weigh the advantages and disadvantages of
committing a crime (Howitt, 2018).
- Hedonism and Utilitarianism: People naturally seek pleasure and avoid pain.
Crimes occur when the potential pleasure is greater than the expected
punishment.
- Deterrence: Punishment must be swift, certain, and proportionate
to stop people from committing crimes (Beccaria, 1764).
- Equality Before the Law: All individuals should receive the same punishment for the same crime, regardless of personal circumstances.
Implications of the Classical Approach
- Focuses mainly on punishment, not rehabilitation.
- Led to strict legal codes and fixed sentencing systems.
- Assumes that all people are fully responsible for their actions.
Criticisms of the Classical Approach
- Ignores individual differences like mental illness, age, or social background.
- Cannot explain impulsive crimes or emotional crimes (“crimes of passion”).
- Overemphasizes punishment and does not consider rehabilitation or treatment.
The Neo-Classical Approach
The neo-classical school developed in the 19th
century. It kept the basic ideas of the classical approach but added important
exceptions. Neo-classical thinkers argued that although people generally make
rational choices, some individuals have limited ability to make rational
decisions (Howitt, 2018).
Examples include:
- Children
- Mentally ill individuals
- People under extreme stress or coercion
Theories such as bounded rationality and soft determinism fall under this approach.
Key Assumptions of the Neo-Classical Approach
- Limited Free Will: Not everyone can fully control their actions. Some people have reduced capacity
to understand consequences.
- Mitigating Factors: Courts should consider personal circumstances—such as age, mental health, or
environment—when deciding punishment.
- Rehabilitation and Treatment: For offenders with diminished responsibility, treatment or rehabilitation may
be more effective than harsh punishment.
- Judicial Discretion: Judges should have the ability to adjust sentences based on individual factors.
Implications of the Neo-Classical Approach
- Recognizes the role of mental disorders in criminal behavior.
- Supports insanity defenses, special juvenile justice systems, and reduced sentences for certain offenders.
- Balances punishment with rehabilitation.
Criticisms of the Neo-Classical Approach
- May lead to inconsistent sentencing because judges rely on personal judgment.
- Critics argue that leniency may reduce deterrence.
- Hard to decide when and how mitigating factors should be applied.
References
- Beccaria, C. (1764). On crimes and punishments.
- Bentham, J. (1789). An introduction to the principles of morals and legislation.
- Howitt, D. (2018). Introduction to forensic and criminal psychology (6th ed.). Pearson Education.

0 Comments