opinions on Krafft-Ebing

[protohistorian]

Here is a little Jewel from Der Artz von Wien by Franz Werfel. It should be noted Werfel was a contemporary of Krafft-Ebing. "He was a man gifted in literary terms, yet scientifically and critically he was incapable to the point of feeblemindedness." (Werfel p.42-43) While it does not itself destroy the validity of Krafft-Ebing, I would say it more than calls it into question. In my recent abnormal psych class, Ebing was used as an example of pseudo science and in particular as science "run off the rails". Dave

[Rubyretro]

First let me reassure you that Krafft-Ebing is not my favoured bedside reading & not being a professional or student -and nor an obsessive of the
most twisted side to the JtR mystery- I have not read this book cover to cover.

Nevertheless, when making my own 'profile' of 'Jack' I have read around on the net the various info on his possible psychological state -and then it is
impossible not to be led to read 'excerpts' of Krafft-Ebing.

My understanding of him is that he was writing in the late 19th century work based on his own cases -about 200 of them. Therefore he is to be respected as a professional, and I would give anything he wrote consideration -but he is limited by not knowing all the data that we've gained in over a hundred years more of shared knowledge gained by equally professional people.

As I understand it, his view of women is coloured by 19th century thinking, for example. And doesn't he put some male behaviour down to 'spinal weakness' ?

Not to be dismissed -but not a 'bible' either...

[protohistorian]

First let me reassure you that Krafft-Ebing is not my favoured bedside reading & not being a professional or student -and nor an obsessive of the
most twisted side to the JtR mystery- I have not read this book cover to cover.

Nevertheless, when making my own 'profile' of 'Jack' I have read around on the net the various info on his possible psychological state -and then it is
impossible not to be led to read 'excerpts' of Krafft-Ebing.

My understanding of him is that he was writing in the late 19th century work based on his own cases -about 200 of them. Therefore he is to be respected as a professional, and I would give anything he wrote consideration -but he is limited by not knowing all the data that we've gained in over a hundred years more of shared knowledge gained by equally professional people.

As I understand it, his view of women is coloured by 19th century thinking, for example. And doesn't he put some male behaviour down to 'spinal weakness' ?

Not to be dismissed -but not a 'bible' either...

I think the problems stems from his rather dogged and over tired attempts at explaining psychological phenomena in a purely biological context. In a situation familiar to many ripperologists, he selected only those cases which would bolster a biological interpretation of psychological phenomena. He is the man who put forth the "degenerate" theory of sexual criminality and as such (not unlike modern academics or ripperologists) blew right past what could be supported by the evidence in a quest to bolster his interpretation. Dave

[protohistorian]

This was not my intent.....however

Since I am on the issue I will put forth what I consider to be the solid reasoning behind dismissing the Kafft-Ebing style of characterization.

The theory is called degenerate for a reason. It assumes a state of balanced psychological composition with a fully formed set of Christian values as the starting point from which a human degenerates into a violent, sexually motivated, and criminal state.
1. We know enough about the development of human cognition to know that we are not born with a complete cognitive array as manifested in adults.
2. We know that there is tremendous variability in the assembly of that array in terms of function and versatility.
3. Not everyone, dare I say even in the Vatican, is Christian. Assumption of a Christian set of values is hopelessly culturally ignorant and cannot be true given our current understandings.
4. Cognitive decline even in "healthy" persons is poorly understood. We know more about which physiological conditions cause decline and what manner of decline than we do about normal atrophy.
5. The degenerate hypothesis cannot account for the correlation between education or environment and sexually criminal behavior.

I would rather circumcise myself with a flat rock than underpin a theory of suspect-hood on such a dismal and shady understanding of the facts. Dave

[Limehouse]

Wow! What an interesting thread!

My knowledge of Krafft-Ebing is limited to attendance at one lecture about him and a little bit of reading so forgive me if I sound sketchy.

I view him in the same way I view Freud. Some of his ideas appeal and some are ludicrous.

For example, as I see it, it is Krafft-Ebing's theory that allows us to see the method of killing and the after-killing mutilations in the JtR case as a kind of metaphor for 'normal' sexual intercourse and to me that makes sense. However, his ideas about the reasons for sexual criminality are, as you say Dave, based on Victorian values and norms.

Tell me, did Krafft-Ebing subscribe to the noption that masturbation caused madness?

Julie

[protohistorian]

Hello Julie, While I do not have a specific reference to such a thing, I believe he would have for a couple of reasons.
1. He was a prone to explaining mental phenomena in strictly biological terms.
2. He believed in acquired heritability, that is to say you could acquire a biological/psychological trait you were not born with, and then pass that on to your children.

With that kind of worldview and interpretive schema it would certainly not be out of the question, (and though I loathe to use the word in a ripper context), probably is. Dave

[Limehouse]

Thanks Dave,

I have heard of some very strange treatments dished out to women during those times that support your ideas that the Victorians linked mental processes to biology - particularly concerning the menstrual cycle. I shall look at Krafft-Ebing in a whole new light!

However, can we usefully employ any of his ideas in trying to understand the actions of JtR?

[protohistorian]

please investigate further! Report back. Dave

[Hunter]

In many ways Richard Von Krafft-Ebing was a paradox. Like most of his contemporaries, he was caught between the 'Christian moral' aspect of human behaviour and the judgements thereof, and the new Darwinian theory of natural selection and its determination of human characteristics.

While he believed that lunacy, sexual deviancy and criminal intent were hereditary, he also believed that such individuals could be rehabilitated. His early career was spent in the employment at various asylums where he campaigned to change policies towards the treatment of the mentally ill. He perceived that these institutions were merely warehousing inmates and eventually became despondent over such policies. Feeling useless in this endeavour, he left the asylums and concentrated his efforts on education.

Krafft-Ebing believed that homosexuality was a degenerative anomaly as well, yet strove to overturn a law that made the act illegal. In later life he reversed his opinions on homosexuality and indeed, coined the phrase 'heterosexual' to mean abnormal behavoir between a man and a woman outside of the sole purpose of procreation; just as homosexual activity had been described as an 'act against nature' in the same way.

His best known book, Psychopathia Sexualis was intended for legal scholars to have a more liberal understanding of 'sexual perversions' and thus change the legal implications of some of the characteristics he exampled. Unintentionally however, it had the opposite effect upon authorities who misconstrued his work; the result being more stringent penalties for certain activities.

He was a follower of the Italian criminologist, Cesare Lombroso, who also believed that crime was a characteristic of human nature. Physiognomics, as it was termed, claimed that personal traits could be determined from certain physical features - such as the shape of the head - with the notion that criminal behaviour could be predicted in individuals as a result of physical examination.

Krafft-Ebing coined many phrases and terminologies that are still in use today. Sadism - from the infamous Marquis de Sade - fetishism and 'lust murderer' are just a few. The latter is still used by such criminal profilers as John Douglas to describe Jack the Ripper and it is this section of Krafft-Ebings book that is important to us. The use of the term 'satyriasis' by Dr. Bond to describe the condition of the Ripper in his early profile is straight from Krafft-Ebing's work.

The 'lust murder' case studies in Psychopathia Sexualis were derived from Lombroso, who traveled to the various institutions in Europe to interview criminals who had performed some of the most repugnant acts of murder. One such interview was of Vincenz Verzeni, who's murders were similar to the person to be known as Jack the Ripper. The complete case study of Verzeni has been posted on another thread here on Casebook. A part I have quoted below:
"I took the clothing and intestines, because of the pleasure it gave me to smell and touch them. At last my mother came to suspect me because she noticed spots of semen on my shirt after each murder or attempt at one. I am not crazy, but in the moment of strangling my victims I saw nothing else."

Whatever we may now think of Krafft-Ebing's philosophy, these case studies are important to us as they not only pre-date the Ripper murders, but undoubtedly had an influence on those who investigated them and their conclusions about the various suspects that we still debate today.

[protohistorian]

Nicely done Hunter! Dave

[Hunter]

Thank you Dave.

Here's another 'pre-Ripper' case that is mentioned. This guy was the opposite of the stereotype that Macnaghten and Anderson thought the Ripper was. He continued in sporatic murders for ten years.

Case 22. A certain Gruyo, aged forty-one, with a blameless past life, having been three times married, strangled six women in the course of ten years. They were almost all public prostitutes and quite old. After the strangling he tore out their intestines and kidneys per vaginam. Some of his victims he violated before killing, others, on account of the occurrence of impotence, he did not. He set about his horrible deeds with such care that he remained undetected for ten years.

[protohistorian]

Fine job Hunter! We certainly benefit from knowing what influenced our decision makers! Dave

[Doug Irvine]

I think we should have a look at what we are talking about. The following is the section of Psychopathia sexualis that deals with Jack The Ripper.

Jack the Ripper - On December 1, 1887, July 7, August 8, September 30, one day in the month of October and on November 9, 1888; on June 1, July 17 and September 10, 1889, the bodies of women were found at various lonely quarters of London ripped open and mutilated in a peculiar fashion. The murderer has never been found. It is probable that he first cut the throats of his victims, then ripped open the abdomen and groped among the intestines. In some of the instances he cut off the genitals and carried them away; in others he only tore them into pieces and left them behind. He does not seem to have had sexual intercourse with his victims, but very likely the murderous act and subsequent mutilation of the corpse were the equivalents for the sexual act. (Mcdonald, Le criminal type, 2 edit, Lyon, 1884; Spitzka, The Journal of Mental and Nervous Diseases, 1888, December Kierman, The Medical Standard, 1888, Nov. and Dec

[protohistorian]

Well Done Doug! Dave