Page:Calcutta Review (1925) Vol. 16.djvu/309

294 a sinner against the law of God. That was about all. But there was one important fact which was usually overlooked,—at any rate, never emphasised;—viz., his psychological similarities, along with many important differences, with the ordinary man.

In the first place, criminality does not imply a special instinct or a unique faculty which is not found at all in other men. A criminal, too, has more or less just the same springs of action as all of us. But there is admittedly a vast difference in the strength and intensity of these impulses. In a criminal, there are some impulses which are more developed and more intense, and some, again, which are less intense, than in an ordinary man. For instance, love of wealth is an ordinary and quite legitimate impulse; it is present in all men; but when grown to an excess, it becomes a source of criminality. The psychology of a shrewd business man bent on making profit, and that of a clever sharper, are not intrinsically different in kind. Both have more or less the same springs of action. But surely there is a remarkable difference in the intensity and magnitude of the impulses. And the difference in the intensity of impulses implies a corresponding difference in the power of self-control. Many of us possibly cast covetous eyes upon what is our neighbour’s; but we resist the impulses and are not criminals; but the unfortunate few who cannot resist, are so. Generally speaking, therefore, the criminal mind does not differ in kind from the normal mind.

Yet it does differ, in so far as there are differences in the strength and intensity, etc., of the springs of action, feelings, and so forth. And in so far as it differs from the ordinary mind, it is an aberration from the type; it is not the healthy, normal type;—it is abnormal, and for the sake of distinguishing it from genius, we may call it sub-normal.

Now, this sub-normal species, the criminal, was usually regarded as sub-moral—as an aberration from the moral type.