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 residua 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.