criminal psychology-第114部分

快捷操作: 按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页 按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页 按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部! 如果本书没有阅读完，想下次继续接着阅读，可使用上方 "收藏到我的浏览器" 功能 和 "加入书签" 功能！

te…playing　is　an　example。　Such　people　may　easily　cause　mistakes。　The　knowledge　of　their　attainment　in　one　field　causes　us　involuntarily　to　respect　their　assertions。　Now；　if　their　assertions　deal　with　their　hobbies　many　a　silly　thing　is　taken　at　its　face　value；　and　that　value　is　counterfeit。


Section　88。　（4）　_Inclination_。

Whether　a　scientific　characterization　of　inclination　is　possible；　whether　the　limits　of　this　concept　can　be　determined；　and　whether　it　is　the　result　of　nature；　culture；　or　both　together；　are　questions　which　can　receive　no　certain　answer。　We　shall　not　here　speak　of　individual　forms　of　inclination；　i。　e。；　to　drink；　to　gamble；　to　steal；　etc。；　for　these　are　comparatively　the　most　difficult　of　our　modern　problems。　We　shall　consider　them　generally　and　briefly。　Trees　and　men；　says　the　old　proverb；　fall　as　they　are　inclined。　Now；　if　we　examine　the　inclination　of　the　countless　fallen　ones　we　meet　in　our　calling　we　shall　have　fewer　difficulties　in　qualifying　and　judging　their　crimes。　As　a　rule；　it　is　difficult　to　separate　inclination；　on　the　one　hand；　from　opportunity；　need；　desire；　on　the　other。　The　capacity　for　evil　is　a　seduction　to　its　performance；　as　Alfieri　says　somewhere；　and　this　idea　clarifies　the　status　of　inclination。　The　ability　may　often　be　the　opportune　cause　of　the　development　of　an　evil　tendency；　and　frequent　success　may　lead　to　the　assumption　of　the　presence　of　an　inclination。

Maudsley　points　out　that　feelings　that　have　once　been　present　leave　their　unconscious　residue　which　modify　the　total　character　and　even　reconstruct　the　moral　sense　as　a　resultant　of　particular　experiences。　That　an　inclination　or　something　similar　thereto　might　　develop　in　this　way　is　certain；　for　we　may　even　inherit　an　inclination；　but　only　under　certain　conditions。　This　fact　is　substantiated　by　the　characteristics　of　vagabonds。　It　may；　perhaps；　be　said　that　the　enforcement　of　the　laws　of　vagabondage　belongs　to　the　most　interesting　of　the　pyschological　researches　of　the　criminal　judge。　Even　the　difference　between　the　real　bona　fide　tramp；　and　the　poor　devil　who；　in　spite　of　all　his　effort　can　get　no　work；　requires　the　consideration　of　a　good　deal　of　psychological　fact。　There　is　no　need　of　description　in　such　cases；　the　difference　must　be　determined　by　the　study　of　thousands　of　details。　Just　as　interesting　are　the　results　of　procedure；　especially　certain　statistical　results。　The　course　of　long　practice　will　show　that　among　real　tramps　there　is　hardly　ever　an　individual　whose　calling　requires　very　hard　or　difficult　work。　Peasants；　smiths；　well…diggers；　mountaineers；　are　rarely　tramps。　The　largest　numbers　have　trades　which　demand　no　real　hard　work　and　whose　business　is　not　uniform。　Bakers；　millers；　waiters　are　hence　more　numerous。　The　first　have　comparatively　even　distribution　of　work　and　rest；　the　latter　sometimes　have　much；　sometimes　little　to　do；　without　any　possible　evenness　of　distribution。　Now；　we　should　make　a　mistake　if　we　inferred　that　because　the　former　had　hard　work；　and　an　equivalent　distribution　of　work　and　rest；　they　do　not　become　tramps；　while　the　latter；　lacking　these；　do　become　tramps。　In　truth；　the　former　have　naturally　a　need　and　inclination　for　hard　work　and　uniform　living；　have；　therefore；　no　inclination　to　tramping；　and　have　for　that　reason　chosen　their　difficult　calling。　The　latter；　on　the　other　hand；　felt　an　inclination　for　lighter；　more　irregular　work；　i。　e。；　were　already　possessed　of　an　inclination　for　vagabondage；　and　had；　hence；　chosen　the　business　of　baking；　grinding；　or　waiting。　The　real　tramp；　therefore；　is　not　a　criminal。　Vagabondage　is　no　doubt　the　kindergarten　of　criminals；　because　there　are　many　criminals　among　tramps；　but　the　true　vagabond　is　one　only　because　of　his　inclination　for　tramping。　He　is　a　degenerate。

Possibly　a　similar　account　of　other　types　may　be　rendered。　If　it　is　attained　by　means　of　a　statistic　developed　on　fundamental　psychological　principles；　it　would　give　us　ground　for　a　number　of　important　assumptions。　It　would　help　us　to　make　parallel　inferences；　inasmuch　as　it　would　permit　us　to　determine　the　fundamental　inclination　of　the　person　by　considering　his　calling；　his　way　of　approaching　his　work；　his　environment；　his　choice　of　a　wife；　his　preferred　pleasures；　etc。　And　then　we　should　be　able　to　connect　this　inclination　with　the　deed　in　question。　It　is　difficult　to　fix　upon　the　　relation　between　inclination　and　character；　and　the　agreement　will　be　only　general　when　a　man's　character　is　called　all　those　things　to　which　he　is　naturally；　or　by　education；　inclined。　But　it　is　certain　that　a　good　or　bad　character　exists　only　then　when　its　maxims　of　desire　and　action　express　themselves　in　fact。　The　emphasis　must　be　on　the　fact；　what　is　factual　may　be　discovered；　and　these　discoveries　may　be　of　use。


Section　89。　（5）　_Other　Differences_。

The　ancient　classification　of　individuals　according　to　temperaments　is　of　little　use。　There　were　four　of　them；　called　humors；　and　a　series　of　characteristics　was　assigned　to　each；　but　not　one　of　them　had　all　of　its　characteristics　at　once。　Hence　temperaments　determined　according　to　these　four　categories　do　not　really　exist；　and　the　categorical　distinction　can　have　no　practical　value。　If；　however；　we　make　use　of　the　significant　general　meaning　of　temperament；　the　apparatus　of　circumstance　which　is　connected　with　this　distinction　becomes　superfluous。　If　you　call　every　active　person　choleric；　every　truculent　one　sanguine；　every　thoughtful　one　phlegmatic；　and　every　sad　one　melancholy；　you　simply　add　a　technical　expression　to　a　few　of　the　thousands　of　adjectives　that　describe　these　things。　These　four　forms　are　not　the　only　ones　there　are。　Apart　from　countless　medial　and　transitional　forms；　there　are　still　large　numbers　that　do　not　fit　in　any　one　of　these　categories。　Moreover；　temperament　alters　with　age；　health；　experience；　and　other　accidents；　so　that　the　differentiation　is　not　even　justified　by　the　constancy　of　the　phenomenon。　Nevertheless；　it　is　to　some　degree　significant　because　any　form　of　it　indicates　a　certain　authority；　and　because　each　one　of　these　four　categories　serves　to　connect　a　series　of　phenomena　and　assumes　this　connection　to　be　indubitable；　although　there　is　absolutely　no　necessity　for　it。　When　Machiavelli　says　that　the　world　belongs　to　the　phlegmatic；　he　certainly　did　not　have　in　mind　that　complex　of　phenomena　which　are　habitually　understood　as　the　characteristics　of　the　phlegmatic　humor。　He　wanted　simply　to　say　that　extremes　of　conduct　lead　to　as　little　in　the　daily　life　as　in　politics；　that　everything　must　be　reflected　upon　and　repeatedly　tested　before　its　realization　is　attempted；　that　only　then　can　progress；　even　if　slow；　be　made。　If　he　had　said；　the　world　belongs　to　the　cautious　or　reflective　person；　we　should　not　have　found　his　meaning　to　be　different。

When　we　seek　clearly　to　understand　the　nature　and　culture　of　　an　individual；　an　investigation　into　his　temperament　does　not　help　us　in　the　least。　Let　us　consider　then；　some　other　characteristic　on　which　is　based　the　judgment　of　individuals。　The　proverb　says　that　laughter　betrays　a　man。　If　in　the　theater；　you　know　the　subject　of　laughter；　the　manner　of　laughter；　and　the　point　at　which　laughter　first　occurred；　you　know　where　the　most　educated　and　the　least　educated　people　are。　Schopenhauer　says　that　the　intelligent　man　finds　everything　funny；　the　logical　man　nothing；　and　according　to　Erdmann　（in　ber　die　Dummheit）；　the　distressing　or　laughable　characteristics　of　an　object；　shows　not　its　nature；　but　the　nature　of　the　observer。　It　would　seem　that　the　criminalist　might　save　himself　much　work　by　observing　the　laughter　of　his　subjects。　The　embarrassed；　foolish　snickering　of　the　badly　observing　witness；　the　painful　smile　of　the　innocent　prisoner；　or　the　convicted　penitent；　the　cruel　laughter　of　the　witness　glad　of　the　damage　he　has　done；　the　evil　laughter　of　the　condemning　accomplice；　the　happy；　weak　laughter　of　the　innocent　who　has　adduced　evidence　of　his　innocence；　and　the　countless　other　forms　of　laughter；　all　these　vary　so　much　with　the　character　of　the　laugher；　and　are　so　significant；　that　hardly　anything　compares　with　them　in　value。　When　you　remember；　moreover；　that　concealment　during　laughter　is　not　easy；　at　least　at　the　moment　when　the　laughter　ceases；　you　see　how　very　important　laughter　may　be　in　determining　a　case。

Of　equal　importance　with　laughter　are　certain　changes　which　may　occur　in　people　during　a　very　short　time。　If　we　observe　in　the　course　of　the　daily　life；　that　people；　without　any　apparent　reason；　so　change　that　we　can　hardly　recognize　them；　the　change　becomes　ten　times　more　intense　under　the　influence　of　guilt　or　even　of　imprisonment。　Somebody　said　that　isolation　has　revealed　the　greatest　men；　the　greatest　fools；　and　the　greatest　criminals。　What；　then；　might　be　the　influence　of　compulsory　isolation；　i。　e。；　of　imprisonment！　We　fortunately　do　not　live　in　a　time　which　permits　imprisonment　for　months　and　years　in　even　the　simplest　cases；　but　under　certain　circumstances　even　a　few　days'　imprisonment　may　completely　alter　a　person。　Embitterment　or　wildness　may　exhibit　itself；　just　as　sorrow　and　softness；　during　the　stay　under　arrest。　And　hence；　the　c