There are three possible responses to a title like “Criminology and the Sciences of Man” — first, total incomprehension — what on earth can be meant by these words? Only in an International Congress could anyone conceive of a title like this; second, to accept this vague and general invitation to be vague and general — and then go on to talk about whatever is on your mind at the moment; or, finally, to actually take the phrase seriously.

I must admit that all three responses crossed my mind. Eventually however I foolishly chose the final one. I'll try, that is, to say something about the subject in the light of Stephen Quensel's interesting paper — which I read as an attempt to break up the specific discourse of criminological theory and re-locate it in the general social sciences. I'll look at the crisis he describes — and end up by being more sceptical that he is about the chances of any sort of “fresh” start — interdisciplinary or otherwise.

There is, by the way, one part of the title of this opening session that I will not take seriously at all. Surely even in the timeless world of International Criminology Congresses, there should by now be some recognition that women exist as well as men. So, not “Criminology and the Sciences of Man” but “Criminology and the Human Sciences” or “Social Sciences” or (in Foucault's term) the “Soft Sciences”.