The classical paradigm of criminology emerged in the 18 th century following the cruel punishment strategies that dominated the justice system at the time ( Beirne, 1991) . Another critical factor that contributed to the classical thought in criminology was the need for new forms of regulation in the society since predictability in the justice system became necessary following the need for legal protection for properties and technology, as well as the need to discipline workers consistently. The critical areas that the classical paradigm focuses on include social control, deterrence, punishment, and free will, elements that explain why human beings commit crimes and the effects of such crimes ( Beirne, 1991) . The major contributors to the paradigm are Cesare de Beccaria and Jeremy Bentham, and they mainly aimed at minimizing the harshness that characterized judicial systems in the 18 th century. Bentham holds that punishment involving the infliction of pain must be justifiable in the context of promoting a greater good.
One of Bentham’s most crucial contributions to the theory is the argument that human behavior aims ate minimizing pain and maximizing pleasure. Hence, Bentham postulates that individuals who commit crimes do so to gain something of value to them, including money, excitement, and sex among others ( Berry, 1991) . On the other hand, Beccaria argues that prevention of crime is better than punishing wrongdoers. In this context, Beccaria emphasizes the need to implement laws that seek to ensure that punishments resonate with the crimes committed. Moreover, he maintains that the severity of punishment should be proportionate to the crime and should not exceed the necessary seriousness to deter both the offenders and other members of the community from committing a crime.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
The classical paradigm maintains that criminals make rational choices and choose to commit a crime to achieve minimum pain and maximum pleasure. The theory holds that human beings possess free will, and they are also rational as demonstrated by their tendencies to pursue the greatest pleasure at the least cost or pain. According to the classical theorists, criminals weigh the charges of committing a crime against the perceived gains. Hence, the theorists posit that if the criminal justice system is to deter individuals from committing crimes, the punishment should outweigh the benefits that individuals can derive from committing a crime ( Berry, 1991) . The theory plays a central role in explaining the occurrence of deviant behavior in societies. The theory maintains that criminals apply the pleasure-pain principle in making decisions to commit crime hence; a person will only incur a crime only if being different presents more pleasure. Therefore, by providing the correct amount of punishment for a given crime, rational individuals will freely choose alternative actions or behavior to minimize pain and achieve greater pleasure. From this perspective, the proponents of the theory postulate that individuals who still decide to commit the crime when the severity of punishment exceeds the pleasure that they expect to derive from a particular action would be termed as irrational.
The classical paradigm demonstrates that failing to observe proportionality between crimes and punishments does little to discourage or prevent individuals from indulging in crime. However, the paradigm illustrates that punishments should be geared towards keeping order in the society rather than avenging crimes. The classical criminology doctrine contributed to three fundamental principles of punishment including swiftness, certainty, and severity ( Matsueda, Kreager, & Huizinga, 2006) . The principle of swiftness holds that for punishment to be effective, it must be swiftly administered so that punishment and crime do not lose their association. On the other hand, the principle of individual states that individuals must be made aware that engaging in illegal behavior will lead to punishment, and one cannot escape the law for whatever reason. Finally, the principle of severity postulates that punishment should be severe enough to exceed the rewards of indulging in illegal activity.
I agree with the classical theorists’ argument that human beings have free will and the capacity to make rational decisions as well as the fact that they focus on maximizing their pleasure and minimizing pain. Moreover, I agree with the idea that ideal punishment helps in deterring crime since all the rational people would opt for behavior that gives them satisfaction rather than one that may expose them to pain. These factors have greatly influenced the modern criminology thinking as well as the general practices in the criminal justice system. For instance, in the U.S. and Europe, the concept of punishments matching the nature of the crime forms the foundation of the modern systems of criminal justice ( Cox, 2010) . Moreover, the classical thought has significantly contributed to a decline in the use of corporal punishment, torture, and capital punishment, since these forms of punishments can only be justified in extreme cases of wrongdoing such as murder, which are fewer instances of offenses compared to such crimes as theft among other petty crimes ( Cox, 2010) . In this context, I agree with the classical theorists’ perspective that punishment should aim at deterring crime rather than avenging crime; hence, it should be proportional to the crime committed in the sense that although it should present greater pain that the pleasure derived from a crime, it should not be unreasonably extreme. For instance, a drug trafficking offense should not be punished with a death penalty.
Ensuring that punishment is administered swiftly and that punishment matches the crime committed ensures deterrence from indulging in crime. This is particularly effective if the pain associated with the punishment exceeds the gains one derives from crime. Another factor that makes me agree with the classical theorists is that granting a punishment that exceeds the crime committed not only deters an individual from committing the crime but also the members of the larger community. As the classical theorists argue, human beings are rational, illustrating that they learn from what is happening around them. In this context, individuals would avoid engaging in criminal activities for fear of facing similar severe punishments to individuals who have been caught committing a crime in the past.
However, the paradigm possesses several weaknesses, which makes it crucial to incorporate essential aspects from other paradigms to ensure fairness in the judicial system. One of the most significant weaknesses that the classical paradigm possesses is the idea that all individuals who indulge in crime are rational thinkers. However, this idea is not applicable to the entire population since some individuals who indulge in crime lack the capacity to reason due to such factors as mental illnesses or drug abuse, which often deters the process of rational thinking ( Wacquant, 2010) . On the other hand, societal factors such as poverty may lead people to commit the crime despite being rational thinkers as illustrated by the dominance of poor groups in the criminal justice systems.
In the U.S. the more significant proportion of incarcerated individuals comprise of such minority groups as Latin Americans and African-Americans, who are the predominantly poor groups. According to Wacquant (2010), rationally thinking individuals often get into crime for survival; for instance, the African Americans are highly indulged in illegal drug trafficking and such crimes as robbery with violence since for survival reasons. The group lacks alternative means of earning an income due to the high poverty levels that contribute to low education attainment, therefore minimizing opportunities for formal employment; hence, a large proportion of the population diverts to crime as the sole means of generating an income ( Skeem, Manchak & Peterson, 2011) . These factors illustrate that appropriate punishment alone is not sufficient to discourage people from indulging in crime. Preferably, it is crucial for the criminal justice system to incorporate elements that seek to establish the key factors that motivate people to commit a crime and integrate them in the correctional measures.
Integrating the positivist thought of criminology into the classical thought would be crucial in overcoming the weaknesses that the classical paradigm demonstrates. Positivism focuses on the nature of the offender, which is majorly driven by pathological, psychological, and biological influences ( Skeem, Manchak & Peterson, 2011) . Positivism emphasizes on the provision of appropriate treatment since the paradigm considers criminal behavior as irrational and requiring a form of treatment. Some proponents of the positivist paradigm, including Cesare Lombroso postulate that criminals demonstrate aspects of more primitive stages of human development, which illustrates that their thought processes are irrational ( Skeem, Manchak & Peterson, 2011) . Hence, criminals need treatment more than punishment to enhance their thought processes so that they can respond to circumstances similarly as other rational individuals.
In conclusion, incorporating elements of treatment and other interventions that focus on improving rational thinking into the classical criminology paradigm would help in deterring criminal activity among individuals with underlying social and biological factors that influence them to indulge in crime. For instance, individuals who engage in crime for survival due to such issues as poverty should be equipped with skills and provided with the necessary opportunities to generate an income. Such an intervention would deter needy individuals from indulging in crime, given that they are rational and they would opt for a source of income that does not expose them to the pain associated with punishment in the criminal justice systems. Moreover, providing treatment to individuals with mental health problems that hinder them from thinking rationally would help in addressing the aspect of unfairness that the classical theorists present by arguing that all human beings are free-willed and rational, yet individuals of unsound mind lack the capacity to make serious decisions.
References
Beirne, P. (1991). Inventing criminology: the “science of man” in Cesare Beccaria's Dei delitti e delle pene (1764). Criminology , 29 (4), 777-820.
Berry, B. (1991). Controlling crime: The artistic perspective in criminology . Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
Cox, R. (2010). Crime, incarceration, and employment in light of the great recession. The Review of Black Political Economy , 37 (3-4), 283-294.
Matsueda, R. L., Kreager, D. A., & Huizinga, D. (2006). Deterring delinquents: A rational choice model of theft and violence. American sociological review , 71 (1), 95-122.
Skeem, J. L., Manchak, S., & Peterson, J. K. (2011). Correctional policy for offenders with mental illness: Creating a new paradigm for recidivism reduction. Law and human behavior , 35 (2), 110-126.
Wacquant, L. (2010). Class, race & hyperincarceration in revanchist America. Daedalus , 139 (3), 74-90.
