Zoekresultaat: 4 artikelen


Emotions and Explanation in Cultural Criminology

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2018
Trefwoorden cultural criminology, emotions, affective states, explanation, theory
Auteurs dr. Nicolás Trajtenberg

    Cultural Criminology (CC) is one of the most recent and exciting developments in criminological theory. Its main argument is that mainstream criminological theories provide inadequate explanations of crime due to epistemological and theoretical flaws. CC’s alternative involves assuming a phenomenological and interpretative approach that focuses on the cultural and emotional components of crime. In this article I shall argue that although CC makes a valid demand for more realistic and complex explanations of crime, its own alternative needs to deal with two main challenges referred to its conceptualization of explanation and emotion. First, two problematic antagonisms should be avoided: understanding vs. causal explanation; and universal nomothetic explanations as opposed to ideographic descriptions. Considering recent developments in philosophy of social science, particularly the ‘social mechanisms approach’, CC should focus on explaining retrospectively through identification of specific causal mechanisms rejecting universal and predictive pretensions. Second, although cultural criminologists rightly question the emotionless character of criminological explanations, they lack an articulated alternative conceptualization of emotions to explain crime. A more refined concept needs to be elaborated in dialogue with recent advances in social sciences.

dr. Nicolás Trajtenberg
Dr. Nicolás Trajtenberg is senior lecturer and researcher at the Department of Sociology, Universidad de la República (UdelaR), Uruguay. He holds a PhD in criminology by the Institute of Criminology, University of Cambridge, UK. His main areas of research are explanation and theory in criminology, and youth violence. E-mail: nico.trajtenberg@gmail.com.

Commodifying compliance? UK urban music and the new mediascape

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift over Cultuur & Criminaliteit, Aflevering 1 2014
Trefwoorden street culture, Grime, frustration, defiance, resistance
Auteurs Dr. Jonathan Ilan

    Subcultural theory and cultural criminology have traditionally viewed ‘underground’ youth movements as providing images of deviance/resistance which the cultural industries harvest to turn a profit. The logic follows that street and sub cultures imbue products with a ‘transgressive edge’ that increases their appeal within youth markets. This paper uses the example of UK ‘grime’ music to demonstrate how this dynamic cannot be viewed as applying universally in contemporary times. Where their street orientated content is censured, many grime artistes express a desire for commercial success which would ultimately emerge through muting their rhetorical links to crime and violence and explicitly championing ‘mainstream’ values. This case is used as an empirical cue to explore the use and critique of the concept of ‘resistance’ within cultural criminology and subcultural theory. The paper problematizes commodification of resistance discourses as they apply to the rugged culture of the streets and indeed its supposed ‘oppositional’ character where disadvantaged urban youth clearly embody and practice the logic of neoliberalism. It furthermore suggests that certain critiques of cultural criminology go too far in denying any meaning to criminality and subcultural practice beyond consumer desire. Ultimately, the concept of ‘defiance’ is suggested as a useful tool to understand the norms of and behaviours of the excluded.

Dr. Jonathan Ilan
Dr. Jonathan Ilan is universitair docent bij de School of Social Policy, Sociology and Social Research, University of Kent (UK). E-mail: j.ilan@kent.ac.uk

Over het denken en voelen achter straf- en herstel(recht)

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Herstelrecht, Aflevering 3 2012
Trefwoorden cognitive emotion theory, punishment, interconnectedness, (ir)rationality, mysticism
Auteurs Jacques Claessen

    In this article attention is paid to the thoughts and feelings which underlie criminal law and restorative justice, as well as the question whether those thoughts and feelings have to be regarded as rational or irrational. For this purpose, the author has firstly examined the relationship between thinking and feeling from the perspective of the so-called cognitive emotion theory as put forth by the American philosopher Martha Nussbaum and the Dutch philosopher Mirjam van Reijen. In addition, this contribution also addresses the ideas of the Stoics, Spinoza and Schopenhauer, since the aforementioned theory goes back on the ideas of these philosophers. These philosophers depart from the view on man and world in which interconnectedness plays an important role – as the opposite of separateness. This view which reflects the mystic-religious perspective on man and world forms an important connecting thread in this article, as this turns out to have direct consequences for the idea about the (ir)rationality of certain thoughts and feelings, as well as for the (ir)rationality of criminal law and restorative justice. Special attention is paid to emotions that are relevant within the context of criminal law and restorative justice – which include anger, resentment, hatred, fear and compassion. After having explained – on the basis of the cognitive emotion theory – how thinking and feeling relate to each other and which thoughts and feelings – on the basis of the perspective of interconnectedness – have to be considered as (ir)rational, the article examines whether punishment is (ir)rational and whether the regular theories which legitimate punishment (i.e. retribution and prevention theories) are ‘rationalities of something irrational’. Furthermore, it is assessed whether the thoughts and feelings behind restorative justice are (ir)rational. The article concludes with a suggestion in which the main findings of this contribution are summarized, in order to stimulate discussion.

Jacques Claessen
Jacques Claessen (1980) is universitair docent straf(proces)recht aan de faculteit der rechtsgeleerdheid van de Universiteit Maastricht. In 2010 verscheen zijn dissertatie Misdaad en straf. Een herbezinning op het strafrecht vanuit mystiek perspectief (Nijmegen: Wolf Legal Publishers). Zijn interessegebieden zijn sanctierecht, herstelrecht en de strafrechtelijke positie van het slachtoffer. Claessen is redacteur van dit tijdschrift en van de Nieuwsbrief Strafrecht. Voorts is hij rechter-plaatsvervanger bij de Rechtbank Maastricht. Hij is winnaar van de Bianchi Herstelrechtprijs 2012.

Het beoordelen van risico’s: een subjectieve zaak

Tijdschrift Tijdschrift voor Veiligheid, Aflevering 1 2010
Trefwoorden Risicoperceptie, Heuristieken, Risicocommunicatie
Auteurs Jop Groeneweg

    In measuring safety a difference appears to exist between ‘objectively measured safety’ and the subjective perception by the public. Objectively spoken the level of criminality in a neighbourhood may have gone down, but that doesn’t necessary mean that the people living there ‘feel equally safer’. Psychology gives a number of explanations for this phenomenon. For example, the knowledge, the differences in thinking styles and communication about safety with citizens play an important role. This should not be seen as a case of non-rational thinking, but rather of systematic irrationality. These people are not ‘dumb’, they have (sometimes hard-wired) ways of handling information about complex issues like safety that require them to take ‘mental shortcuts’ (heuristics) in order to estimate the risks they are exposed to. This paper will focus on some of the psychological laws that guide our risk perception and surprisingly enough, the ‘objective risk’ seems to be of relatively little importance if compared with other, more subjective factors. Many of the factors relate to the nature of information citizens are exposed to: a risk that this described in easy to imagine way leads to a different evaluation of that risk compared with a less conspicuous presentation. Also the level of expertise of the ‘receiving end’ must be taken into account. Lay-people have different ways to look at risks compared with experts in a certain domain. The discussion on how to improve safety is probably best served with a continuing debate between ‘rational, objective’ and ‘systematic irrational, subjective’ mental models, while recognising their respective strengths and weaknesses. These findings may assist policy makers in particular in the formulation of policy that, in addition to the security objective as such, also improves the perception of safety.

Jop Groeneweg
Jop Groeneweg is Projectleider Menselijk falen bij de Werkgroep Veiligheid, Universiteit Leiden, Postbus 9555, 2300 RB Leiden. E-mail: groeneweg@fsw.leidenuniv.nl.
Interface Showing Amount
U kunt door de volledige tekst zoeken naar alle artikelen door uw zoekterm in het zoekveld in te vullen. Als u op de knop 'Zoek' heeft geklikt komt u op de zoekresultatenpagina met filters, die u helpen om snel bij het door u gezochte artikel te komen. Er zijn op dit moment drie verschillende filters: tijdschrift, rubriek en jaar.