Abstract
For much of the history of criminology, tension has existed between sociologically oriented and biologically oriented perspectives. In recent years, a new, more nuanced approach has emerged which attempts to take both perspectives seriously and integrate them into a biosocial criminology. Yet, it remains, in large part, a fringe field of study. We argue that this is due, primarily, to critical as well as supportive scholars’ views that the ‘biosocial’ perspective represents a paradigm shift in the field of criminology. In this article, drawing on our work with the late Nicole Rafter, we present a case that rather than a paradigm shift, this biosocial turn simply represents a maturing field. In doing so, we describe the ways in which biosocial criminology examines crime and antisocial behavior as a biological and social phenomenon. At the same time, we also point out some cautions with respect to this body of work. We conclude with a vision of the future of (biosocial) criminology.
| Original language | American English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 288-303 |
| Number of pages | 16 |
| Journal | Theoretical Criminology |
| Volume | 21 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| DOIs | |
| State | Published - Jul 21 2017 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Disciplines
- Criminology
- Criminology and Criminal Justice
Keywords
- Biocriminology
- Biosocial criminology
- Nicole H. Rafter
- Paradigm shift
- Sociological criminology
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Paradigm Shift or Normal Science? The Future of (Biosocial) Criminology'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Author
- BIBTEX
- Harvard
- Standard
- RIS
- Vancouver