Evolution - Is it down to Us?

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 1:50pm

WindSock wrote: »

I don't know if people are genetically predisposed to criminality and violence either. I just thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss.

Its not genetical. Its social. Most scumbag are not reared by there parents. They are dragged up. When I was a kid if I was bold I got smacked & all my ma had to do was hold a wooden spoon & we would all bail out of the room & upstairs. Now I am older & I think my ma & dad did a great job. Poltical Correctness has ruined a generation of children who think they have more rights than their parents. With more & more Governments telling you how to raise your kids it will contunie this way.

Children need clear defined rules & they will be happy as ****. Sadly this doesnt happen most of the time with Parents been more stressed than ever now with a econmic downturn in ireland.

So yea its a Social thing. Why arent adopted rich children robbers because there are raised well & are not allowed to hang out on the street thats why. Children need focus like sports, comics & other things. However most parents fail at this because they are stressed out.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 2:06pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Its not genetical. Its social.

I'm going to go ahead and stop you there and say that statement is wrong. It's actually a combination of both.

Rich, well raised people don't commit crime ever? News to me. You should look up 'thrill killing'. many of the perpetrators here have come from well off backgrounds and good upbringings.

metrovelvet · 29-10-2008 2:15pm

^ He said it was socialised, he never said it was class based.

Dragan · 29-10-2008 2:17pm

WindSock wrote: »

I don't know if people are genetically predisposed to criminality and violence either. I just thought it would be an interesting topic to discuss.

It should also be noted that genes can act off each other, or be dormant for a generation, or combine in all manner of ways.

So, in effect, you could have Saint Mom and Angel Dad and the child is still a genetic bastard.

( I have to say, i am really enjoying this thread!)

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 2:25pm

Galvasean wrote: »

I'm going to go ahead and stop you there and say that statement is wrong. It's actually a combination of both.

Rich, well raised people don't commit crime ever? News to me. You should look up 'thrill killing'. many of the perpetrators here have come from well off backgrounds and good upbringings.

I was talking about normal crime and yes some of the most famous rapiest were rich people like the hier to Max Factor who I think date raped 3 woman or Javed Iqbal who raped & murdered over 100 children. Point is its all about parenting, a rich family can have crap parents just as much as a poor family. So yea its Social.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 2:35pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

I was talking about normal crime and yes some of the most famous rapiest were rich people like the hier to Max Factor who I think date raped 3 woman or Javed Iqbal who raped & murdered over 100 children. Point is its all about parenting, a rich family can have crap parents just as much as a poor family. So yea its Social.

While I would agree that the vast majority of criminal activity could be avoided with the aid of social conditioning, it is not the single defining factor. I have known many people who have good upbringings but still turn out to be hellions (would use harsher language to describe them but it's a public forum). Some people simply have a chemical imbalance which makes them do things which are evil by society's standards. No amount of good parenting can change these particular people.
There is a lot more to this debate than most realize.
You can't simply tar every criminal with the same brush and say they just had bad upbringings, because it simply is not true.

Dragan · 29-10-2008 2:41pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Point is its all about parenting, a rich family can have crap parents just as much as a poor family. So yea its Social.

And two very good parents can have a kid that is a wanker. So......

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 2:45pm

Galvasean wrote: »

While I would agree that the vast majority of criminal activity could be avoided with the aid of social conditioning, it is not the single defining factor. I have known many people who have good upbringings but still turn out to be hellions (would use harsher language to describe them but it's a public forum). Some people simply have a chemical imbalance which makes them do things which are evil by society's standards. No amount of good parenting can change these particular people.
There is a lot more to this debate than most realize.
You can't simply tar every criminal with the same brush and say they just had bad upbringings, because it simply is not true.

True, the N&N Theory is the best thing we have atm but you admit yourself a vast majority of criminal activity could be avoided with the aid of social conditioning. I would say that the other people who are evil have probally has a tramacial experience. There are a lot of things that change who we are like, bullying, sexual abuse & rejection. Look at people with no crimial record who killed there partners because of rejection. There is a lot of social factors I have not touched upon but if your parents perpare you for life & its the hardships of it you should be able to come pass all these issues.

Thou a massive issue is the way Police carry out there jobs now a days. A generation of youth are been arrested for stupid things & been given crimal records, this causes a lot of trama & sets people on the way to commiting larger crimes. Policing for too Government required statistics is wrong.

Dragan wrote: »

And two very good parents can have a kid that is a wanker. So......

They may be great friends but that doesnt make them good parents. Most people are not as good a parent as they could be to be honest because of stress & other social stress which they cant help. People set the bar too high for themselves & feel like they are bad parents when all it requires if that you be firm, fair & consistant in your parenting. You will probally find your friends are not this. Also Kids are happy in School where they have clear definded rules, so why dont people have this at home ?. A lot of what a kid will be in older years in defined as a young child. Our Social Structure defines that.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 2:55pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

True, the N&N Theory is the best thing we have atm but you admit yourself a vast majority of criminal activity could be avoided with the aid of social conditioning. I would say that the other people who are evil have probally has a tramacial experience. There are a lot of things that change who we are like, bullying, sexual abuse & rejection.

While that is often the case, there are people born with as i mentioned before chemical imbalances in their brain, ie: born crazy for lack of a better term.
Many would like to brand such people as evil. This is an unfair labeling. In fact many others would argue that evil itself is a purely subjective term, citing how deeds deemed to be evil are the result of either inherent neurological imbalances or bad experience or even both.

Nuravictus wrote: »

Look at people with no crimial record who killed there partners because of rejection. There is a lot of social factors I have not touched upon but if your parents perpare you for life & its the hardships of it you should be able to come pass all these issues.

As you said, certain things (eg: being molested as a child or witnessing a particularly random act of violence) can have a detrimental effect on one's development. Many instances are out of parents' control, so therefore it would be naive to suggest that good parenting is blanket protection from such things.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 2:58pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Also Kids are happy in School where they have clear definded rules,

Such a sweeping statement is utter nonsense. Many kids hate school and are far from happy being forced into an environment with such a strict and defined structure. Not to mention that a classroom environment, where attention and affection must be distributed among many children as opposed to just one as they are used to, can be quite traumatic for many children.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 3:07pm

Galvasean wrote: »

While that is often the case, there are people born with as i mentioned before chemical imbalances in their brain, ie: born crazy for lack of a better term.
Many would like to brand such people as evil. This is an unfair labeling. In fact many others would argue that evil itself is a purely subjective term, citing how deeds deemed to be evil are the result of either inherent neurological imbalances or bad experience or even both.

Everyone is born with the ability to do evil mate & everyone is born with the ability to do good. If I had a Child who was killing cats down the back of the Garden. I will give him a good few smacks & tell him its bold. Soon enough he will realise “killing cats” equals “pain for me” and he will stop. I know I tried to put my brothers pet cat down the drain when I was 4 but my ma sorted that one out :P. That doesn’t make me evil but look at the experiments done in American where the results showed that most people would give the man a fatal shock even thou they could hear him scream in pain (Actor). The Social side of this is the ability to say “NO” & walk away. Very few people did in that experiment because they felt they were under due arrest. So everyone can commit murder under the correct social conditions.

Thou the above point could be used to state that everyone is born evil !.

Galvasean wrote: »

As you said, certain things (eg: being molested as a child or witnessing a particularly random act of violence) can have a detrimental effect on one's development. Many instances are out of parents' control, so therefore it would be naive to suggest that good parenting is blanket protection from such things.

No what I same saying is preparing children by getting them in sports & as many social interactions as possible. Children sitting watching TV all day was not been prepared.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 3:09pm

Galvasean wrote: »

Such a sweeping statement is utter nonsense. Many kids hate school and are far from happy being forced into an environment with such a strict and defined structure. Not to mention that a classroom environment, where attention and affection must be distributed among many children as opposed to just one as they are used to, can be quite traumatic for many children.

Studies show kids are less disruptive in school because of clear structure & rules. This get hased at best in the home. Thats my point. You can be a loving parent & enforce structure.

metrovelvet · 29-10-2008 3:11pm

Dragan wrote: »

It should also be noted that genes can act off each other, or be dormant for a generation, or combine in all manner of ways.

So, in effect, you could have Saint Mom and Angel Dad and the child is still a genetic bastard.

( I have to say, i am really enjoying this thread!)

Indeed. Genetics can be a roulette table. My son is a strawberry blonde and no one knows where the hell that came from.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 3:13pm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Indeed. Genetics can be a roulette table. My son is a strawberry blonde and no one knows where the hell that came from.

Thats Ginger, Hes a ginger nut :P. At least you can call him Fire Croach when he gets to that age. Good Luck

WindSock · 29-10-2008 3:18pm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Indeed. Genetics can be a roulette table. My son is a strawberry blonde and no one knows where the hell that came from.

The Postie?

Dragan · 29-10-2008 3:25pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

They may be great friends but that doesnt make them good parents. Most people are not as good a parent as they could be to be honest because of stress & other social stress which they cant help. People set the bar too high for themselves & feel like they are bad parents when all it requires if that you be firm, fair & consistant in your parenting. You will probally find your friends are not this. Also Kids are happy in School where they have clear definded rules, so why dont people have this at home ?. A lot of what a kid will be in older years in defined as a young child. Our Social Structure defines that.

That has absolutely **** all to do with my point, no disrespect intended.

I said an absolute which exists in modern society, that peope who are good parents can have bad kids.

Also, i'd like to see some studies on how happy kids are in school.

No offence, but your putting forward a lot of your opinions as if they are facts, or vice versa.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 3:34pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Everyone is born with the ability to do evil mate & everyone is born with the ability to do good.

that is an absolute kop out of an argument. Your acting like humans are born a blank slate. everyone isn't born equal. You can put two people in the exact same environment from birth and they can end up completely different.

Nuravictus wrote: »

If I had a Child who was killing cats down the back of the Garden. I will give him a good few smacks & tell him its bold. Soon enough he will realise “killing cats” equals “pain for me” and he will stop.

Is he becoming good though? Possibly not. Perhaps he will see it as being caught = pain and continue to carry on his activity in covert fashion.

Nuravictus wrote: »

Studies show kids are less disruptive in school because of clear structure & rules. This get hased at best in the home. Thats my point. You can be a loving parent & enforce structure.

Other studies have shown the exact opposite. Some people develop much better in a more open ended environment as it stimulates their artistic tendencies, while others develop better in a structured environment (eg: if their particular skill was something more rigid, like mathematics).
Once again you are making the assumption that everyone is born the same which is simply false.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 3:36pm

Dragan wrote: »

That has absolutely **** all to do with my point, no disrespect intended.

I said an absolute which exists in modern society, that peope who are good parents can have bad kids.

Also, i'd like to see some studies on how happy kids are in school.

No offence, but your putting forward a lot of your opinions as if they are facts, or vice versa.

So whats your saying is that a Parent has no control of the actions of their Child. If you all took that approach we might as well just feed them & have no more interaction. You can be a bad parent by not committing enough time to the kid. The kid might be been a bold because he/she is not getting enough attention or some other social issue. Children seek approval from there parents & if you dont spend enough time with the child they will probally end up doing thing to get your attention. I stand by my points and from my experience kids are happy in school because they have predefined rules & set structure. In the house they rules can change on the kids depending on the parents mood.

See the issue ?

Dragan · 29-10-2008 3:42pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

See the issue ?

Yes, i see you ignoring points raised and arguing around points you don't like because they don't suit your argument.

I would call that an issue.

You made an absolute statement that kids are happier in school, now that becomes "in your own experience" when you are called on it.

And for the third time, i offered you an absolute on the "good parents", i don't want arguments about why these imaginary parents are not as good as they could be, I want a decent opinion of why good parents can have bad kids, not reasons as to why those parents are not "good".

It's a different argument.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 3:53pm

Galvasean wrote: »

that is an absolute kop out of an argument. Your acting like humans are born a blank slate. everyone isn't born equal. You can put two people in the exact same environment from birth and they can end up completely different.

You swear there is no social conditioning going on, Do we all go murdering or raping people ?. No because we are ALL shown this is wrong as children so a majority wont do it.

Galvasean wrote: »

Is he becoming good though? Possibly not. Perhaps he will see it as being caught = pain and continue to carry on his activity in covert fashion.

Fair point but in the majority of cases he will stop in my opinion.

Galvasean wrote: »

Other studies have shown the exact opposite. Some people develop much better in a more open ended environment as it stimulates their artistic tendencies, while others develop better in a structured environment (eg: if their particular skill was something more rigid, like mathematics).
Once again you are making the assumption that everyone is born the same which is simply false.

True you are correct but the truth is that Children are still happy in School whether that be in there maths class or arts class. Is doesn’t matter.

Dragan wrote: »

Yes, i see you ignoring points raised and arguing around points you don't like because they don't suit your argument.
I would call that an issue.

What do you want me to answer ?

Dragan wrote: »

You made an absolute statement that kids are happier in school, now that becomes "in your own experience" when you are called on it.

Everything I post is my opinion or taken from something I have read, I can’t go link every article that I have read in the past 5 years just to get you to accept my point. So you will have to take my “word”

Dragan wrote: »

And for the third time, i offered you an absolute on the "good parents", i don't want arguments about why these imaginary parents are not as good as they could be, I want a decent opinion of why good parents can have bad kids, not reasons as to why those parents are not "good".
It's a different argument.

I find this really annoying, If the kid is been bold. The parent is doing something wrong. This sense that it was nature & I am not a crap parent is a load of crap. Different Kids need different approachs. What worked on their first kid might not work on there second. So on the first kids they could of been GREAT parents but on the seconds they would of been crap parents.

This is a great thread btw, Im getting called out on nearly everything I say :P

Dragan · 29-10-2008 4:29pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

I find this really annoying, If the kid is been bold. The parent is doing something wrong. This sense that it was nature & I am not a crap parent is a load of crap. Different Kids need different approachs. What worked on their first kid might not work on there second. So on the first kids they could of been GREAT parents but on the seconds they would of been crap parents.

This is a great thread btw, Im getting called out on nearly everything I say :P

You find it really annoying that parents cannot be the only thing that determines how a child will develop morally?

In that case i would suggest you never have kids.

Galvasean · 29-10-2008 4:32pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

You swear there is no social conditioning going on,

No I don't. where did you get that from?

Nuravictus wrote: »

Do we all go murdering or raping people ?. No because we are ALL shown this is wrong as children so a majority wont do it.

We tell our children not to rape people?

Nuravictus wrote: »

Fair point but in the majority of cases he will stop in my opinion.

That's fine, but please bear in mind that just because something is not the majority does not mean it is irrelevant or can be duly ignored.

Nuravictus wrote: »

True you are correct but the truth is that Children are still happy in School whether that be in there maths class or arts class. Is doesn’t matter.

The truth? Do a survey in any school and you will find a large portion of them are not happy. You missed my point entirely. A very structured approach on education will benefit some, but not all.

Nuravictus wrote: »

Everything I post is my opinion or taken from something I have read, I can’t go link every article that I have read in the past 5 years just to get you to accept my point. So you will have to take my “word”

Why should he take your word for it if you are not willing to back up your points? You are partaking in what has become a scientific debate. One of the fundamental principals of such is to back up any points made with evidence. If we took everyone's word for it the world would be one very confused place.

Nuravictus wrote: »

I find this really annoying, If the kid is been bold. The parent is doing something wrong. This sense that it was nature & I am not a crap parent is a load of crap.

Tried and tested orthodox science is a 'load of crap'? Well done.

Nuravictus wrote: »

Different Kids need different approachs. What worked on their first kid might not work on there second. So on the first kids they could of been GREAT parents but on the seconds they would of been crap parents.

Pretty much. In some cases there may simply not be a solution available. Hypothetical example: Child needs a chemical imbalance fixed to curb his disruptive tendencies. Perhaps there is no known cure for this particular imbalance. No amount of social conditioning can fix this particular problem. Only a chemical interaction (which would affect said child's very genetic disposition, in other words his natural state of being) can solve the problem. therefore it is a problem with his nature, not his nurture so to speak.
Granted it is a quite specific example, but not invalid.

Nuravictus wrote: »

This is a great thread btw, Im getting called out on nearly everything I say :P

There appears to be a reason for that.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 4:56pm

Dragan wrote: »

You find it really annoying that parents cannot be the only thing that determines how a child will develop morally?
In that case i would suggest you never have kids.

I personally think its a lot to do with the social structure the children are in. What I am saying works. Look at Government programs like the Hitler Youth & the Nashi in Russia where Children join youth movements are conditioned. Social Interaction & real life experiences define your character and your character defines who you are. Evil people can become good people but according to you guys if your born evil that means you are evil. I think most people the social aspect defines who they are but you lot keep going back to its genitic Maybe in small percentage but in the majority i don’t see that been the case.

Galvasean wrote: »

No I don't. where did you get that from?
We tell our children not to rape people?

I’m saying the Society we live in, Kids are predisposed to this via News Reports & so on. By looking at there parents general distaste or reaction to a news report a kid will get that understanding in my opinion.

Galvasean wrote: »

That's fine, but please bear in mind that just because something is not the majority does not mean it is irrelevant or can be duly ignored.
The truth? Do a survey in any school and you will find a large portion of them are not happy. You missed my point entirely. A very structured approach on education will benefit some, but not all.

You missed my point on this, What I am saying on this matter is that on Schools rules & structure are predefined as well as in sports. Children like this because they no the limits. In the home these rules can change depending on the parents mood.

Galvasean wrote: »

Why should he take your word for it if you are not willing to back up your points? You are partaking in what has become a scientific debate. One of the fundamental principals of such is to back up any points made with evidence. If we took everyone's word for it the world would be one very confused place.

While you might not agree with me everything I state has come from a report or article of some sort. This thread is so vast that if I spent all day & night getting articles to back my posts up I would have a real life. I have backed a lot of this things up on other issues.

Galvasean wrote: »

Tried and tested orthodox science is a 'load of crap'? Well done.

Tried & tested Science recommends you give anti depression drugs to a 4 year old. I rather take my chances than listen to that crap.

Galvasean wrote: »

Pretty much. In some cases there may simply not be a solution available. Hypothetical example: Child needs a chemical imbalance fixed to curb his disruptive tendencies. Perhaps there is no known cure for this particular imbalance. No amount of social conditioning can fix this particular problem. Only a chemical interaction (which would affect said child's very genetic disposition, in other words his natural state of being) can solve the problem. therefore it is a problem with his nature, not his nurture so to speak.
Granted it is a quite specific example, but not invalid.
There appears to be a reason for that.

We all aren’t born the same we all look different but I still think that the overall character of a person is not predefined upon birth but is a result of life experiences & environment events they don’t control.#

Also we are way offtopic I think now :P

Dragan · 29-10-2008 5:06pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

I personally think its a lot to do with the social structure the children are in. What I am saying works. Look at Government programs like the Hitler Youth & the Nashi in Russia where Children join youth movements are conditioned. Social Interaction & real life experiences define your character and your character defines who you are. Evil people can become good people but according to you guys if your born evil that means you are evil. I think most people the social aspect defines who they are but you lot keep going back to its genitic Maybe in small percentage but in the majority i don’t see that been the case.

First off, find where i said it is genetic? Because i haven't. You assume that because i don't agree with the point you are very badly putting across that i think it is the other.

I don't. Personally i lack indept understand of the Human Genome, or the Human Condition beyond my own, so i am working from the vantage point that any post in this thread from me are purely my opinions and questions in an interesting debate.

From you posts i am taking that you think you are right.

Well, prove it? It's not that much to ask for prove of a point, or a research paper to back up the opinions you are putting forth as fact.

This is, afterall, a quasi-scientific debate, no?

My issue with what you are saying is that you are aguing Parental/Child relations as if that is the only part of Social. There are hundreds of various points of contact that would fall under the Social aspect, not just parental.

But you maintain the parental influence should be stronger than all the others.

It makes no sense to be honest.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 5:16pm

Dragan wrote: »

First off, find where i said it is genetic? Because i haven't. You assume that because i don't agree with the point you are very badly putting across that i think it is the other.

I don't. Personally i lack indept understand of the Human Genome, or the Human Condition beyond my own, so i am working from the vantage point that any post in this thread from me are purely my opinions and questions in an interesting debate.

From you posts i am taking that you think you are right.

Well, prove it? It's not that much to ask for prove of a point, or a research paper to back up the opinions you are putting forth as fact.

This is, afterall, a quasi-scientific debate, no?

My issue with what you are saying is that you are aguing Parental/Child relations as if that is the only part of Social. There are hundreds of various points of contact that would fall under the Social aspect, not just parental.

But you maintain the parental influence should be stronger than all the others.

It makes no sense to be honest.

Sorry if both if I offended you but I am debating with two people here & replying to them at the same time.

I stated a few posts back that there is many social events that affects the character of a kid but I was talking about the fact that a kid who was born "evil" will grow up to be evil which I dont agree with.

metrovelvet · 29-10-2008 5:17pm

Why can't you accept that it's a little of both?

metrovelvet · 29-10-2008 5:18pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Sorry if both if I offended you but I am debating with two people here & replying to them at the same time.

I stated a few posts back that there is many social events that affects the character of a kid but I was talking about the fact that a kid who was born kid will grow up to be evil which I dont agree with.

This is very difficult to argue since what we consider to be evil changes over the decades.

Nuravictus · 29-10-2008 5:19pm

metrovelvet wrote: »

Why can't you accept that it's a little of both?

Say a child who is born with good but is abused & turns bad why can't a kid who is born evil have something happen to him turn him good ?.

What i am saying is the Social Structure & Enviorment defines the person. Now I gota run or I will miss my bus to the gym :mad:

metrovelvet wrote: »

This is very difficult to argue since what we consider to be evil changes over the decades.

True but im talking about what is acceptable when the child is born. The Society you are born into.

GLaDOS · 29-10-2008 5:43pm

Nuravictus wrote: »

Say a child who is born with good but is abused & turns bad why can't a kid who is born evil have something happen to him turn him good ?.

Maybe it does, how are you supposed to know if a kid is born 'evil'? I believe a child could be genetically be predisposed towards bad behavior, depending on how he is raised he could turn out fine or be a little bastard. It's nature versus nurture, both play a part, but not always in the same proportion.

As regards women controlling evolution, no way. Women cant force a man to take them, and can choose to settle for someone less desirable just to have a family instead of remaining single. This would have been popular in the past, as women would see it as their duty to find a husband and raise a family.

Evolution - Is it down to Us?

Comments