Professing interactionist bio + social terminology, contemporary biocriminology asserts a break from its biologically essentialist past. Assurances notwithstanding, whether biocriminology has undergone a decisive paradigm shift rejecting notions of biological criminals and bad brains remains uncertain. Unfortunately, discussions of biocriminology's assumptions are mired in politics, obscuring important scientific issues. Motivated to clarify misunderstanding, I address the ontoepistemology of biocriminology from a scientific realist perspective. Drawing on familiar notions of crime as a social construction, I explain how and why biocriminology's ontoepistemology is inconsistent with the social reality of crime for scientific not ideological reasons. I explain that recognizing crime as a social construction does not imply that crime is not real or objective and cannot be studied scientifically. On the contrary, the irreducibly social nature of crime requires that scientific realists reject assumptions of “biological crime” as well as the biologically reductionist epistemology on which biocriminology depends.
Nagel E (1961) The Structure of Science: Problems in the Logic of Scientific Explanation. New York: Harcourt, Brace and World.
9.
Walsh A and Bolen JD (2012) The Neurobiology of Criminal Behavior: Gene–Brain–Culture Interaction. Burlington, VT: Ashgate Publishing.
10.
Weinberg S (1993) Dreams of a Final Theory. London: Random House.
11.
Ayala FJ (1974) The concept of biological progress. In: AyalaFJDobzhanskyT (eds) Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.339–355.
12.
BechtelWRichardsonRC (2010) Discovering Complexity: Decomposition and Localization as Strategies in Scientific Research. 2nd ed. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
13.
BeckerHS (1963) Outsiders: Studies in The Sociology of Deviance. New York: Free Press.
14.
BurtCH (2018) Racial discrimination and cultural adaptations: An evolutionary developmental approach. Advances in Criminological Theory: Building a Black Criminology24: 207–252.
15.
BurtCHSimonsRL (2014) Pulling back the curtain on heritability studies: Biosocial criminology in the postgenomic era. Criminology: An Interdisciplinary Journal52(2): 223–262.
16.
CarrierNWalbyK (2014) Ptolemizing Lombroso: The pseudo-revolution of biosocial criminology.Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Criminology6(1): 1–45.
17.
CarrierNWalbyK (2015) For sociological reason: Crime, criminalization, and the poverty of biosocial criminology. Journal of Theoretical & Philosophical Criminology7(1): 73–82.
18.
CartwrightN (1999) The Dappled World: A Study of the Boundaries of Science. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
19.
ClausenJDKeckDHieseyWM (1940) Experimental studies on the nature of species. I. Effects of varied environments on western north American plants. Washington, DC: Carnegie Institute of Washington.
20.
CooneyM (2009) Is Killing Wrong? A Study in Pure Sociology.Charlottesville, VA: University of Virginia Press.
21.
CurrieE (1985) Confronting Crime: An American Challenge. New York: Pantheon Books.
22.
DawkinsR (1986) Sociobiology: The new storm in a teacup. In: RoseSAppingnaneseL (eds) Science and Beyond. Oxford: Blackwell, pp.61–78.
23.
DennettDC (1995) Darwin’s Dangerous Idea: Evolution and the Meanings of Life. New York: Simon & Schuster.
24.
DupréJ (1993) The Disorder of Things: Metaphysical Foundations of the Disunity of Science. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
25.
DupréJ (2001) Human Nature and the Limits of Science. New York: Oxford University Press.
26.
DupréJ (2012) Processes of Life: Essays in the Philosophy of Biology. New York: Oxford University Press.
27.
DusterT (1970) The Legislation of Morality: Law, Drugs, and Moral Judgment. New York: The Free Press.
28.
DusterT (1990) Backdoor to Eugenics. New York: Routledge.
29.
DusterT (2006) Behavioral genetics and explanations of the link between crime, violence, and race. In: Parens E, Chapman AR and Press N (eds) Wrestling with Behavioral Genetics: Science, Ethics, and Public Conversation. Baltimore, MD: Johns Hopkins University Press, pp.150–175.
30.
EllisB (2001) Scientific Essentialism. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31.
EllisLWalshA (2000) Criminology: A Global Perspective. Needham Heights, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
32.
FallinMWhooleyOBarkerKK (2019) Criminalizing the brain: Neurocriminology and the production of strategic ignorance. BioSocieties14(3): 438–462.
33.
FodorJA (1974) Special sciences (or: The disunity of science as a working hypothesis). Synthese28: 97–115.
GarlandD (1985) The criminal and his science: A critical account of the formation of criminology at the end of the nineteenth century. The British Journal of Criminology2: 109–137.
36.
GriffithsPStotzK (2013) Genetics and Philosophy: An Introduction. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
37.
HackingI (1999) The Social Construction of What. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
38.
HaslangerS (1995) Ontology and social construction. Philosophical Topics23(2): 95–125.
39.
HopkinsEJWeisbergDSTaylorJCV (2016) The seductive allure is a reductive allure: People prefer scientific explanations that contain logically irrelevant reductive information.Cognition 155: 67–76.
40.
HulsmanL (1986) Critical criminology and the concept of crime. Contemporary Crisis10: 63–80.
41.
JacksonFPettitP (1992) In defense of explanatory ecumenism. Economics & Philosophy8(1): 1–21.
42.
KaiserMI (2011) The limits of reductionism in the life sciences. History and Philosophy of the Life Sciences33: 453–476.
43.
KitanoH (2002) Systems biology: A brief overview. Science295(5560): 1662–1664.
44.
LewontinRC (2001) Gene, organism and environment. In: OyamaSGriffithsPEGrayRD (eds) Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge: The MIT Press, pp.59–66.
45.
LombrosoC (1876/2006) The Criminal Man. Trans. and Introduction by GibsonMRafterNH. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
46.
MeloniM (2014) Biology without biologism: Social theory in a postgenomic age. Sociology48(4): 731–746.
47.
MessnerSFRosenfeldR (1994) Crime and the American Dream. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing.
48.
MichaelJAdlerMJ (1933) Crime, Law, and Social Change. New York: Harcourt, Brace & Co.
49.
NagelT (1986) The View from Nowhere. New York: Oxford University Press.
50.
OppenheimP andPutnamH (1958) Unity of science as a working hypothesis. In: FeiglH (ed.) Minnesota Studies in the Philosophy of Science, vol. 2. Minneapolis, MN: Minnesota University Press. Retrieved from the University of Minnesota Digital Conservancy, https://hdl.handle.net/11299/184622.
51.
PanofskyA (2014) Misbehaving Science. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
52.
PopperKR (1974) Scientific reduction and the essential incompleteness of all science. In: AyalaFJDobzhanskyT (eds) Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.259–283.
53.
QuinneyR (1970) The Social Reality of Crime. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co.
54.
QuinneyR (1975) Analysis and Critique of Crime in America. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Co.
55.
RafterNPosickCRoqueM (2016) The Criminal Brain: Understanding Biological Theories of Crime. 2nd ed. New York: New York University Press.
56.
ReimanJH (1979) The Rich Get Richer and the Poor Get Prison: Ideology, Class, and Criminal Justice. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
57.
SchaffnerKF (1967) Approaches to reduction. Philosophy of Science34(2): 137–147.
SchurEM (1979) Interpreting Deviance. New York: Harper & Row Publishers.
61.
SearleJR (1995) The Construction of Social Reality. New York: The Free Press.
62.
SkolimowskiH (1974) Problems of rationality in biology. In: Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.205–223.
63.
ThorpeWJ (1974) Reductionism in biology. In: AyalaFJDobzhanskyT (eds) Studies in the Philosophy of Biology: Reduction and Related Problems. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, pp.109–136.
64.
WalshA (2009) Biology and Criminology: The Biosocial Synthesis. New York: Routledge.
65.
WalshAWrightJP (2015) Biosocial criminology and its discontents: A critical realist philosophical analysis.Criminal Justice Studies28(1): 124–140.
66.
WilliamsCRArrigoBA (2006) Philosophy, crime, and theoretical criminology. In: ArrigoBAWilliamsCR (eds) Philosophy, Crime, and Criminology. Chicago, IL: University of Illinois Press, pp.1–38.
67.
WrightJPCullenFT (2012) The future of biosocial criminology: Beyond scholars’ professional ideology. Journal of Contemporary Criminal Justice28: 237–253.
68.
WrightJPMorganMA (2015) Human biodiversity and the egalitarian fiction. In: BeaverKMBarnesJCBoutwellBB (eds) The Nature versus Nurture Debate in Biocriminology. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE, pp.55–73.
69.
YoungJ (2011) The Criminological Imagination. Cambridge: Polity Press.
