Crime and Human Nature
1985 book
- 2 min read
- 3 chapters
Related on Lably
Through Human nature, Biology and Genetics
Summary
Wilson and Herrnstein present and critique almost all major theories of the etiology of crime, with the notable exception of critical theory. The book is especially critical of mainstream sociological theories of crime. They also argue that crime primarily results from intrinsic aspects of human nature, rather than from psychological or environmental factors, and that biology and genetics play an important role in the causation of crime.
Sign in to keep reading
2 more chapters are free with a Lably account.
Reception
Writing in The New York Times, the social scientist John Kaplan wrote in his review of Crime and Human Nature that "there is no doubt that this is an important book and will be the starting place for discussions of the subject for years to come." In a more mixed review of the book, Susan Jaco wrote that "The authors' point of view is buried amid so many tedious studies – many of which could just as easily be summed up in aphorisms like "the apple doesn't fall far from the tree" – that it is difficult to discern their real opinions on the causes and prevention of crime." Nevertheless, she concluded that the book "...will be useful to anyone who wishes to have access, in one volume, to most of the important criminological studies of the past 50 years."
Impact
Crime and Human Nature was called "the most important book on crime to appear in a decade" by the law professor John Monahan in 1986. Also in 1986, Michael Nietzel and Richard Milich wrote of the book that "Seldom does a book written by two academicians generate the interest and spark the debate that this one has," noting that by February 1986, it had been reviewed by at least 20 publications. The book was particularly controversial because it re-invigorated the nature versus nurture debate in criminology. The book also influenced Herbert Needleman to research the potential link between lead and crime. In 2012, The Washington Post's Matt Schudel wrote that the book was "one of [Wilson's] most controversial books".