Part I: Introduction
To solve a problem, one must strive to understand it first - thus the never-ending exploration and debate surrounding criminal behaviour. Inequality, discrimination, oppression. Many believe that society creates criminals with all of its problems.
To some extent, the statement is true. However, the pronouncement gives the impression as if society is the sole cause of criminality. On the contrary, the root of criminal behaviour is an aggregation of stimulants only possibly mapped with the assistance of several different psychological perspectives, ranging from the inevitable path of natural selection to the sheer chance of what kind of neighbourhood you are born into.
First of all, do criminals think differently than ordinary people? According to several studies, psychologists have generalised that offenders have a distinct style of cognition, including impulsivity, lack of ability to think from another person’s perspective, deficiency at weighing consequences, and the proclivity to account for external factors for their actions.
These thinking patterns make some more likely to offend when an opportunity arises, thinking that the benefits of offending would outweigh the consequences (Parker 46–58).
Besides dissimilarities in cognitive processes, it is also believed that criminals tend to have different moral values and priorities, manifesting as antisocial traits such as irresponsibility and the lack of sympathy. Some offenders also might have the habit to rely on violence as the primary resolution to problems.
However, the distinction between the thinking pattern between normal people and criminals can be a blurry line, and in one way all of us are capable of committing wrongdoings, only that some have higher tendency than others. Nowadays, the common toxicity we experience on the internet is one demonstration of the discussed unhealthy thinking pattern.
Social media promoting borderline content, data analysis feeding you with individualised news, and trends which magnify peer pressure. Within the area of digital communication, it is easy to express radical opinions without the risk of getting held responsible, and confirmation bias is a perfect example of how to not think from another person’s perspective.
All of these leads to more and more extreme polarisation between different social groups and ideals. These, however, are only manifestations of criminality in contrast to the causations - factors which I will be discussing in future articles.
Sources:
Parker, Michael. Dynamic Security : The Democratic Therapeutic Community in Prison. Jessica Kingsley Publishers, 2007, pp. 46–58
By Wenmiao