In general words, Associationism is a theory explaining how different items combine in the human mind to produce thoughts, feelings, and emotions. The key tenets of Associationism are rather simple: all items are associated in the human mind through sets of experiences. The items are derived from diverse experiences and are further combined to form a thought or a feeling. For example, a child learns not to touch fire because the kid associates it with pain, the pain that was memorized from the experience with fire. Furthermore, items can combine to form a complex idea based on several experiences.
Associationist psychology is based on two fundamental doctrines. The first doctrine is that the more recondite phenomena of the mind are formed out of simple parts. The second one is that the mental law is the law of association. Overall, associationistic theorists try to explain the mental phenomena by trying to show the final product of the small experiences connected through complex networks of associations. In other words, associationism is an attempt to explain mental phenomena through looking at small experiences and mental laws of association. John Stuart Mill and George Berkeley are two of the most prominent representatives of the Associationistic theory (Wilson 1990).
John Mill linked associationist psychology to the issues of moral education and social reform. Interestingly enough, Mill argued that the contents of human minds (namely beliefs and moral feelings) are the ultimate products of diverse experiences people go through. These small experiences are connected by associationistic laws. The different combinations of these experiences may lead to different shapes of human nature. For example, when new experiences are gained, the mind of the person is changing because another connection network of experiences is created. Associationism, as Mill suggested, is based on the assumption that problems of people can be explained by their situations (or associations promoted by these situations) rather than by intrinsic factors (Wilson 1990).
Special attention should be paid to the impact made by Mill on equality between a woman and a man. Mill argued that to ensure equality among men and women, the experiences of females should be changed. Consequently, the change in experiences will result in the change in associations, and ultimately it will change their minds. Mill rejected the idea that subordination of women is a natural order. He tried to show that the social superiority of men was also the result of specific experiences that formed the particular associations in minds of both genders (Skorupski 1989).
George Berkeley, on the other side, explored the theory of associationism through the senses in general and touch in particular. Berkeley believed that touching provides people with full access to the world. Moreover, Berkeley put forward the idea that the vision of an object does not give true information about the items. For example, the tower has a determinate shape and size but depending on the distance between the tower and an observer, the person gets continually changing visual image (Berman 1994).
From the psychological perspective of Berkeley, it happens because there is no associationistic connection between vision and tactic ideas. Nevertheless, some of Berkeley’s assumptions are very similar to Mill’s. In particular, both believed that associations are the results of experiences. From one side, Mill focused on social experiences such as upbringing and the role played by women in society. Berkeley, on the other side, focused on personal experiences, the ones that are not obligatory related to the social factors. Berkley formed his theory of associations on the sensory experiences or the processes of world exploration through touch. Of course, the concept of touch has a broad meaning in this context (Winker 1989).
Associationism is highly relevant to modern-day psychology. Theories of Associationism marked the beginning of the development of cognitive psychology explaining the conscious and unconscious response of humans to diverse experiences. Associationism sets the clear connection between experience and thoughts. For example, learning is analyzed as the process of the formation of associations between unrelated information. Most people use association techniques without even being aware of them. Associations are often used to remember the birthday of the friend or answers to the test questions. Thus, Mill and Berkeley set a solid foundation for the development of modern cognitive psychology.
Questions
What is associationism? Associationism is the theory of psychology explaining the connection between thoughts and past experiences. It explains how people learn and how they react to different situations.
What was the key argument of Mill on associations? Mill focused his attention on the importance of social factors’ information of experiences. Mill tried to analyze social phenomena by looking closely at the social factors shaping the experiences of different groups of people.
What was the key argument of Berkeley on associations? Berkley explored association through the theory of touch and self-exploration. Unlike other associationistic theorists, Berkley ignored the external factors shaping the nature and essence of experiences.
What is the similarity between Mill’s and Berkeley’s views on associations? Both theorists focused their attention on the importance of past experiences for exploration of the world and learning new information. Mill and Berkeley would agree with each other that experiences are the small elements of the association.
What is the modern application of associationism in psychology? Cognitive psychology is the direct manifestation of the associationistic theories of Mill, Berkley, and other theorists.
References
Berman, D. (1994) George Berkeley: Idealism and the Man. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
Skorupski, J. (1989) John Stuart Mill. London: Routledge.
Wilson, F. (1990) Psychological Analysis and the Philosophy of John Stuart Mill. Toronto: Toronto Univ. Press.
Winkler, K. (1989) Berkeley: An Interpretation. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
The ship begins a voyage around the world and in the course of this voyage some of the parts of the ship inevitably break. One by one, the broken parts of the ship are replaced with new parts that are similar to the original parts. By the time the ship returns home at the port, all parts have been replaced after breaking down one by one. From the framing to the deck to the last bolt and nut, everything has been replaced. Even the painting is new. The question that begs is whether this ship is the same or it is a different ship. This is a tricky question bearing in mind that meaning all the parts of the ship have been replaced at the end of the long voyage meaning that the original outlook has been changed. The original structure has also been changed with parts that are identical to the original parts. Is this ship a different one or the same old ship that left the port for the voyage? To start with, it is important to note that if one looks at the ship when it lands back at the port, it is almost impossible to note that the ship has undergone replacements because the parts that have been used to replace the original parts are identical to the replaced part. The name of the ship and the registration has not changed and what have changed are the parts that initially made up the ship. The whole ship has changed, from the largest part to the smallest nut in the ship. The problem is that people cannot notice the difference because the parts used are quite identical and this brings this discussion to a new realm where we ask ourselves some pertinent questions.
One of the most important questions is: just because people cannot notice the difference because identical new parts have been used, does this mean that the ship is still the same one? Surely, this is not the ship that left the port. The parts that made the initial ship are absent in the ship that arrives at the port. The entire structure and composition have changed and changing the entire structure of the ship by putting new parts are the same as buying a new ship and putting the registration number of the old ship. The cost of replacing every part is almost the same as buying an entirely new ship. Though people may not see the difference, it is evident that the ship that returns to the port is not the ship that left the port. The entire framework of the ship that left the port has been replaced with a new one. The ship that left the port is no more since all its parts including the casing lay somewhere as scrap materials meaning that at the port we get an entirely new ship. From a mechanical perspective, we can argue that the ship has been renovated but from a psychological perspective, the most plausible argument would be that the ship that left the port is not the ship that docks the port at the end of its voyage.
There is a strong distinction between modern philosophy and ancient philosophy. The difference mainly comes in the way issues are handled about the prevailing situation and circumstances. Ancient philosophy was based more on Greek teachings which were mythological, an example of such mythologies are those of Aristotle. No truth could be found in the myths and were drawn mainly to give leaders a basis on which they can establish their leadership. The authors of ancient philosophy did not have any genuine experience in matters of leadership and mainly based their theories on some mystical happenings that nobody knows about their existence (Morgan, p. 28). In as much as there were strong points and lessons presented in them; they can no longer be applicable in modern political thought. Machiavelli is a modern philosopher that has derived reasonable arguments for modern leaders from his observations of the past. Greek philosophers emphasize the importance of understanding the needs of the people and hence sacrificing all to ensure that they are met. There is some reality in his work that can be adopted by the current leaders who want to experience a change in leadership. As we focus on the challenges that modern leaders especially in America face, we will be looking at the views of Machiavelli in comparison to what the ancient philosophers had to say.
Greek philosophy played a major role in instilling wisdom and character among its leaders (Morgan, 2005). It was mainly based on certain spiritual mythologies that were believed to have occurred some time back. They are mainly narratives of certain Heroes who either lost or won because of engaging in certain activities (Morgan, 2005). The stories signified that for a leader to achieve a certain goal then they had to go through a certain epic experience or journey which would, in turn, define their character. This philosophical thought became a major basis of leadership until when it was discovered how unpractical they were. With the changing societal needs, it becomes obvious that some principles can not be applied. They emphasize much on the importance of being divinely connected even when such spirituality does not make sense. Furthermore, modern society embraces more secular values than ancient spiritual values. Thus, it became challenging for modern leaders who can not identify with such philosophies. In trying to connect how events were unfolding in ancient times and how they are currently unfolding, there is a need for a different interpretation of the philosophies that were previously presented. It is for this reason that modern philosophy took a keen interest in the views presented by Machiavelli in defining leadership in the current society.
Machiavelli is a philosopher that insists on following the correct leadership values for politicians. His concept of ‘effectual truth’ vs. the imagination of it was a significant departure from the values of his day, this implies that leaders should be more realistic about the policies that they set forth rather than simply doing it to lure voters. Correct values to him do not necessarily mean what is generally acceptable. They are based on the political situation of the country as well as the ability of a leader. As much as Machiavelli does not believe in dictatorial leadership, he believes in an independent leader who does not need to be swayed by people’s ideologies. When in leadership, a person already has his obligations that they need to see fulfilled by the time their term is over. As they looked forward to being in a leadership position, they should have already seen a desire which they want to be fulfilled (Machiavelli, 1938). The moment they get into leadership and forget what took them there, they may start being pushed to do what other people want rather than fulfill the desires they had for that particular society. The reason why most leaders change once they enter into leadership is simply that they bow to the pressures of other people who don’t understand their vision.
In his literature titled ‘the prince’, Machiavelli points out some of the things that a prospective leader needs to do for them to occupy the bigger seat. He also has a word for those that are in leadership and what they can do to maintain their leadership position. His ideas are not based on any faulty methodologies but rather having the interest of a state at heart, the title is a reflection of how a prospective leader can do much more than what the former did (Machiavelli, 1938). People have become more knowledgeable and will look out for leaders that can handle their social and political needs. People have had a test of many leaders, how they carried out their campaigns and what they were able to deliver to them once in leadership positions. This has made them more intelligent when it comes to exercising their voting rights. It is not usually about the party that the leader chooses to campaign on but their morals. At a point when people are hungry for change, they can scrutinize their leaders and identify who is likely to deliver what they are saying. There are several issues in the country that every leader endeavors to fight. Machiavelli has not only identified the areas but also came up with procedures that may be used by such leaders to fight them.
One of the issues that have been pointed out is terrorism which has become a major issue, especially in the United States. The country has become a major target for terrorists which is making leaders look out for leaders that will promise an end to it. Potential leaders are those that understand the history of the land and are determined to bring change. On the contrary, those that are out for fame may not care much about past mistakes and will out trying out new things that may not necessarily be practical. They have heard leaders who have not done much in fighting it. Citizens are always looking up to their leaders to come up with policies that will instill security. Security has become a fundamental issue in economic growth without which people live in fear. After several bombings in the US and other officers in other countries that are affiliated with them, people are expressing doubt on the ability of their leaders to maintain security. Some of the strategies that have been employed have only sucked into the government coffer and given the country a bad name rather than fulfilling its objectives. Most of the funds that were set aside were channeled into fighting terrorism, a battle that seems to have no end. In his reference to defending the nation, Machiavelli suggests that sound policies and a strong military force are the basic requirements.
Compared to other philosophies that have been used for leadership, Machiavelli’s have been considered to be the best for application in the modern world. This is basically due to the changing needs in leadership. During the ancient years, people were more concerned about reforms and looked for leaders that could implement them. However, as it now stands, people are looking for leaders that can unite them and protect their interests from attacks. The greatest threat in America is security; security can only be facilitated if there are sound policies for the same as well as maintaining a strong military. Those are the principles that have been emphasized by Machiavelli which are also applicable to America today (Machiavelli, 45). The reality of the same may have been experienced in the world and America at large during the first and second world wars (Machiavelli, 1938). Many nations were proved to be lacking in military supremacy as they faced the consequences of war. It has taken quite some time before such nations recovered from the economic crunch that was experienced after the two wars. It was realized that they need to prepare their military ready for any battle and also set some funds aside for such emergencies.
America is one of the countries that have had a lot of experiences in leadership. Each leader has had an impact on the country, some that are cherished as positive while others as negative. It was basically because of the desire for justice and change that has motivated the country to vote for new leaders over and again. Some mistakes were made by the leaders that were previously there that are costing the nation a lot. They failed to meet the targets that they had set during their campaign rallies and hence leaving the other generation of leaders with a lot more to do. Before a new regime comes in, they have to first ensure that the blunders that were made by the previous regime are cleared before setting out afresh. This has affected the economic and political standing of the nation as every leader aims at making a remarkable change. People are still looking out with a lot of optimism that the leaders they choose will facilitate the much-needed change.
Works cited
Machiavelli, N. (1938). The prince. New York: Plain Label Books.
Morgan, M., (2005). Classics of moral and political theory. New York: Hackett Publishing
During the Axial Age, China experienced difficult times of discord, hunger, and death. In response to suffering, people began looking for a new life purpose, meaning, and way to build a new society. These efforts led to the creation of three influential schools of thought – Confucianism, Daoism, and Legalism. Despite the significant differences between schools, they became influential in Chinese society and introduced changes.
Legalism
Legalism was based on the views of the School of Law and proposed the idea that people are essentially evil creatures. Based on a nature of people, Legalism offered authoritarian governance through laws, punishments, and a strong leader who could restore order. The direction provided more answers and solutions to the country’s problems than other schools, gaining a significant influence. The impact of Legalism united the country, contributed to the power of the Qin dynasty, and supported the reign of the first emperor. Although the wars ceased, the school had negative consequences – totalitarianism, which established robust control over the population and severe penalties for misconduct. Nevertheless, even after the emperor’s death, China remained united, and Legalism was the basis for the rule of other dynasties, establishing political and social order. Moreover, the rulers, guided by the teachings, were able to expand China’s influence and establish trade relations with other peoples, changing the country’s economic life.
Confucianism
This school originates from the teachings of Confucius, whose life is shrouded in myths. The school is based on the assumption that people occupying a specific place in the social hierarchy should strive in the best way to fulfill their role. Confucianism also emphasizes the importance of an attentive and respectful attitude towards people if a person expects much the same. Confucianism also established rules regarding the relationships of different types, in which mainly the superior should care about the inferior; for example, the rulers should treat their subjects well. These views changed the political life of China when the Han dynasty came to power and united the features of Legalism and Confucianism. Economically, the direction promoted farming and education but vilified merchants treating them as lower class. Confucianism had the most significant influence on social life, guiding the population until the 20th century, notably establishing a superior-inferior relationship. The negative effect, in this case, was manifested in the establishment of a patriarchal society.
Daoism
This direction emphasizes the existence of Dao force, or “The Way” in the universe, which is everything. Daoism also calls on people to return to nature and abandon artificial civilization. However, the direction had a disadvantage – it did not offer an answer to China’s adversity, and its application mainly focused on attempts to manage the Dao to improve life. However, guided by Dao, people changed their social life – they were inclined to stay in the flow, do their job, and not do foolish things. The economic influence was not so significant in the considered period, but Taoism showed its impact during the Yellow Turban Rebellion in political life.
Conclusion
Thus, Legalism, Confucianism, and Taoism became influential schools of thought in China during the Axial Age. Although they are based on contrasting teachings, each direction was embedded in the country’s political, economic, and social life. Schools arose in response to chaos, destruction, and wars in China. Still, only Legalism gave solutions to the problem, becoming a guide for the ruling dynasties and changing the country’s policy.
The medieval period is characterized by a distinctive attitude to philosophy and theology. This vast phenomenon was significantly influenced by the thinkers of Western Europe, from which it received the conventional name Western Thought. An exceptional contribution to this trend was made by the philosopher and theologian St. Thomas Aquinas. His most outstanding works were “Summa Contra Gentiles” and the “Summa Theologica.” Thus, this scientific paper aims to study the contribution that St. Thomas Aquinas made to the Western Thought of the Middle Ages.
About the Philosopher
Before considering the influence of St. Thomas Aquinas, it is necessary to gain knowledge about its background. This is of particular importance since the history and life of the figures primarily affect their work. Therefore, St. Thomas Aquinas was born in Italy in 1225 and died in 1274 (Chenu para. 1). In the future, a famous philosopher and theologian, Aquinas, began his journey at Montecassino and later was redirected to the University of Naples in France. This place had a turning point for the man since it was there that he got acquainted with the newly found mendicant order of Preachers or Dominicans and Aristotle’s philosophy. After that, the philosopher decided to become a Dominican, although the family did not support this decision.
Interest in the teachings of Aristotle contributed to the unification of many philosophers, which happened in the case of Thomas Aquinas. Hence, in Cologne, he went to Albert the Great, who shared his interest in Aristotle. The main achievement of Thomas is that he is considered the founder of the philosophical and theological school of Thomism. In addition, the philosopher studied and promoted the foundations of natural theology, was an Empiricist, and made a valuable contribution to Christian theology.
Summa Theologica and Summa Contra Gentiles
As already mentioned, one of the outstanding works of Thomas Aquinas is “Summa Theologica.” After being translated into English, it received distribution and recognition under the name “Compendium of Theology” (Waqas 5). It was an article that considered the concept of the concept “quinquae viae.” The second significant work of the philosopher and theologian was “Summa Contra Gentiles” or “On the Truth of the Catholic Faith.” This description was a collection of arguments acting as a refutation of non-Christian religions (Cole and Symes 314). The basis of these works is an analysis between the domains and methods of philosophy and theology of the Middle Ages.
The author sees feelings as a source of knowledge about the root cause of all things around people. In addition, the main object of Thomas Aquinas’ research was God, who was mentioned in the holy scriptures, which did not have as much significance for philosophy as in theology. Sources note that Thomas Aquinas “believed that the study of the physical world was a legitimate way of gaining knowledge of the divine because God had created both the world and the many ways of knowing it” (Cole and Symes 314). These teachings became one of the main driving forces that affected the changes in Western thought of the thirteenth century and beyond.
The Impact on the Western Thought
Another basis of Aquinas’ teaching was a natural and supernatural revelation. According to the philosopher and theologian, they helped to understand religion better and were complementary concepts (Elders 198). Thus, Thomas Aquinas’ contribution was that he provided a theological view of the world as “rational, organized, and comprehensive to the inquiring human mind” (Cole and Symes 335). Valuable in his teaching was also the disclosure of such sacred aspects as the Trinity and Incarnation. Hence, Aquinas believed that many attributes that people attribute to God could be easily explained. However, the mentioned concepts are the object of a more detailed and profound revelation. All this knowledge was revealed in his philosophical works on Christian theology.
In addition to the natural and natural revelations and senses of man, the basis for the teachings of Thomas Aquinas were the scriptures and traditions of the Catholic Church. Moreover, the philosopher believed that the main postulates in the process of acquiring and analyzing new knowledge are faith and reason. It is they who will help to assist in the interpretation of those teachings that were created as a result of God’s revelation. As already mentioned, works on Aristotle’s theology played an essential role in this process. In them, God reveals himself to people through nature, which can help bring people closer to understanding his covenants.
Thomas Aquinas contributed to Western Thought by suggesting that God has several important qualities. First of all, the Almighty is devoid of matter and form, that is, invisible and not felt by people. Moreover, he is perfect in everything and infinite and boundless. These characteristics are prescribed to him because he is the founder of all things. In the end, he is unchangeable neither concerning his nature nor character and is one. Another particularly critical turning point was the introduction by the philosopher and theologian of the principle of double effect (Buzar 1299). The basis of this approach was that in any act of a person, the ethical side should initially be taken into account. For example, a particular action can be justified if it does not violate moral and ethical postulates, such as not harming one’s neighbor.
The philosopher and theologians saw the main final goal of any person’s life as to find union and communion with God. Therefore, throughout his work, he tried to show how not believing in the Almighty can turn out for non-religious people. Consequently, Aquinas thought that there is life after death. However, the theologian believed that this opportunity is available to those who have experienced salvation and redemption. Therefore, during their lives, individuals should do everything to do only the right actions and observe the basic tenets of the religion. Among the main concepts that people should follow are peace, holiness, and mercy.
Conclusion
In conclusion, this paper considered the contribution that Thomas Aquinas made to Western thought. Thus, the Italian philosopher and theologian conducted teachings on the Christian faith and was a follower of the views of Aristotle. He tried to spread knowledge about how important faith is for a person and how it can give him spiritual balance. A feature of his works is also the reliance on the natural and supernatural as sources of deeper knowledge of the Almighty and the definition of his main characteristics. Aquinas views the two main works, “Summa Theologica” and “Summa Contra Gentiles,” were writings refuting non-Christian teachings. Therefore, Thomas Aquinas became a philosopher and theologian who gave impetus to the formation of the future of modern philosophy.
Works Cited
Buzar, Stipe. “The Principle of Double Effect and Just War Theory.” Philosophia, vol. 48, no. 4, 2020, pp. 1299-1312.
The book under review is The Money Interest and the Public Interest: American Monetary Thought, 1920-1970, and it was written by Perry Mehrling and published in 1997. It examines the general monetary thought in America as was during the time of Keynes, leading up to the Second World War and the subsequent periods. Perry’s main inspiration to write this book was his displeasure regarding the conditions that were prevailing in America and the monetary policies that were in place at that time. The author, therefore, set out to review the monetary economics history of the country to find out how they dealt with similar situations in the past. He focused on the works of three economists to help him accomplish his goal, namely Alvin Harvey Hansen, who lived between 1887 and 1975, Allyn Abbot Young who lived between 1876 and 1929, and finally Edward Stone Shaw who lived between 1908 and 1994.
In as much as the focus was on their work, Perry also focused on the economists as individuals to understand what actually led them to develop the kind of thinking they had. He, therefore, did extensive research on them and their published and unpublished works and settled on showing the relationship between peoples’ democracy and its relation to finance. In addition, he studied the relationship between the American peoples’ interest and money interest (Mehrling x). It is important to note at this point that the book took a biographical view on how the three mentioned economists looked at the situations that faced them at the time they gave their views on monetary economics of the time such as those experienced during the different wars, the great depression and the stagnation of the economy among others.
According to Perry, what set economists he focused on apart from the rest is that they spoke out regarding the economic issues that were prevailing during their time despite the obvious tensions their outspokenness caused, as opposed to the current situation where most economists choose to remain dumb and let issues play themselves out. Therefore, the book was meant to inspire economists to give their views and opinions on burning issues that are relevant and require to be talked about (Mehrling ix).
Organization of the Book
The book is organized into three major sections with each section focusing on a different economist and the situations that were prevailing during his time. It has eleven chapters, with the first section having four chapters, the second also having four, and the third and final section having three chapters. A detailed discussion is given below:
Section One- Chapters One to Four
The first section focuses on Allyn Abbot Young and his time as well as his intellectual thought and influences. A further breakdown of this section is as follows:
The first chapter gives Allyn Abbot’s intellectual formation, which is a brief personal history, family background, and other influences that led him towards his line of view. Perry gives Abbot’s initial interest in economics as having been influenced by his father who showed major interest and support for the free movement of silver. In high school, he studied political economy with his book of focus being Richard Ely’s Outlines of Economics. Later he went on to work, and then joined the University of Wisconsin where he majored in economics and minored in history and statistics. After graduating, he opted to work as a professor as opposed to working in a secure government job. During his working life, Abbot faced a series of personal problems but they did not dent his quest to come up with publications of his own on the prevailing economic conditions. Some of his works were published in other people’s books such as Ely’s Outlines of Economics in 1908, 1916 and 1923 editions.
While developing his work, he had discovered that there was a disconnect between statisticians’ work and that of economists and therefore he saw his main challenge was finding a way to bring the two together, since some of the assumptions on which classical economists worked, such as ceteris paribus did not apply to the prevailing situations. He was therefore of the opinion that new concepts would have to be introduced to get rid of this disconnect (Mehrling, p. 29). At the time, new statistical theories were being developed and had brought with them a lot of enthusiasm from supporters. He was of the view that when these fields operated differently on taking actions regarding prevailing economic conditions nothing much would be accomplished and therefore there was a need to bring them together. This shows his outspokenness regarding the issue even at the onset of obvious opposition and thus fulfills Perry’s need to encourage economists to speak out on views that would contribute positively towards bringing more viable solutions to matters concerning money and peoples’ economic interests.
Allyn’s realization of the classical economists’ downplay of the use of monofin the economy, though not discrediting their theories sought to show the importance of money and the monetary system in shaping peoples’ economic life and as such, they need to incorporate factors such as prices of commodities was necessary.
The second chapter of the book introduces monetary ideas that were developed by economists such as Irvin Fisher who tried to introduce the concept of the quantity of money into the economy in helping to resolve the situations that were at hand and also enable the country to take a different direction as far as the public’s interest on money was concerned. Fisher even came up with a formula to determine the level of money supply in the economy at any given time. This sought to change the focus from the views held by most classical economists regarding the relationship between the quantity of money in the economy and the prevailing economic conditions.
With the onset of the war, policies were put in place to counter the effects of the war and as such, they affected the level of money in the economy. When it came to an end new actions were taken to help in the recovery of the country’s monetary systems. These reforms threatened the existence of small businesses but not at the expense of big businesses thereby calling into action the progressive economists who sought to defend the survival of people and protect their interests in relation to money. Among those who participated in pushing for the interests of the public were economists like Ely and Robert La Follette. Even though they faced opposition, they had already instilled the thought in people and not even politics could hinder their actions (Mehrling, pp. 51-52). This brings out Perry’s agenda as it encourages economists to push their views to work for the public’s interest even when they face opposition because the eventual result is to do what is right for the public because they largely determine the direction of the economy of a country takes.
Section Two- Chapters Five to Eight
This second section focuses on Alvin Harvey Hansen and centers on four sections, namely his intellectual formation, the great depression, the stagnation period, and the golden age. Again, Perry in the first section concentrates on Hansen’s personal history, showing how it influenced his economic thought. Alvin Hansen’s thoughts were influenced by the works of economists such as Schumpeter who contributed to the business cycle theory. This theory paved the way for new developments regarding investments at the continental or international level. Hansen was also influenced by Albert Aftalion who was also involved in the development of the business cycle theory. This is despite the fact that Aftalion’s work faced opposition due to the fact that it was developed with the use of modern analytical tools as opposed to the historical tools and views which were more acceptable at that time (Mehrling, p. 99).
Perry credits Hansen with the push to drive for adjustment of the country’s price system in order to allow factors of production to change in relation to changes in technology as was taking place in the country. This is because the inflexibility of the system at the time was leading to a situation of slow economic development. During this period when the country was facing depression, Hansen, therefore, advocated for price flexibility as according to him this was the right solution to the problem. He faced opposition from different economic agents who sought to cushion themselves from the problems caused by the depression by continuing to hinder price fluctuations in line with the prevailing economic conditions (Mehrling, p. 108). It was believed at this point that the depression was part of the economic cycle and after some time, it would end and as such advances in technology would be a good measure to encourage such recovery. This would mean lowering interest rates and the cost of production. Even though Hansen knew that these measures were not forthcoming and thus his greatest fear which was a prolonged depression period was confirmed. Political pressure at this point was also mounting as more and more people called for actions that would lead to a quick economic recovery from the depression. Largely borrowing from the measures Britain had undertaken when it was experiencing depression, Hansen came up with a proposal advocating for aggregate social control such as consumption stabilization. According to him, this would make peoples’ purchasing power more stable, a view that was shared by the likes of Irvin Fisher who was a radical monetarist.
Hansen believed that social control of prices would be more acceptable because of its similarity to the liberal market system, with the exception of unemployment insurance. Internationally he advocated for the control of capital flows to developing economies which would lead to the stabilization of international trade markets and bring back free trade (Mehrling 110). This view has been brought out clearly by Perry in his book and continues to show the importance of borrowing from historical events in order to deal with current situations. This is the whole concept on which his book is built and thus justifies his venture into the historical backgrounds of the periods he is dealing with in this book. This shows that in as much as economies thrive, there are always accompanying downturns and as such, it is necessary to come up with a necessary and viable measure that will salvage the situation quickly and efficiently and as such restore normalcy for the benefit of the public.
Section Three- Chapters Nine to Eleven
In this section, Perry presents the views of Edward Stone Shaw and like in the other sections starts by giving his personal background and main influences for his line of thinking. Shaw established himself as a pre-war economist and his theories and works are largely associated with those of Friedman. Since he held divergent views regarding the monetary policy system of the country, he developed a model of his own to explain his point of view. His theories always portrayed banks as a central unit of analysis as he thought that they had a major role to play as far as the decentralization of the market economy was concerned. Even though Hansen shared his view to a certain extent, Shaw did not agree with Hansen and instead advocated that the country’s reserve base be stabilized to enable the growth and development of the country’s financial infrastructure which would lead to economic growth. Shaw’s views were greatly influenced by those of Robertson, John Canning and Keynes, though not always in a positive way which explains his divergence away from Keynes theories (Mehrling, p. 171).
Shaw’s views were presented in a theory that showed the importance of financial institutions such as banks with regards to economies that were still experiencing growth. To come up with the correct theory, he depended on historical works and the works of his predecessors which he learned from and argued against. The theory was developed in different stages with elements such as financial institutions, markets, monetary systems developed by governments, and the money factor being taken into consideration (Mehrling, p. 201).
Shaw’s drive to come up with his own framework of thinking was influenced by the state of affairs in the economy during the time in which he lived and the actions that were taken to deal with the situation, which he did not agree with. At the time there were divergent views on the country’s monetary thought and to his dissatisfaction, these views influenced the country’s monetary policy and monetary system in a manner he disagreed with (Mehrling, p. 204). This can be compared to Perry’s reason for writing the book under review and encourages thinking beyond the common way in order to come up with new ways of dealing with problems which may prove to be even more efficient even though different from those held by the majority. Shaw’s independence was however revealed in his later works such as the Financial deepening in Economic Development, as he worked on it as an individual was influenced by the development of new thoughts on his part, away from the point of view he held in previous occasions which were incorporated in his works during the 1960’s (Mehrling, p. 206). His works were developed in a period when America was experiencing alarming inflation rates between 1960s and 1980s.
Conclusion
From the book, one gets the historical, intellectual, economical, and policy contributions of Perry’s three major characters who are Abbot, Hansen, and Shaw within the times they lived. Even though Abbot was the only heavyweight and largely recognized economists among the three, Perry manages to tell Hansen and Shaw’s stories in a way that shows their contribution to America’s monetary thought was after the First World War, a period in which work of monetary economists was largely disregarded in the field of economic theory. He also places the three economists in an institutionalized tradition because of their interest in linking money and public interest and showing how finance and money could be used to promote the public interest. Perry thinks that his three main characters were influenced by their quest to serve the public interest and the fact that political insights were not in their favor did not deter them from developing different theories concerning money and finance.
The book is written intellectually and objectively and there is the usage of the necessary language regarding economics in pushing for the views of the three main characters. The information is given in a form of narration but at the same time gives a chronological exposition of different happenings in the periods mentioned.
Works Cited
Mehrling, Perry. The Money Interest and the Public Interest: American Monetary Thought 1920-1970. Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1997. Print.
This essay will focus on the article “The Saints and the Roughnecks” by William Chambliss. It will demonstrate relevant sociological theories, perspectives and other critical concepts captured in the study. The theories addressed are social learning theory, social strain theory, and rational choice theory.
Theories
Sutherland’s theory of social learning addresses the problem of white-collar criminality, which is a part of organized crime. The theory states that learned criminal behavior allows individuals to see illegal activities within the context of normative ethics. The Saints, a gang of youths take delinquent activities as normal behavior. They use the school and town environment to engage in delinquent behavior. Their self-image in the community easily allows them to get away with their deviant behaviors (Henslin, 2010).
Akers further points out that differential organization is a factor that can explain individual criminal behavior but can also tell how communities are differentially promoting deviant or no-deviant behavior (Akers, 2009). The society’s view of the Saints and the Roughnecks is quite different.
The community sees the Saints as morally upright boys but only out of lark. Their performances in school are excellent, which help to conceal their deviant behavior. On the other hand, society sees the Roughnecks as headed for trouble. Their performance at school is not pleasant. Both gangs engage in criminal activities, but the society treats them differently.
The basis for individual participation in criminal groups and the crime committed is a product of a learning environment. People learn to understand criminal organizations and activities as normative. Individual’s experiences and learning environment in different ways promote deviance or non-deviance behavior. The Saints and the Roughnecks obtain their delinquent behavior from their immediate environments.
In social strain theory, Agnew argues that the disjuncture between positively valued goals, opportunities, and ability to achieve those goals results in crime (Agnew, 1992). He identifies some strain, which forces individuals into crime-coping activities such as low social control, and unjust society, which creates some urge or motivation to engage in criminal-coping activities.
The strains created can lead to negative emotions, low social control, and social learning of criminal behavior. Social pressure makes the Roughnecks engage in delinquency. They are not rich boys, not well mannered, readily violent, and not performing well at school. Agnew characterizes criminal groups as appealing to those experiencing social strain. The Roughnecks use delinquency as a way to gain status and success in society.
The central premise of rational choice theory is that criminals make decisions for maximizing gains in criminal engagements. Levels of commitments in criminal activities differ depending on “the risk, effort, and rewards.” A person will choose the course of action that gives the best or highest returns on time and effort (Cornish and Clarke, 2002).
Factors attributed to the background of the gangs such as a psychological state of the minds, upbringing and demographic profile limit the decisions of the bands to engage in crime. Limited predisposition and information rationally control delinquency among the gangs.
Criminals consider crime as a rational course of action. Returns gained from engaging in delinquent activities extremely influence the behavior and activities of both gangs. Background factors of the bands, to a greater extent, influenced the findings of the study. The community, school and the police reacted differently to these two sets of gangs.
Conclusion
William studied two sets of gangs operating in the same environment and got different results. The townspeople, the community, and the police have different perspectives of the bands. The background, social upbringing, social status, and other factors make the gangs engage in criminal activities at various degrees and for different purposes. Bands use delinquency to achieve a given mission in life.
References
Agnew, R. (1992). Foundation for a general strain theory of crime and delinquency. Criminology, 30, 47–87.
Akers, R. L. (2009). Social Learning and Social Structure: A General Theory of Crime and Deviance. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers.
Cornish, D. B., and Clarke, R. V. (2002). Analyzing Organized Crime. In A. R. Piquero, Rational Choice and Criminal Behavior: Recent Research and Future Challenges. New York, NY: Routledge.
Henslin, J. M. (2010). Essentials of Sociology: A Down-to-Earth Approach (9th Ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Allyn & Bacon.
Ludwig Wittgenstein’s assertion that “The world is all that is the case” can be found in the principal work of all his life “Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus” as the Preposition 1. On the whole, the work does not feature specific arguments supporting ideas stated in it; however, it presents the very interesting approach to the representation of connection between reality and linguistics. The assertion that “The world is all that is the case” is a part of Ludwig Wittgenstein’s metaphysical view which he developed to explain his picture theory of language.
The Tractatus is mainly organized around the concern that there exist certain relationships between the world, reality around us and the language (Ludwig Wittgenstein, p. 2). Language can be treated as the declaration of thought in accordance to Wittgenstein’s approach. The Tractatus begins with the description of the world around us and the issue of the “voice speaking behind” this description. It argues that it is rather hard to identify this voice. Another idea connected to the voice is that it may belong to some entity of godly nature who announces pieces of wisdom concerning the logical structure of the world (Monk, p. 24). Speaking about semantics supporting the assertion by Ludwig Wittgenstein’s that “The world is all that is the case”, it should be mentioned that there exist a row of such arguments. First of all, it can be said that everything that happens to achieve something in the world is a kind of situation that may be described as ‘case’ in the universe. Thus, the universe can be defined as ‘logical space’ (Fogelin, p. 19).
In addition, facts can be defined as composers of objects which unite them in a certain relation. Objects are, in turn, represented in sentences by words and are always in a certain connection with the other objects within facts. The world is organized in a united harmony; thus, there are no objects which are “drifting alone” in the universe. Further, there exist no priory facts: nothing can “dictate” any particular object with which other objects it should create some kind of relation. Still, every object should create certain relation with the other particular object in some fact or the other one. As a result, objects are united by their logical structure to make up facts.
Finally, we imagine and picture facts to ourselves in our heads, and thus we create thoughts. If one will imagine a thought as an image of somebody’s yard with its trees, flowers, birds and so on, all these objects will be organized in a certain configuration. The same thing happens to thoughts: each word which makes up the sentence corresponds to an object, and all these objects will have certain relationships with each other. The ‘picture theory’ of meaning based on these assertions states that the meaning of a sentence or a proposition, in the other words, can be defined by the objects it is represented by and their mutual organization.
Concluding on all the information related above, it should be mentioned that Ludwig Wittgenstein’s assertion that “The world is all that is the case” can be described as an important idea behind his picture theory of language. The ‘picture theory’ of meaning states that the meaning of a proposition is defined by the objects it is represented by and their mutual organization.
Works Cited
Fogelin, Robert. “Wittgenstein. The Argument of Philosophers series” (2nd ed.). London and New York: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1987. Print.
Ludwig Wittgenstein 2002. Web.
Monk, Ray. “Wittgenstein: the Duty of Genius”. London: Jonathan Cape, 1990. Print.
Marx’s concept of labor is among the most influential definitions in the modern economy. However, despite its flexibility and inclusiveness, it has produced several discrepancies with the shift towards a post-industrial society. The comparison of Marx’s concept of labor with that by Hannah Arendt reveals that the latter contains several important additions and clarifications which make it more suitable for use in the contemporary socioeconomic environment.
Marx’s Concept
In the most basic terms, the concept of labor according to Marx is based on the process of objectifying the materials. This is achieved by giving form to physical objects. In other words, labor is a process of creating a material product, which leads to the productivist interpretation of Marx’s theories. This has also led some scholars to believe that Marx used the industrial model as a basis for his concept, with factories being the easiest example.
However, it is also possible that a certain form of craft, such as carpentry, is an equally suitable match for the described activities since its elements fit within the productivist model. However, it is equally important to recognize the philosophical implications behind labor. For instance, labor in humans serves an additional purpose of satisfying the spiritual need. This distinguishes human beings from animals, who perceive objects as potential means of fulfilling their immediate desires. Simply put, animals are likely to devour (or otherwise destroy) an object in the process of satisfying their desires.
This process is capable of sustaining natural life but does not produce any meaningful development. In contrast, humans foresee their likely future needs and use labor to form objects that can be used for satisfying them. In other words, the immediate desires are ignored, which allows for a meaningful creation of value. Interestingly, since the labor is directed by humans and driven by their needs, the created products attain human-related attributes. From this perspective, it is possible to say that through labor people introduce their qualities to the world.
According to Marx, the process also allows the participants to acknowledge their abilities and powers. The reflection that occurs in the process of objectification enhances human self-awareness and stimulates development. Finally, it should be understood that despite the evident emphasis on the operational element, labor necessitates the involvement of peers and is, therefore, a social activity, which again, differentiates it from the non-human counterpart.
As can be derived from the information above, one of the key components of labor from Marx’s perspective is the mediation of activities to the desires and immediate instincts. Interestingly, such criterion excludes some actions that would otherwise be considered human. The easiest example is hunting – a form of labor that for a long time was crucial for human survival and well-being in the developed societies and that is retained in some form to this day.
Marx specifically cites fishing, mining, and woodcutting as examples of such activities and argues that the presence of instruments (e.g. axes, pickaxes, and fishing equipment) as well as the elements of social organization, allows categorizing them as labor. Such a position is not entirely flawless since it is also possible to describe the appropriation of tools as a selection and relocation of objects rather than their deliberate and meaningful transformation.
From a purely physical standpoint, it is necessary to achieve a certain level of material influence which would, in turn, result in the expected transformation. From a broader perspective, however, it is possible to state that the selection, relocation, and eventual application of an object already constitute a transformation. Within the Marx’s concept, the conscious separation of an object from its natural environment is a sufficient condition of formative activity and, by extension, labor.
As was mentioned above, the concept of labor introduced by Marx is highly consistent with industrial labor and craft. Unlike nature-related labor, it relies less more on the workers’ actions for reaching the desired outcomes. Since the materials used by the worker are already the products of earlier labor, industrial labor employs changes in social organization and division of labor. The most obvious example is the routinization of labor through disaggregation of tasks and introducing specialization.
The resulting process requires managerial effort and thus transcends to the next level. It is also important to mention that the introduction of coordination is a major cause for the introduction of the social component, as workers are required to communicate on both horizontal and vertical levels to ensure the necessary level of quality. Another important element is the addition of machinery which automates certain routine tasks and consequently eliminates the involvement of manual labor. The said process is termed real subsumption by Marx and effectively describes the evolution of labor in the modern world.
One of its key characteristics is the gradual increase in the scale of production, which, in turn, decreases the pressing need to satisfy immediate needs. Thus, the produced goods serve a more encompassing and abstract goal of satisfying the demand of the market. As such, industrialization gradually eliminates the need to engage in labor for the sake of fulfilling local and individual needs and minimizes the involvement of human beings.
Shortcomings
At this point, it is tempting to conclude that the described concept is becoming less applicable to the contemporary economic and social environment. Most notably, the service sector has grown enormously both in significance and in scope. Unlike material goods, services rarely require the involvement of physical objects and rarely require their transformation as a part of successful needs satisfaction. The fact that by this time, according to Marx, the connection between labor and satisfaction of needs has become elusive and abstract further complicates the situation. Another important development is the growing presence of information technology as an essential component of both the economic and social domains. Since information is intangible and is only indirectly connected to the material goods, it is reasonable to assume that labor, as defined by Marx, does not apply to it.
Another concern with the concept proposed by Marx is the inclusiveness of the definition and the vagueness of criteria that lead to the situation where numerous activities fall into the same category despite being significantly different on many parameters. Finally, the concept does not account for the discrepancy between the satisfaction of immediate needs and the expected decrease of human involvement in the production. In an attempt to address these inconsistencies, it would be necessary to compare the described concept of labor to that proposed by Hannah Arendt.
Arendt’s Concept
The most evident difference between the two concepts is the diversification of the definitions. Whereas Marx unites all human activities that involve deliberate transformation under the definition of labor, Arendt differentiates between labor, work, and action. Labor, according to Arendt, constitutes the actions aimed at the satisfaction of immediate needs. What differentiates this activity from the non-human labor used by Marx is the appropriation of instruments and objects. In this regard, it resembles the rudimentary activities that have a minimal mediating factor (e.g. fishing). However, Arendt further clarifies the issue by specifying the immediate and non-lasting nature of the satisfaction effect. In other words, labor according to Arendt is the process that addresses the needs that reemerge immediately after being satisfied.
Thus, fishing can be categorized as labor for as long as the fish is consumed as soon as it is caught (rather than preserved). Woodcutting and mining, on the other hand, are to be excluded from this category since they are most likely undertaken to create the stock of supplies (timber or ore). Most examples of housework also fall into this category, which further distances the two definitions since housework usually does not lead to the creation of material objects. This issue is specifically addressed by Arendt, who points out that labor does not create lasting effects or products (which is consistent with the immediate reemergence of needs).
Since humans do not create a lasting impression on their environment and engage in labor mostly to sustain their natural existence, it does not constitute a significant difference from animals. To emphasize this, Arendt humans that engage in labor as their primary activity as animal labor. She further clarifies that since labor is driven by necessity, it decreases the freedom of action and is thus comparable to slavery. At this point, it becomes obvious that the implications of labor differ depending on the outlook, with Marx viewing it as means of humankind’s development while Arendt emphasizing its inhibiting qualities. She goes as far as to suggest that the introduction of labor in the social sphere may disrupt the freedom of choice and substitute it with the pursuit of animal needs satisfaction.
In contrast, the second category, work, is aimed at the production of a lasting product intended for future use. Such a definition closely resembles both the formative nature of work suggested by Marx and the productivist perspective that underlies his concept of labor. Similarly to Marx, Arendt considers work an unnatural activity in that it usually results in the creation of the artificial objects suitable for humans’ needs but unavailable in natural form. In this sense, humans manifest themselves in the world and create a durable imprint of their existence. Since the created objects are distinct from those occurring naturally and are semi-permanent (e.g. durable), the results of work attain a certain level of independence both from nature and its creators.
The expected outcome of work is the creation of space that is more suitable for the existence of humankind than the less convenient natural environment. However, in contrast to Marx’s standpoint, Arendt does not limit the products of work to material goods and includes art and legislature into this category. Therefore, the said environment (termed “common world” by the author) is not limited to physical manifestation but includes artistic, social, and cultural characteristics.
Also, it conveys a greater amount of freedom since it is not driven by the need to satisfy immediate instincts. Finally, in contrast to labor (as defined by Arendt), work is not confined to individual needs and is instead public (and, therefore, social): it pursues a more abstract goal of “common good.” Interestingly, in this regard work is opposed by labor, which produces perishable outcomes and thus does not have the potential to create a lasting environment. According to the author, this difference is critical for explaining the reason behind the expansion of production beyond the point of basic needs satisfaction: to achieve abundance and luxury, the qualities of durability and stability are neglected. Simply put, the inclusion of immaterial elements is probably the most significant factor that differentiates the otherwise similar definition of work by Arendt from Marx’s concept of labor and allows accounting for the shortcomings of the latter.
Finally, acting as a third component further emphasizes social interaction while at the same time excluding the material component. In essence, it is the furthest deviation from the concept of labor as suggested by Marx but is a logical extension of Arendt’s sequence. Nevertheless, it still resembles the latest stage of industrial labor which, according to Marx, requires only a managerial and maintenance effort from humans and can be achieved entirely by machines.
In both concepts, the amount of freedom is the greatest, since the limitation of necessity is eliminated in its entirety. Interestingly, Arendt argues that it is the social component or the interaction between the participants of action that is responsible for the freedom. While Marx’s concept also includes the increase in social interactions that corresponds to the decrease of personal needs and a shift towards a more universal and abstract approach, there is no evidence of a causational relationship between the two. Therefore, at this point, Arendt’s concept of labor aims at social rather than industrial drivers behind the facilitation of freedom, which further aligns it with the observed reality and strengthens its position in comparison with that suggested by Marx.
Conclusion
Given the differences in concepts highlighted in the essay, it would be tempting to conclude that Marx’s concept of labor, while consistent with the changes observed during the period of active industrialization, has lost its relevance in the post-industrial setting. However, a closer examination reveals both concepts share the essential characteristics, cover the same stages of development, and arrive at similar conclusions.
Importantly, Marx’s concept retains the applicability to postindustrial society since it contains the definition of universal labor as necessary for sustaining complex industrial activities. It is thus possible to align the recent surge of the service industry and informational technology with the economic and social relationships described by Marx. Nevertheless, the concept suggested by Arendt offers a much clearer definition that distinguishes between various types of labor that are characterized by different degrees of freedom.
Even more importantly, Arendt’s concept clarifies the condition of an artificial environment that is an important element of human activity, whereas from Marx’s perspective such development only occurs at a certain unspecified point in time. Next, Arendt’s definition contains the element of action which, while only marginally related to labor as presented by Marx, offers a better explanation for the degree of freedom associated with it and clarifies the reasons behind the expansion of manufacture beyond the point of satisfying the basic needs. Finally, and most importantly, the acknowledgment of social and cultural activities as key elements of work provides a feasible explanation of the growing demand for services and other intangible products as a current leading manifestation of creating value.
Considering the said advantages, it would be reasonable to say that Arendt’s concept of labor offers a set of clearer definitions and contains several important additions that make it more compelling than that offered by Marx.
Criminology is a certain study of crime based on the social-scientific approach and is both regarded as an individual and wide social phenomenon. Criminological research fields include such issues as: the incidence of crime, its forms, causes and consequences of crime. Governmental and social regulations, certain reactions to crime are also included here.
Criminology is actually an interdisciplinary sphere in the sciences that regard behavior. It is usually drawing up by the research of such scientists as: sociologists and psychologists; it is also drawing up by writings in law. Quantitative methods in the criminology play a great role in data analysis. Deflem wrote in his book: “In 1885, Italian law professor Raffaele Garofalo coined the term “criminology” (in Italian, criminologia). The French anthropologist Paul Topinard used it for the first time in French (criminologie) around the same time”(Deflem, p. 279, 2006).
Following these I suggest reviewing Positivist school of “Schools of thought”, which is listed in the Larry J. Siegel’s “Criminology – The Core”, and is development.
The Positivist School argues that the criminal behavior itself is always caused by some factors: internal and external which are mainly outside of the control of the certain individual. The scientific method was represented and applied in order to study behavior of the human being. According to Larry J. Siegel Positivism can be divided into three main segments which are named: biological positivism, psychological positivism and social positivism.
Siegel states that: “Cesare Lombroso, an Italian prison doctor working in the late 19th century and sometimes regarded as the “father” of criminology, was one of the largest contributors to biological positivism and founder of the Italian school of criminology” (Siegel, p. 7, 2003). I accordance with McLennan: “Lombroso took a scientific approach, insisting on empirical evidence, for studying crime” (McLennan, p. 311, 1980). He actually suggested that certain physiological traits such as the measurements of somebody’s cheek bones or even hairline, or maybe a cleft palate, used to be considered as throwbacks to man of the Neanderthal period, were pointing out of well known “atavistic” tendencies in the criminal sphere.
This approach was actually influenced by the earlier represented theory of the phrenology and also by Charles Darwin’s evolution theory. However, this approach has been replaced. A well known student of Cesare Lombroso – Enrico Ferri argued that both factors: social and biological ones played a role. Ferri stated that criminals should not be regarded as responsible ones for those factors which were causing their criminality but were actually beyond their own control. Larry J. Siegel states that: “Criminologists have since rejected Lombroso’s biological theories, with control groups not used in his studies” (Siegel, p. 139, 2003).
Then we may speak of Alexandre Lacassagne and his own school of thought. He actually rejected Lombroso’s “criminal type” and “born criminals”, and outlined the significance of social factors. Key positions of his theory were opposite to social determinism of Durkheim, but still Alexandre Lacassagne did not turn down certain biological factors. Renneville said about these: “Indeed, Lacassagne created an original synthesis of both tendencies, influenced by positivism, phrenology and hygienism, which alleged a direct influence of the social environment on the brain and compared the social itself to a brain, upholding an organicist position” (Renneville, p. 56, 2005).
Emile Durkheim regarded the act of the crime as an inescapable aspect of human society, with its uneven allocation of wealth and some other obvious distinctions among people.
We made a comparison analysis in the Positivist school of “Schools of thought” with a view to Larry J. Siegel’s “Criminology – The Core” and other theorist’s points of view.
References
Deflem. M. (2006). Sociological Theory and Criminological Research: Views from Europe and the United States. Elsevier: Praeger Publishers.
McLennan. G. (1980). Crime and Society: Readings in History and Theory. Routledge: Routledge Press.
Renneville. M. (2005). La criminologie perdue d’Alexandre Lacassagne (1843-1924), Criminocorpus. Paris: Centre Alexandre Koyré.
Siegel. L. J. (2003). Criminology -The Core. New York: Pocket Books.