Little Scumbags! Nature or Nurture?

Everybody is born as a blank sheet, but then it depends on many factors, if someone turns good, bad or ugly, such as family, friends, school, work...life is a lifelong process of learning, so to speak

starbelgrade wrote: »

There are certain areas where you are a hell of a lot more likely to have kids throw bricks at windows of passing buses than others, so anecdotedly, that would suggest that the environment you grow up in has a lot to do with your patterns of behaviour.

I agree, but it's also likely that people who are not naturally predisposed to throwing bricks at buses move out of these areas, which would give a disproportionately high number of brick-throwers in the area, giving a false impression that it's a nurture thing.

But it's probably a little of both. If your biological parents were absolute scummers and you were raised in the best enviornment ever, you'll probably turn out grand

I live on the 77 bus route and can attest to what little scumbags live around there. However I have family who live in Cabinteely and I've gotten more hassle from little gob****es there than I have in Fatima.

If kids are allowed to grow up to be scumbags then they'll be scumbags.

Parents don't have the rights to punish their kids for being scumbags if they choose that path, nor does the law have any influence. Most of these scumbags don't fear their peers whether they be family or law.

I was brought up by the wooden spoon and the clout round the ear and it has stood to me. I was brought up to show respect to people and their belongings and I believe in following the law. Sure when I was younger I got into trouble for doing stupid little things but never did I harm or cause damage to anyone or their belongings/property etc.

I see the problem with society rather than parents or area people live(lots of rich scumbags too). Society has made it almost impossible to enforce some sort of respect between the youth of today and their peers. If an adult gives a child a clout round the ear its seen as bad and illegal.

Some of the scumbags of today could do with a bullet rather than a wooden spoon! They are a helpless cause if they are willing to put another humans life in danger through their own recklessness and for some sordid entertainment. Sure you will have human rights and so on whining that they can be changed but they can't! Society has ruined them/let them ruin themselves and then when its too late steps in to save them.

If these youths were caught they wouldn't even get charged (maybe a caution) but god forbid one of the passengers had not paid for a ticket they would be fined! :mad:

A harsh view indeed but its my view on today's "scumbags" (such a horrible word)

EMF2010 wrote: »

I also think that there is some cold comfort to be found in saying that people who do awful things are innately like that, that they are 'evil' or 'damaged'. I don't know if that is true, I suspect it varies from case to case, but I think sometimes we like to distance ourselves from our own innate capacity, as a species, to be violent.

The conclusions of the study you quoted are particularly interesting in light of the link suggested by the other studies. It suggests that 'nurture' (or as I said earlier a lack of nurture, because if a kids sole point of stimulation is coming from a video game that is shameful neglect) can actually have a physical effect on 'nature'.

Whilst I would tend towards nurture and processes like identification as being strong factors in anti-social behaviour. I would have to strongly disagree with you about the concept of evil and its role in severe criminality.

I have a strong interest in forensic psych because of my work, and whilst I never worked in a totally forensic setting I spend a bit of my time working with prisoners. I have never worked with your criminal minds like serial killer; I have worked with various sex offenders, people who have murdered people and the like.

Now it could be argued that because I don't believe in the concept of evil, I don't see it in those cases. However, I have never experienced anything that could be described actually as evil. I have worked with a lot of people who are/have been quite ill, but never evil.

The concept of personal responsibility was mentioned by others earlier, whilst I agree; I don't think that factors in a subject's life that may explain why they committed a criminal act should be ignored when a person is before the courts.

However, to be clear on it, I believe that such factors should be considered but I don't think they are a get out of free jail card either. Some people can be very damaged by their up bringing that some of their actions are quite understandable, that does not mean I think they should not be punished. However, that punishment should be coupled with rehabilitation, otherwise we will get nowhere.

I think falling back on the concept of evil is a very simple way of avoiding looking at more complex issues.

stovelid wrote: »

Your friends and peers fall under the nuture category too.

I would have thought that nuture = environental factors including area, friends, parents etc; nature = predetermined factors such as genetics.

I know! when I woke up after a nap and saw I wrote that i felt stupid haha.

EMF2010 wrote: »

I'm a little puzzled as to why you strongly disagree as that is pretty much what I was saying.

I wasn't actually proposing the existence of 'evil' - I was arguing that as a group, people look to concepts like these to explain violent acts and to distance themselves from the capacity that people have to commit horrible acts. The reason I said that I don't know what the truth is, that I suspect it varies case to case is more to do with sociopathic behaviour - but even there I don't think it is so much 'evil' as an absence of what most would recognise as humanity.

Aplogies then it's been a long day, I must have mis-read your post then;) I hate the use of the concept of evil to make complex things simple, as well as trying to avoid the dark side of human nature.

I don't think the two are distinguishable. The person's nature will determine to a large degree how they are influenced and moulded by their environment. A weak-willed, extremely extraverted (to the point where spending 5 minutes alone would drive them mad) person is more likely to go with the crowd, do whatever is seen as normal in their social group to fit in. A more strong-willed person with an independant streak and less of a desire to be like others will probably do whatever they deem to be right. Also, add to that the fact that some people are more predisposed to violence and quick to anger (is it a testosterone thing?) than others. Only when you see the bones of the person can you determine how much they have been shaped by their upbringing and their friends.

Think about it: some absolute scumbag parents have brought wonderful, well-adjusted and hard working people into the world. Some amazing, supportive and wonderful parents have managed to raise complete scummy tyrants despite all the odds.

So yeah, I say it's both.