Deviance, Defiance and Criminological Conjecture - 1 10/29/2024 1:13:03 PM
A new essay by Randy Gonzalez - From the classical school of criminology, or rational choice theory, the perspective herein delves into the intricate issues related to the concept of deviance. This exploration sheds light on the connection between deviant behavior and defiance and challenges the traditional understanding of these terms. As per the primary tenets of the classical school of criminological metaphysics, individuals act in their own interests. From the classical school of criminology, or rational choice theory, the perspective herein delves into the intricate issues related to the concept of deviance. This exploration sheds light on the connection between deviant behavior and defiance and challenges the traditional understanding of these terms. As per the primary tenets of the classical school of criminological metaphysics, individuals act in their own interests. This deliberate ideation of thought into action is a testament to the essence of their intentional selectivity. Free will is the driving force, and choice stems from rational decision-making. It's not just about the amative instigation of individual seduction to illicit, illegal, or otherwise different behavioral perpetrations. It's about understanding that antisocial or unconventional behaviors observed from communal interactivity represent only one part of an individual’s narrative. The public face is merely a reflection, or an illusion, of the hidden totality of the person.
Beyond the commonality of the mainstream, the concept of what is “normal” is a complex psychic matrix of personality. And there are no simple answers that define it. In the pseudosciences (i.e. criminology, psychology, sociology, and theology), or as some refer, the “social studies arena”, myriad theories attempt explanations regarding the proverbial police “formula”, the 5WH (who, what, where, when, how and why). This formula, commonly used in investigative processes, is particularly challenging and intriguing in the context of criminology. It’s dark, deep, and demented. Beware, as caution is warranted, when anyone espouses a singular philosophical presumption of having found all the answers. In the complex spheres of the real sciences (i.e., astronomy, biology, chemistry, physics, etc., solvability as to behavioral explanations remains complicated as well. Added to this, back over in the “social studies arena”, and in the schools of criminology, there is the dichotomy of the “practitioner versus the non-practitioner”.
