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 psychological 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.
