affair solely of positive science, of anthropology, with methods
peculiarly its own.” Thus, when we rightly comprehend the life-work of
Lombroso, we see that it is completely erroneous to assert that the
object of study of criminal anthropology is merely the born criminal,
and that its content is solely the description and elucidation of his
characteristics.
Everything belonging to inherited human nature, to the social structure,
to the economic system and economic history, to justice, to geological,
climatical, and meteorological conditions as determining factors of
human conduct, all determinative cosmic processes—in short, the
reciprocal action between the individual and his environment in the
widest possible sense, and the precise determination of the socially
important characters of the individual—all these are, for Lombroso, the
subject-matter of anthropology; and if a conflict arises between the
individual (thus influenced) and the traditional rights or interests of
society, they are the subject-matter of criminal anthropology. Criminal
anthropology would, and must, exist, even if the idea of responsibility,
and the psychological and legal decisions and traditions based upon that
idea, were non-existent.
A broad-minded general review of the necessity and the causal
connection, in consequence of which inheritance from nearer and more
remote ancestors determines the nature of the individual from his
entrance into the world, and of the inescapable influences which the
world-all as a unity and as a totality, and also through the individual
forces of organized matter and highly organized human society, exercises
on the individual, so that the latter is compelled to act in whatever
manner the operation of these forces determine, whilst all the time he
is under the illusory belief that he desires so to act, and is liable to
be blamed for his actions—this view of the ἓν καὶ πᾶν, of the totality
of the cosmic process, interpermeated throughout by the spirit of life,
and in whose eternal unity and endless manifoldedness the differences
between normal and abnormal, healthy and unhealthy, would seem utterly
without importance—this is the _positive_ view of the world, which from
the very beginning guided Lombroso in his researches. I do not propose
to consider at any length the question whether this view involves
certain dogmatic assumptions. I myself do not think so. In any case, it
is to this view of the world we owe the overwhelming accumulation of
facts which, between the years 1845 and 1860, was effected in the
different fields of natural science. We may also draw attention to the
manner in which the growth of positivism was accompanied by a
development of the industrial arts and by the consequent transformation
of economic life. In a brief Appendix to this work an account is given
of the facts discovered during this period—one characterized by a
temporary realism in politics and by the development of a realistic and
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account