Search results

1

Rosyjska myśl kryminologiczna w XIX w.

100%

Arsoba M.

Forum Polityki Kryminalnej

|

2022

|

issue 1(3)

1-17

EN

Michał Arsoba presents the beginning of criminology in Russia in the period before the Revolution of 1905 in terms of a general historical and legal overview. His aim is to locate 19th-century Russian criminological thought in the global context of this discipline and to identify its major achievements within the international context. For this reason, Arsoba highlights three stages of the development of reflection on criminal law. The first stage concerns the views of Aleksander Radiszczew and the first publications on statistical research. The second stage includes the first legal act on prevention and the first criminal code. The third stage focuses on the emergence of the sociological school represented by Michaił Duchowski and Ivan Fojnicki and the anthropological school, represented by Dymitr Dril. Arsoba argues that Russian criminology as a discipline stems mainly from the field of criminal law, acting as its isolated reflection from legal sciences. It has its own achievements, manifested by the realization of ideas contained in the preventive act and criminal code, as well as making the contribution to the development of the global sociological and anthropological research. Furthermore, it can be said that Russia saw the occurrence of symbolical, ground-breaking moments for the criminological thought globally, aspects of which pioneered in that country.

PL

Niniejszy przeglądowy artykuł o charakterze historyczno-prawniczym przedstawia początki dziedziny nauki, jaką była kryminologia w przedrewolucyjnej Rosji. Jego celem jest wpisanie rosyjskiej myśli kryminologicznej XIX w. w kontekst światowy danej dyscypliny, wskazując na jej spektakularne oraz ważne osiągnięcia na tle międzynarodowym. Aby zrealizować ten zamiar, wydzielono i przedstawiono trzy etapy rozwoju refleksji nad prawem karnym w Rosji. Zaczynając od opisania pierwszego z nich, czyli poglądów Aleksandra Radiszczewa, autor przechodzi do omówienia: pierwszych publikacji badań statystycznych z dziedziny kryminologii, pojawienia się pierwszej ustawy prewencyjnej w Rosji (w tym także na świecie), pierwszego kodeksu karnego, utworzenia szkoły socjologicznej z Michaiłem Duchowskim, Iwanem Fojnickim na czele oraz antropologicznej z Dymitrem Drilem. Wnioski płynące z rozważań przedstawionych w artykule wskazują, że rosyjska kryminologia jako dyscyplina wyrasta głównie z dziedziny prawa karnego, jako swego rodzaju refleksja wyodrębniająca się z nauk prawniczych. Posiada ona swoje osiągnięcia objawiające się chociażby w sferze zainteresowań profilaktyki kryminalnej oraz wkładem w rozwój światowej szkoły socjologicznej czy również antropologicznej. Co więcej, można powiedzieć, że Rosja była także państwem, w którym doszło do symbolicznych momentów przełomowych dla kryminologii na świecie, i wpisała tym samym swoich przedstawicieli na listę prekursorów danej nauki.

2

Międzywojenna polska debata kryminologiczna-poszukiwanie społecznych przyczyn przestępczości i sposobów jej zwalczania

94%

Rodak M.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

2009

|

issue XXXI

101-145

EN

This article is an attempt of a summary of the debate, pending in Poland in the interwar period, on the issues related to the etiology and methods of preventing and / or controlling crime. Analyzing these two highly interrelated and interdependent problems, the author decided to take into consideration the clear-cut division in criminology prevailing in the interwar period and to reflect it in the structure of the article. Thus, the text is divided into two parts. The first part discusses the causes of crime, the second the criminal policy. However, the text is not an analysis of all the causes of crime. The author focuses on discussion of the interwar views on the social causes of crime held by persons or institutions related, on various different levels, to criminology. Accordingly, the section on criminal policy includes response to crimes being, at least in theory, a result of social causes. The autor of the article faced the problem to attempt to collect and present ideas on social causes and method of preventing and / or combating crime published in the interwar period. The study covers articles and books, in which the above-mentioned problems have been discussed both by scientists (criminologists, lawyers, doctors, psychologists, and sociologists) and laymen (journalists, publicists, community workers, and politicians). In this text, the attempts to analyze the opinions expressed by the latter of the aforementioned groups is a significantly new thing. The views of people not directly related to the academic community at that time were rarely taken into the consideration while discussing criminological theoretical considerations of the interwar period. The point of departure of this text is assumption of the thesis that in the interwar debate on the broad issue of crime, the views which favoured social factors in generating crime were significantly dominant. It should be recalled that on the other side of the dispute there remained a theory of special importance of so-called endogenous factors. It was argued that the specific psycho - physical construction of a man makes him predisposed to become a criminal. This was an aftermath of a C. Lombroso’s theory, already modified in the interwar period. It should be noted that his theory in Poland was not received unquestioningly. However, the dispute between supporters of exogenous and endogenous factors took place in interwar Poland. A strong trend was a school trying to combine the two trends, taking into account the reasons of both parties as typically they did not exclude. This should be regarded as a unique achievement of the Polish criminology of the interwar period.

3

Leon Wachholz, zapomniany polski kryminolog

94%

Widacki J.

Archiwum Kryminologii

|

2018

|

issue XL

523-534

EN

Leon Wachholz (1867-1942) was a professor of forensic medicine at the JagiellonianUniversity, Cracow (Poland).He made his way into the history of forensic sciences as an eminent specialistin forensic medicine, promoter of experimental methods and a teacher of a wholegeneration of Polish professors of forensic medicine. He tutored professors: Jan Ol -brycht (Cracow), Włodzimierz Sieradzki (Lwów), Stefan Horoszkiewicz (Poznań), andwrote the first modern Polish handbook of forensic medicine, published in Cracowin 1899.Leon Wachholz was also a historian of medicine, the author of many interestingarticles in the field, whereas his scientific achievements in the field of criminology,although attractive and valuable, now remain practically unknown.Nevertheless, in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, it was typical of forensicmedicine professors to deal with criminology. Those who did include pioneers of contemporary criminology, to mention for example Cesare Lombroso in Italy or Alexand reLacassange in France. Therefore, Wachholz’s interest in criminology was natural forhis time.Wachholz’s first work in criminology was the higher doctorate (“habilitation”)lecture O obłędzie moralnym z punktu widzenia antropologii kryminalnej (“On moralinsanity from the point of view of criminal anthropology”), published in 1894.His most valuable contributions to criminology include Wojna a zbrodnia (“Warand crime”), published in 1922 in Poland and Germany, and Alkoholizm a przestępstwo(“Alcoholism and crime”), published in 1927.Other notable works in criminology, more exactly in forensic sexuology, includedO przewrotnym popędzie płciowym (“On perversive sexual drive”), published in 1892,and O morderstwie z lubieżności (“Murder motivated by sex”, in German: “Der Lustmord”),published in 1900.Both above-mentioned works show a visible influence of Richard von Krafft-Ebing(author of the famous Psychopathia sexualis), in whose Viennese clinic Wachholz heldan internship immediately after graduation.Wachholz’s point of view on the aetiology of crime was expressed in the bookMedycyna kryminalna (“Medicine for investigators”) written together with Professor Jan Olbrycht, as well as in the extensive eulogy published after the death of CesareLombroso (1910).Wachholz’s works in criminology prove that the his view on the aetiology of crimeand the criminal gradually evolved. Why do people commit crime and acts of violence?As far as he seemed to follow the individual (anthropological, biological aspects,like Cesare Lombroso or Richard von Krafft-Ebing), in his later works he appreciatedthe impact of social factors on crime (e.g. Alexandre Lacassange, Gabriel Tarde or Franzvon Liszt). Ultimately, his views placed him among positivists-multicausalists such asEnrico Ferri. Later, in the early 1930s, having read Johann Lange and Heinrich Kranzon the criminality of twins, he remained within the realm of multicausality, yet wasready to recognise the biological, individual element as dominant.Towards the end of his life, in 1937, Wachholz formulated his original theoryof criminality, which he called “The Right of Contrast” (in Polish: prawo kontrastu).Making some reference to metaphysics and categories of “good” and “evil”, he divergedfrom the fundamental foundations of positivism, which he had followed nearly for allhis scientific life.

Refine search results

2 Archiwum Kryminologii

1 Forum Polityki Kryminalnej

1 Arsoba M.

1 Rodak M.

1 Widacki J.

1 2022

1 2018

1 2009

Rosyjska myśl kryminologiczna w XIX w.

Międzywojenna polska debata kryminologiczna-poszukiwanie społecznych przyczyn przestępczości i sposobów jej zwalczania

Leon Wachholz, zapomniany polski kryminolog