criminological theory

[The Wrath]

Because, in criminological theory, the definition of crime is not usually "acts which are immoral." Usually, they are one of the following:

1.) Acts which harm society.

2.) Acts which deviate from the norm.

3.) Acts which break the law.

The first two are quantifiable and the third is a matter of definition. Criminological theory doesn't really have much to say about ethics, and I don't plan to try and make it fit.

[EC]

Because, in criminological theory, the definition of crime is not usually "acts which are immoral."  Usually, they are one of the following:

1.) Acts which harm society.

2.) Acts which deviate from the norm.

3.) Acts which break the law.

The first two are quantifiable and the third is a matter of definition.  Criminological theory doesn't really have much to say about ethics, and I don't plan to try and make it fit.

Yes but ethics exlain what should be a crime and why. Any other "crimes" are not really crimes and have no place either being a law or in a "crimino"logical theory.

[The Wrath]

Dude...you're trying to make the definition of criminology too narrow. Criminology is not a branch of ethics. It is a branch of sociology and seeks to explain why humans behave the way they do, not how humans should behave. My thesis has to be based on data and statistical analyses, not my own personal ethics. Now, I can work my own ethics into the conclusion. So, while the conclusion may contain my ethics, I cannot derive the conclusion from my ethics.

Edited February 15, 2005 by Moose