ABSTRACT

The classical school of thought in criminology emerged in the 18 th century through the work of
Cesare Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham. They viewed crime as a rational action, a situation
where the intending offender weighs the pleasure and pain of committing a crime and takes
decision based on the most favourable. The classical school advocated for a system of criminal
justice whereby the punishment should be administered based on the magnitude of the crime,
and that punishment should be public so as to deter crime. Neo-classical school emerged
through the work of Gabriel Tarde as a result of the flaws of the classical school. Neo-classists
argued that although human beings are rational and weighs the pain and pleasure of
committing crime, there are an exception to this such as the insane, mentally ill and therefore,
punishment should be made to fit the offender.
In essence, the classical and neo-classical schools have their similarities and differences. For
instance, both schools agreed on what Jeremy Bentham called “felicitous calculus” (the act of
calculating the pain and pleasure of committing a crime), but disagreed on how punishment
should be administered. For example, the classical school believe that punishment should be
made to fit the crime irrespective of the offender, while the neo-classical school believe that
punishment should be made to fit the offender based on the fact that there are recidivists and
first time offenders.

INTRODUCTION

Classical crime theory is represented by the theoretical study of Jeremy Bentham and Cesare
Beccaria. Jeremy Bentham was a founder of English utilitarianism. Bentham thought that
human beings are hedonistic and act only in their own self-interest. Neoclassical crime theory
is a continuation of classical crime theory tradition. While classical school was wholly concern
with an explanation of crime, neoclassical crime theory saw some flaws in Beccaria's theory of
crime. Classical crime theory completely concentrated on the criminal act, neoclassical crime
theory sought to improve the stances towards perpetrators who should have an impact on the
level of guilt and severity of punishment. Not all perpetrators should be treated in the same
fashion, because the evident differences exist among them. Crime is a result of many
conditions that have ultimately influenced on the perpetrators to commit it. Representative of
neoclassical criminology theory, Gabriel Tarde published the book "Penal philosophy" in 1890.
Neoclassical criminology theory considers age, gender and social class of the perpetrators. The

1
perpetrators are people who think, feel, act and criminal behavior is learned within groups by
imitation and identification.

The question as to what is the similarities and differences between classical and neo-classical
schools of criminology is one that needs to be answered by looking at the various schools of
thought in order to highlight the areas where they agreed with each other and where they differ.
Therefore, it becomes necessary that we start by considering the key terms in this question, as
well as the consideration of the various schools of thought.

DEFINITION OF KEY CONCEPTS

Before we proceed to talk about the similarities and differences between the classical and neo-
classical schools of thought in criminology, it is important that we first of all, explain the key
concepts here which are Criminology and School of thought. This will enhance our
understanding of the basic argument of these schools of thought.

CRIMINOLOGY: This is the scientific study of crime, including its causes, responses by law
enforcement, and methods of prevention. It is a sub-group of sociology

This is the scientific study of crime, including its causes, responses by law enforcement, and
methods of prevention. It is a sub-group of sociology, which is the scientific study of social
behavior. There are many fields of study that are used in the field of criminology, including
biology, statistics, psychology, psychiatry, economics, and anthropology. Criminology can also
be said to be the study of the effect of crime on individuals and society. Criminology involves
analyzing illegal human behaviors and crime prevention methods. Criminology blends social
science and psychology with criminal justice. It also explores the many causes of criminal
activity among different groups of people. The study of criminology involves the investigation
of how factors such as race, ethnicity, education and socio-economic status can influence crime
incidences. It also examines the history and success rates of different law enforcement
methods. Criminology also entails the examination of how individuals react to specific types of
crimes, along with the overall effect of crime on culture as a whole. Crime affects more than
just the perpetrator; it can also have severe consequences for the victims, families and the
society at large.

SCHOOL OF THOUGHT: This refers to a collection or group of people who share common
characteristics of opinion or outlook of a philosophy, discipline, and belief. It can also be said
to be a particular idea or set of ideas held by a specific group. School of thought can as well,

2
refer to be any idea that a group strongly believes in, be it through practicing this idea in their
everyday life or through fighting for its adoption. Schools are often characterized by their
currency and thus, are classified into classical and neo-classical. Sometimes, school of thought
is named after their founders or the city where it was founded. For instance, in sociology we
have the Marxist school which is named after its founder Karl Marx, and also the Chicago
school which is named after the institution where such ideas classified under the school
originated from.

BRIEF HISTORY OF CRIMINOLOGY

The history of criminology is in many ways the history of humanity. As long as there have
been people, there has been crime. As human society has evolved over the years, so too, has
our understanding of the causes of crime and the societies responses to it. The history of
modern criminology finds its roots in ancient times. Throughout history, people have
committed crime against one another. In ancient times, the common response was one of
revenge; the victim or the victim’s family would exact what they felt to be an appropriate
response to the crime committed against them. Often, these responses were not measured or
proportionate. As a result, the original criminal would often perceive himself or herself to have
become the victim due to actions taken against him or her that they felt did not match the crime
committed. Blood feuds often developed that could some times last for generations.

While certainly crime is a problem for all societies, the response to crimes in early societies
posed their own problems. Laws that clearly defined crimes and corresponding punishments
were established to both quell crime and to put an end to blood feuds that resulted in the
victims revenge. These early attempts still allowed for the victim of a crime to issue the
punishment, but sought to clarify that a response to a particular crime should be equal to the
severity of the crime itself. The Code of Hammurabi is one of the earliest, and perhaps the best
known, attempts to establish a set punishment scale for crimes. The principles set out in the
code are best described as the “law of retaliation.”

Much of our modern understanding of the relationship between crime and punishment can be
traced to the writings of the Greek philosophers Plato and Aristotle, though it would take more
than a millennium for many of their concepts to take root. Plato was among the first to theorize
that crime was often the result of a poor education and that punishments for crimes should be
assessed based on their degree of fault, allowing for the possibility of mitigating circumstances.
Aristotle developed the idea that responses to crime should attempt to prevent future acts, both
by the criminal and by other who may be inclined to commit other crimes. Most notably, that

3
punishment for crime should serve as a deterrent to others. In early societies, crime along with
most everything else, was viewed in the context of religion. Criminal acts offended the gods or
God. It was in this context that acts of revenge were justified, as a means to appease the gods
for the affront committed against them by the crime. The first society to develop a
comprehensive code of laws, included criminal codes, was the Roman Republic. The Romans
are widely regarded as the true precursors to the modern legal system, and their influences are
still seen today, as the Latin language is preserved in much of the legal terminology.

Rome took a more secular view of crime, viewing criminal acts as an affront to society as
opposed to the gods. Therefore, it took on the role of determining and delivering punishment as
a governmental function, as a means of maintaining an ordered society.

SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT IN CRIMINOLOGY

Edwin Sutherland pointed out that a school of criminology connotes “the system of thought
which consists of an integrated theory of causation of crime and of policies of control implied
in the theory of causation”. Therefore, a school of criminology implies the following three
important points:

1. The adherents of each school try to explain the causation of crime and criminal
behavior in their own way relying on the theory propounded by the exponent of that
particular school.

2. Each school of criminology suggests punishment and preventive measures to suit its
ideology.

3. And, each of the school represents the social attitude of people towards crime and
criminal in a given time.

It was generally believed that a man commits crime due to the influence of some external spirit
called ‘demon’ or ‘devil’. Thus an offender commits a wrongful act not because of his own
free will but due to the influence of some external super power. No attempt was, however,
made to probe into the real causes of crime. This demonological theory of criminality
propounded by the exponents of pre-classical school acknowledged the omnipotence of spirit,
which they regarded as a great power. The right of society to punish the offender was,
however, well recognized. The offender was regarded as an innately depraved person who
could be cured only by torture and pain. The evolution of criminal law was yet at a
rudimentary stage. Hobbes suggested that fear of punishment at the hands of monarch was a
sufficient deterrent for the members of early society to keep them away from sinful acts which

4
were synonymous to crimes. Thus the theosophists, notably St. Thomas Aquinas and the social
contract writers such as Donte Alighieri, Machiavelli, Martin Luther and Jean Bodin provided
immediate background for Beccaria’s classical school at a later stage. The pre-classical
thinking, however, withered away with the lapse of time and advancement of knowledge.

Today, we have several schools of thought in criminology such as:

POSITIVIST SCHOOL OF THOUGHT: The Positivist school presumes that criminal

behaviour is caused by internal and external factors outside of the individual's control. The
scientific method was introduced and applied to study human behavior. Positivism can be
broken up into three segments which include biological, psychological and social positivism.
Cesare Lombroso (1835-1909), an Italian sociologist working in the late 19th century, is
regarded as the father of criminology. He was one of the key contributors to biological
positivism and founded the Italian school of criminology. Lombroso took a scientific approach,
insisting on empirical evidence for studying crime. Considered as the founder of criminal
anthropology, he suggested that physiological traits such as the measurements of one's cheek
bones or hairline, or a cleft palate (regarded as throwbacks to Neanderthal man) could indicate
"atavistic" criminal tendencies. Enrico Ferri, a student of Lombroso, believed that social as
well as biological factors played a role, and held the view that criminals should not be held
responsible when factors causing their criminality were beyond their control.

SOCIOLOGICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT: Sociological school suggests that societal

factors such as poverty, membership of subcultures, or low levels of education can predispose
people to crime. Adolphe Quetelet made use of data and statistical analysis to gain insight into
the relationship between crime and sociological factors. He found that age, gender, poverty,
education, and alcohol consumption were important factors related to crime. Lance Lochner
conducted three different research experiments that shared the same conclusion: schooling
reduces crime by a significant margin. Rawson W. Rawson utilized crime statistics to suggest a
link between population density and crime rates, with crowded cities creating an environment
conducive for crime. Joseph Fletcher and John Glyde also presented papers to the Statistical
Society of London on their studies of crime and its distribution. Henry Mayhew used empirical
methods and an ethnographic approach to address social questions and poverty, and presented
his studies in London Labour and the London Poor. Émile Durkheim viewed crime as an
inevitable aspect of society, with uneven distribution of wealth and other differences among
people.

5
There are other schools of thought in criminology such as the Psychological school, Biological
school, Anthropological School etc. It is noted that the concept of criminology is varying and
highly complicated and as such, numerous and diverse number of schools of thought exist
within the concept. Most cogent to this piece are the Classical and Neo-classical schools of
thought, without attempting to belittle the essence of the other aforementioned schools of
thought, the classical and neo-classical schools stand high as schools of thought most notable
in respect to inquiry and essence in the concept of criminology.

CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT IN CRIMINOLOGY

The Classical School in criminology is usually a reference to the eighteenth-century work

during the Enlightenment by the utilitarian and social contract philosophers Cesare Beccaria
and Jeremy Bentham. Their interests lay in the system of criminal justice and penology and,
indirectly through the proposition that "man is a calculating animal", in the causes of criminal
behaviour. The Classical school of thought was premised on the idea that people have free will
in making decisions, and that punishment can be a deterrent for crime, so long as the
punishment is proportional, fits the crime, and is carried out promptly.

Beccaria, the pioneer of modern criminology expounded his naturalistic theory of criminality
by rejecting the omnipotence of evil spirit. He laid greater emphasis on mental phenomenon of
the individual and attributed crime to ‘free will’ of the individual. Thus he was much
influenced by the utilitarian philosophy of his time which placed reliance on hedonism,
namely, the “pain and pleasure theory”.

There are ten principles that are used to summarize Beccaria’s arguments and ideas that he
thought would make the criminal justice system work in a more efficient, effective, and all-
around non-discriminatory way.

1. He felt that legislatures should define the crimes and set forth the punishments for the
specific crimes, instead of allowing the laws to be vague and left to the discretion of the
judicial system.

2. Because judges had an immense amount of discretion when ruling over proceedings,
Beccaria suggested that judge’s only task should be to determine guilt or innocence and
then follow the predetermined sentence set forth by the legislature.

6
3. Beccaria also implied that all factors except the impact on society were immaterial in
determining the seriousness of a crime. Therefore, impact on society should be used to
determine the significance of the crime.

4. The next principle brought forth by Beccaria was that of proportionality. He felt that that
the punishment of the crime should be proportionate to its seriousness. (Vold, Bernard, &
Snipes, 2002) In other words, the “time should fit the crime.”

5. Beccaria thought that the purpose of punishment should not be retribution. Instead, he
believed punishment should be based on deterrence.

6. He felt that if people saw punishments being carried out, it would allow onlookers to be
deterred from criminal activity.

7. When the harshness of the punishment exceeds the necessity to achieve deterrence,
Beccaria believed that it was unreasonable.

8. Beccaria thought torture was inappropriate and allowed for the weak to incriminate
themselves and the strong would be found innocent before they were adjudicated.
(Schmalleger, 2014) This unjust punishment inflicted on offenders allowed crime to be
increased instead of deterred.

9. Beccaria also called for adjudication and punishments to occur quickly. (Vold, Bernard, &
Snipes, 2002) He felt that if a crime was committed and the offender was adjudicated in a
prompt manner that the concept of crime and punishment would be associated with each
other.

10. Beccaria thought if a punishment was certain then society would have a better impression
of the criminal justice system. (Vold, Bernard, & Snipes, 2002) This allowed potential
offenders to know the punishment before making a rational decision to commit crime.

Beccaria pushed for laws to be published so that the public would be aware of the laws, know
the purpose of the laws, and know the punishments set forth by the laws. (Vold, Bernard, &
Snipes, 2002) He also accentuated torture and secret accusations be abolished or eliminated
because they were cruel and unusual punishments. (Vold, Bernard, & Snipes, 2002) Beccaria
called for imprisonment instead of capital punishment or the death penalty. (Vold, Bernard, &
Snipes, 2002) He also emphasized jails becoming more human and the distinction between the
elite and the underprivileged be eradicated from the law. (Vold, Bernard, & Snipes, 2002) This
was based on the idea of sovereignty lying in the hands of the people and all members of
society being seen and treated equally in the application of the law. (Jeffery, 1959)

7
Jeremy Bentham was born in 1748. He started putting together an all-inclusive code of ethics.
The issue he came across was he thought the task was too non-utilitarian, so he placed
prominence on the real problem of eradicating or at least diminishing crime. Bentham created
the concept of the hedonistic calculus, because he believed in the person’s capability to judge
the impact of punishment on themselves and their ability to make a choice regarding the
pursuance of pleasure and the evasion of pain. The hedonistic calculus defined as the idea
that the main objective of an intelligent person is to achieve the most pleasure and the least
pain and that the individuals are constantly calculating the pluses and minuses of their
potential actions.

Since Bentham believed in the hedonistic calculus and a person’s ability to make a rational
decision regarding a pleasure versus pain calculation, he conjectured that the punishment for
crimes should prevail over the pleasure the person would get from committing the criminal
activity. The free-will idea of the Classical School, therefore, added to Bentham’s idea that the
penalties of the criminal actions would be considered before the actions were taken. This
means that the person would ultimately be deterred from the actions that criminal activity the
person would have made had they not be a free-will, rational person.

What the Classical School did for Criminology. The Classical School of Criminology is known
as the first organized theory of crime that links causation to appropriate punishments. The
classical school followed Beccaria’s ideology which focused on crime, not the criminal. The
Classical School of Criminology focused on the principle of deterrence instead of punishment.

CLASSICAL THEORIES OF CRIMINOLOGY

Many things came about because of the creation of the Classical School of Criminology. One
of the most important things that came from the Classical School of Criminology was the
theories that arose from it. Three of the theories that came from the Classical School of
Criminology are the Rational Choice Theory, Routine Activities Theory, and Deterrence
Theory. These theories came from the Classical School of Criminology, but are still used to
explain criminal behaviour in criminology today.

Rational Choice Theory is defined as a perspective that holds that criminality is the result of
conscious choice and predicts that individuals chose to commit a crime when the benefits
outweigh the costs of disobeying the law. (Schmalleger, 2014) Rational Choice Theory is
basically a cost-benefit analysis between crime and punishment relying on the freewill decision
from the offender. (Schmalleger, 2014)

8
Routine Activities Theory has three principle elements. Those three key elements for the
Routine Activities Theory are a motivated offender, an attractive target, and a lack of a capable
guardian. (Cullen & Agnew 2003) It is said people’s daily routine and activities affect the
chances that they will be an attractive target who encounters an offender in a situation where
no effective guardian is present. Routine Activities Theory has a strong emphasis on
victimization. Different changes in routine activities in society can affect the crime rates.
(Cullen & Agnew) Some examples of this are working women or college classes starting after
a summer break.

Deterrence Theory: There are two types of deterrence; general deterrence and specific
deterrence. As a general definition, deterrence is a goal in sentencing of hindering the criminal
behaviour from fear of the punishment or consequence. A goal in criminal sentencing that
seeks to prevent others from committing crimes similar to the one that the offender is being
sentenced for is general deterrence. Similarly, specific deterrence has a goal in sentencing that
seeks to prevent a particular offender from recidivism or repeat offending.

APPLICATION OF THE CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF THOUGHT TO A CRIMINAL

CASE IN NIGERIA

Taking into view a case of intent based murder, a situation where a husband as a result of an
argument murders his wife intentionally, if the analysis of the classical school is to be brought
bare in this case, the husband must have to die. As the classical school believes that
punishment meted over a crime committed must fit or match the crime committed. A concept
known as “just desert”. In the above mentioned case, the culprit being the husband must be put
to death, the classical school says, having killed, he must be killed as a punishment. This is
necessary as it serves as a deterrence to others who have the propensity to commit crime. In an
analogical view, the punishment fits and matches the crime committed.

THE NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOL OF CRIMINOLOGY

Neoclassical criminology can be defined, simply, as a school of thought that assumes criminal
behaviour as situationally dynamic and individually-determined. Neoclassical theories of crime
assert that deterring, reducing, or eliminating crime can occur through stricter child-rearing
practices, enhanced punishments, and/or an increase in surveillance and security. Neoclassical
thought is typically linked to politically conservative crime control policies. This is primarily

9
because these theories advocate for an increase in more aggressive forms of policing, zero-
tolerance parole and probation practices, and increased prison sentences for all crimes

In criminology, the Neo-Classical School continues the traditions of the Classical School
within the framework of Right Realism. Hence, the utilitarianism of Jeremy Bentham and
Cesare Beccaria remains a relevant social philosophy in policy term for using punishment as a
deterrent through law enforcement, the courts, and imprisonment

The ‘free will theory of classical school did not survive for long. It was soon realized that the
exponents of classical school faltered in their approach in ignoring the individual differences
under certain situations and treating first offenders and the habitual alike on the basis of
similarity of act or crime. The neo-classists asserted that certain categories of offenders such as
minors, idiots, insane or incompetent had to be treated leniently in matters of punishment
irrespective of the similarity of their criminal act because these persons were incapable of
appreciating the difference between right and wrong. This tendency of neo-classists to
distinguish criminals according to their mental depravity was indeed a progressive step
inasmuch as it emphasized the need for modifying the classical view. Thus the contribution of
neo-classical thought to the science of criminology has its own merits.

When crime and recidivism are perceived to be a problem, the first political reaction is to call
for increased policing, stiffer penalties, and increased monitoring and surveillance for those
released on parole. Intuitively, politicians see a correlation between the certainty and severity
of punishment, and the choice whether to commit crime. The practical intention has always
been to deter and, if that failed, to keep Thus they justified mitigation of equal punishment in
cases of certain psychopathic offenders. The neo-classists represent a reaction against
the severity of classical view of equal punishment for the same offence.

1. Neo-classists were the first in point of time to bring out a distinction between the first
offenders and the recidivists. They supported individualization of offender a treatment
methods which required the punishment to suit the psychopathic circumstances of the
accused. Thus although the ‘act or the ‘crime still remained the sole determining factor
for adjudging criminality without any regard to the intent, yet the neo-classical school
focused at least some attention on mental causation indirectly.

2. The advocates of this school started with the basic assumption that man acting on
reason and intelligence is a self-determining person and therefore, is responsible for his
conduct. But those lacking normal intelligence or having some mental depravity are
irresponsible to their conduct as they do not possess the capacity of distinguishing

10
 between good or bad and therefore should be treated differently from the responsible
offenders.

3. Though the neo-classists recommended lenient treatment for “irresponsible” or

mentally depraved criminals on account of their incapacity to resist criminal tendency
but they certainly believed that all criminals, whether responsible or irresponsible, must
be kept segregated from the society.

4. It is significant to note that distinction between responsibility and irresponsibility, that

is the sanity and insanity of the criminals as suggested by neo-classical school of
criminology paved way to subsequent formulation of different correctional institutions
such as parole, probation, reformatories, open-air camps etc. in the administration of
criminal justice. This is through this school that attention of criminologists was drawn
for the first time towards the fact that all crimes do have a cause. It must, however be
noted that though this causation was initially confined to psychopathy or psychology
but was later expanded further and finally the positivists succeeded in establishing
reasonable relationship between crime and environment of the criminal.

5. Neo-classists adopted subjective approach to criminology and concentrated their

attention on the conditions under which an individual commits crime.

Thus it would be seen that the main contribution of neo-classical school of criminology lies in
the fact that it came out with certain concessions in the ‘free will theory of classical school and
suggested that an individual might commit criminal acts due to certain extenuating
circumstances which should be duly taken into consideration at the time of awarding
punishment. Therefore, besides the criminal act as such, the personality of the criminal as a
whole, namely, his antecedents, motives, previous life-history, general character, etc., should
not be lost sight of in assessing his guilt. It may be noted that the origin of jury system in
criminal jurisprudence is essentially an outcome of the reaction of neo-classical approach
towards the treatment of offenders.

Society will be safer for the longest possible period of time by locking the habitual offenders
away in prisons. From the earliest theorists, the arguments were based on morality and social
utility, and it was not until comparatively recently that there has been empirical research to
determine whether punishment is an effective deterrent.

The main tenets of neo-classical school of criminology can be summarized as follows

11
 Neo-classists approached the study of criminology on scientific lines by recognizing that
certain extenuating situations or mental disorders deprive a person of his normal capacity to
control his conduct.

NEO-CLASSICAL THEORIES OF CRIMINOLGY

RATIONAL CHOICE THEORY: Neoclassical theorists draw much of their inspiration from
the rational choice theory. Indeed, even the most complex neoclassical theories assume that
people can and will make a choice to not commit a crime if the reward is low and punishment
is likely to be swift, sure, and harsh.

However, neoclassical theorists do not hypothesize that all people may commit a crime if it is
rational to do so. Rather, they understand that some types of motivated offenders choose to
commit crime based on the opportunities available to them in relation to their individual
attributes, skills, and interest.

COMPARISON OF THE CLASSICAL AND NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT

S/N CLASSICAL SCHOOL NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOL

The cause of crime in the classicist The neo-classists still argue that most
crimes are the result of rational choice,
paradigm relates to the question of rational
but that exceptions can be made for
1 calculation where the 'benefit' is greater people who are, for example, mentally
ill.
than the 'cost'.

To Classists, punishment must be made so Neo-classicism also brings forward the

2 strict that an individual would be deterred
from committing crime again.
premise of the modern ‘just desserts’
principle, meaning that even if it does
not achieve complete deterrence, society
needs to see that criminals are punished
in the way that they deserve.

3 The last stage of the criminal justice system The last stage of the criminal justice
is punishment system is punishment

12
CONTRAST BETWEEN THE CLASSICAL AND NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOLS OF
THOUGHT IN CRIMINOLOGY

S/N CLASSICAL SCHOOL NEO-CLASSICAL SCHOOL

Relying on the hedonistic principle of pain The advocates of this school started with
and pleasure, the classical school pointed the basic assumption that man acting on
1 out that individualization was to be the reason and intelligence is a self-determining
basis of punishment. This in other words person and therefore, is responsible for his
meant that punishment was to be awarded conduct. But those lacking normal
keeping in view the pleasure derived by the intelligence or having some mental
criminal from the crime and the pain depravity are irresponsible to their conduct
caused to the victim from it. For the as they do not possess the capacity of
punishment to be efficacious, it is enough distinguishing between good or bad and
that the disadvantage of the punishment therefore should be treated differently from
should exceed the advantage anticipated the responsible offenders.
from the crime; in which the emphasis
should be on the certainty of punishment
and the loss of the expected benefit.
The Classical school argued that Neo-classists asserted that certain
punishment should be administered in such categories of offenders such as minors,
2 a way that it is proportional to the harm it idiots, insane or incompetent had to be
caused irrespective of the offender’s age, treated leniently in matters of punishment
mental state or whether he is a recidivist or irrespective of the similarity of their
a first timer. criminal act because these persons were
incapable of appreciating the difference
between right and wrong.
It is the act of an individual and not his Neo-classists approached the study of
intent which forms the basis for criminology on scientific lines by
3 determining criminality within him. In recognizing that certain extenuating
other words, the classicists are concerned situations or mental disorders deprive a
with the ‘act’ of the criminal rather than his person of his normal capacity to control his
‘intent’. Still, they could never think that conduct. Thus, they justified mitigation of
there could be something like crime equal punishment in cases of certain
causation psychopathic offenders.
Classists argued that punishment should fit Neo-classists were the first in point of time
the crime. That is, a criminal should be to bring out a distinction between the first
punished based on the magnitude of the offenders and the recidivists. They

13
 crime or the harm on the society supported individualization of offender and
4 irrespective of whether it is the criminal’s treatment methods which required the
first time, his/her age or circumstances punishment to suit the psychopathic
surrounding the crime circumstances of the accused. Though the
‘act’, i.e., the criminal act still remained the
sole determining factor for adjudging
criminality without any regard to the intent,
but the neo-classists focused at least some
attention on mental causation indirectly.

Classicists recommended equal punishment Neo-classists recommended lenient

for equal crime irrespective of the treatment for “irresponsible” or mentally
offender’s age, or mental state. depraved criminals on account of their
5 incapacity to resist criminal tendency but
they certainly believed that all criminals,
whether responsible or irresponsible, must
be kept segregated from the society.

According to the classists, the criminal Neo-classists believe that the criminal
justice system should be an obstacle course
6 justice system should be like an assembly
rather than an assembly line based upon the
line where cases are expedited rapidly. assumption that the criminal justice process
is plagued by human error throughout.
The Classical school is not really The Neo-classical school ask questions as
to “how and why” did he commit a crime.
7 concerned with the nature of the criminal,
but with delivering justice.

CONCLUSION

This piece examines the concept of crime and its adjourning schools of thought. While other
latent schools of thought such as the anthropological school of thought, psychological school

14
of thought exist, most notable and manifest of the schools of thought are the classical and neo-
classical schools of thought. This schools of thought efficiently examines the essence,
dynamics and negativity of crimes, the reasons crimes are committed and the nature of
punishment and the controversial circumstances surrounding it. Many a scholar in the field of
criminology believe that crime cannot be holistically taken away from the society, while some
see it as a function of the law and a component that services the law others see it as a bug that
cannot be taken away from society. In this view the classical and neo-classical schools as
highlighted in this piece examines the concept of crime in its nature and response. The classical
school tends to see crime as a concept that should be exorcised in a way that the cycle of crime
goes thus:

The punishment meted out on a crime fits and matches the crime committed in proportion and
position with due respect to time, while the neoclassical school seeks answers to the questions
how and why crime is committed. This piece has been able to show direct comparison and
contrast between the classical and neo-classical schools.

The classical and neo-classical schools of thought in criminology are both very much similar
and also different in nature. As they both consider crime to be a matter of rational choice and
that punishment generally should be designed in a way that it deters the offender from re-
offending and also non-criminals from committing crime. In the course of this study, we have
been able to examine both school and their position on crime. They both view crime as an act
of rational choice and that the criminal must be sanctioned to deter crime. The classical school
recommended imprisonment of a criminal, while the neo-classical school advocated for capital
punishment.

REFERENCES

15
 Retrieved from: https://www.uniassignment.com/essay-samples/criminology/the-classical-
school-by-beccaria-criminology-essay.php§ (accessed on 11/02/2017)

 Classical School of Criminology: A Foundation of Today’s Criminal Justice System. Retrieved

from: https://russiarobinson.wordpress.com/2014/06/03/classical-school-of-
criminology

 Retrieved from: http://www.foundation-of-todays-criminal-justice-system/§

(accessed on 11/02/2017)

 Retrieved from: http://classroom.synonym.com/differences-between-classical-neoclassical-

schools-criminology-10040264.html§ (accessed on 11/02/2017)

16