Citation

Palermo MT. Int. J. Offender Ther. Comp. Criminol. 2022; 66(9): 1036-1048.

Copyright

(Copyright © 2022, SAGE Publishing)

DOI

10.1177/0306624X221104959

PMID

35702023

Abstract

Can criminology thrive on quantitative studies alone? Can evil be operationalized? Quantitative work may have, for the time being, supplanted common sense, personal experience and resulting in an improbable "Periodic Table of humanity". Has the construction of the psychopathic concept surpassed positivist "constitutional" formulations and translated into effective (re)habilitation of individuals lacking affiliative ethical behaviors? Or has it simply fueled a deterministic neo-Lombrosian truism: moral development has a brain. Has it helped so far? Has letting go of fundamental moral concepts, implicit in organized religion - but pervasive in most cultures irrespective of religious affiliation and devotion - in favor of causal explanations based solely on neuroimaging, personality inventories or structured emotional decoding tasks, made a difference in the life - or in the defense for that matter - of wrongdoers diagnosed as intrinsically evil?

Language: en

Keywords

Humans; Male; ethics; *Cerebrum; *Morals; evil; psychopathy; scientism