Theories of crime and deviance abound and are significant in determining how criminals are defined. The debate between classicalism and positivism has contributed significantly to the growth of modern day criminology. Classicalism is based in large measure on the assumption that individuals possess free will and that those who violate the law were motivated by personal needs. Utilitarians such as Beccaria and Bentham argued that the decision to violate the law comes after a careful weighing of the costs of criminal behavior and classical theorists assert that punishment should only be severe enough to deter an offense. In contrast, positivist thinkers argue in favor of a scientific approach to understanding choices as evident in the work of Comte and Durkheim. This theory calls for measuring rather than speculating about the causes of cr

The most empirical support for the various schools of thought on criminal causation discussed herein has been received by the positivist school. Akers and Sellers (24) note that this particular school of thought depicts crime and deviance as social and even inevitable elements in modern society. These schools, which include interactionist theories as well as functional theories continue to be researched because they are seen by Jacoby (n.p.) as offering more specific insight into deviant behavior than either the biological, psychological, or classicalism schools provide. The focus in criminal causation research today is empirical demanding high degrees of rigor and methodological soundness in testing any theory under real world conditions.

Castle, Tammy and Feshami, Kevan. "Criminal Preference:

at www.filmsite.org/crimefilms.html. Accessed online,

The biological school of thought as reflected in the work of such early scholars as Lombroso and Hooten proposes that individuals may be drawn toward deviance because of certain genetically inherited traits or characteristics. Lombroso, for example, whose ideas were later discredited, believed that criminal types could be identified by the shape of the human skull (Akers and Sellers 40-41). Modern day criminologists look at such biological antecedents of crime as neurological damage, mental disorders caused by trauma to the brain, and the interaction of biological and social factors or nature versus nurture in explaining crime (Lilly, Cullen, and Ball 27).

Akers' social learning theory has elaborated Sutherland's model, stating that in addition to definitions, people can become involved in crime through imitation or modeling of criminal conduct. Secondly, Akers "contended that definitions and imitations are most instrumental in determining initial forays into crime (Akers and Sellers 49). The continued involvement in crime result