Against Prediction

"Bernard Harcourt has never had an uninteresting thought, or made an argument that does not provoke or engage or delight or enlighten--or do all of those things simultaneously."

--Malcolm Gladwell (8/28/2006 12:00:00 AM)

"In Against Prediction, Bernard Harcourt stresses that while the benefits of actuarial predictions have been widely touted, certain costs have been largely overlooked. Indeed, actuarial prediction can under some circumstances actually increase crime, and generate morally problematic social wounds on the profiled classes that might outweigh the benefits even if crime is reduced. Once again, Harcourt has challenged the conventional wisdom in criminal justice policy, and offered an indictment to the practice of actuarial prediction that policymakers, scholars and concerned citizens will have to fully consider."

--John J. Donohue III, Leighton Homer Surbeck Professor of Law, Yale Law School (8/28/2006 12:00:00 AM)

"This is a creative, provocative, well-researched argument against current practice in sentencing, parole discrimination, and investigative profiling. Harcourt makes the case that a century of social science-inspired thinking about punishment and profiling should be cast out in favor of randomness. It is a position that will be dismissed by many as politically impractical, if not absurd. But that is often the immediate fate of revolutionary ideas."

--Jack Katz, University of California, Los Angeles (8/28/2006 12:00:00 AM)
"Against Prediction convincingly argues that the use of economic actuarial methods--predicting individual criminal likelihood based on the quantifiable characteristics of groups to which one belongs--is fundamentally flawed. . . . That we fail to see the harms of prediction, and that we proudly aspire to some quixotic goal of corrective 'efficiency' is to our collective shame as much as Against Prediction is to Harcourt's credit."--Peter Moskos "American Journal of Sociology"
"Against Prediction is inspiring in its breadth of erudition, from mathematics to philosophy, sociology, and history, and persuasive in its impassioned and provocative argument. . . . If we want to break the hold that racialist thinking has on criminal law, there is no better place to begin than the apparently neutral actuarialism of the new penology."--Ariela Gross "Law & Social Inquiry"