In the article “What role can and should genetics play in understanding which people might become violent and commit crimes — and putting them in jail?” by Michael Schulson, much is discussed about biosocial criminology with arguments from both sides. People in the past people like Cesare Lombroso published works such as “Criminal Man” relating human physiology to criminal behavior with lackluster and flawed evidence. This along with the rise of eugenics in the early 20th century completely discredited this field of study, making it somewhat taboo to this day. That is why I believe that so many people today are concerned about the new studies connecting genetics to criminal behavior such as biosocial criminology. However times are changed and scientists have better tools at their disposal, better methods for collecting, and verifying data as well as intensive peer review. Unlike the past, now more scientists tend to operate with morals and ethics in mind. These reasons compel me to support the research into biosocial criminology, if there is truly no connection between genetics and criminal behavior then we can at least be certain of that afterwards. But even if there is a slight chance that there is, I think research should be done. Any definitive conclusions to be made from this research must be heavily peer reviewed and verified of course. There are drawbacks to this as well depending on the results of these studies, such as possible racial profiling by the police and people using this research to back up extremist ideologies, and heightening existing racial tensions. However I believe the benefits of this research out weighs the drawbacks, I love the scientific pursuit of knowledge and this information could help everyone in the world better understand crime as a whole.
Powered by:
top
I agree with what you said. There are better methods today to practice this type of studies. Like you said, scientists have better tools and also, the opportunity for a peer review to get more opinions. Based on your opinion, I disagree with the research to be done, but I respect your opinion. But overall, I mostly agree with what you said about the time changes and do the peer review before telling the world any result or before making any decision about the results. Thanks for sharing.
Clearly presented and easily grasped, the information is straightforward and well articulated, making it accessible to a wide audience.
Presented in a manner that is both easily digestible and comprehensible, the information is well-explained, ensuring accessibility and clarity for all readers.
I agree with your reasoning to support biosocial into criminology in order to determine if in fact there is any basis to support a finding that it does play into a reason a person committing a criminal act.
I agree with you where you start to talk about how times have changed and that we have better tools and better methods for collecting, and verifying data.