Violence and the Adoption of Violent Behavior - Essay Example

?Violence cannot be properly understood if it is approached as an evolutionary aspect of human nature. Discuss. Introduction Whether biological and genetic factors are responsible for the violent behavior of an individual or it is the environmental or evolutionary influence that makes one perform violent acts, has been a hot de bate always. Violence and the adoption of violent behavior, in general, are attributed to many causes and events that happen in one’s life. Mental illness, offensive relationship, poverty, abusive childhood, lost parents, social deprivation, and many other factors are linked with violence. Research related to sociopathy and psychopathy shows that violent activities are generally committed by individuals whose psychological functioning is different from normal individuals, which leads to the fact that violence should not be understood as an evolutionary aspect of human nature because there is a causal relationship between abnormal brain chemistry and violence. This paper intends to discuss this thesis statement. Violence cannot be understood as an Evolutionary Aspect of Human Nature Ferguson (2008, p.321) defines aggression or aggression control as evolutionary or adaptive traits of human nature; but, when he talks about violent behavior or violent anti-social behavior, he asserts that it is such an “aggressive behavior that is excessive or uncontrolled and results from either of two pathways” which include instrumental violence and reactive violence. The former type is related to “genetic contributions to aggressive personality traits” (Ferguson) while the second type involves biological deficiency or damage in the impulse control system. Thus, we prove that violent behavior can be better understood if it is approached through genetic or biological aspects of human nature rather than evolutionary aspects. However, we cannot totally ignore the evolutionary aspects of human nature being responsible for violence. Researchers have talked about the evolutionary factors which involve inappropriate socialization and background, but most of them have mainly and more importantly focused on the psychological and biological abnormalities that give rise to violent behavior. Criminologists believe that most of the people who commit violent acts suffer from some psychological dysfunctioning. Among children, there are many psychological disorders that convert into violent behavior. Youth Violence (2001), A Report of the Surgeon General, has suggested that there are two developmental pathways leading to violence: Early- and Late-Onset Trajectories. “Children who commit their first serious violent act before puberty are in the early-onset group, whereas youths who do not become violent until adolescence are in the late-onset group” (Youth Violence, 2001). Disorders like Oppositional Defiant Disorder (ODD) which, at later stages, gets converted into Conduct Disorder, and Antisocial Personality Disorder are also responsible for the development of violence in one’s personality. The causes of ODD are mainly biological in addition to evolutionary. Damage or injuries to specific delicate areas of a child’s brain can cause his behavior to suffer which is a biological cause for ODD. Neurotransmitters, that are chemicals present in the brain, can also be held responsible for ODD as their abnormal levels in the brain hinder with the proper communication of neurons with each other causing their messages to not being transmitted throughout the nervous system. The presence of other psychiatric disorders like ADHD or mood disorders also initiates the occurrence of ODD in the child’s behavior. Studies have blamed the chemical serotonin to be chiefly responsible for oppositional, defiant, hostile and violent behavior. Aggression and violent behavior that occurs after puberty also involve abnormality in the hormone, testosterone. Antisocial Personality Disorder (APD) is a psychiatric condition in which the individual becomes violent and violates other people’s rights because APD snatches away from the individual any regard for what is rights and what is wrong. His life is greatly affected by this violent behavior which may also get him into serious trouble. He is disrespectful toward laws; deceitful because of, say, consistent lying or stealing; aggressive; irritable; irresponsible toward his duties; and, most of all, does not show remorse over his behavior. Although scientists have defined many evolutionary aspects responsible for APD such as child abuse, substance abuse, neglect, deprivation, having faced prejudice, being involved in animal cruelty during childhood, sexual harassment, reading disorder in children, and mental torture; however, the biological and genetic aspects also hold significant importance in this context. Research suggests that Amygdala is that part of the brain that deals with the showing of sympathy toward the happy or sad expressions of other people, and also enables one to accept mistakes and learn lessons from them. APD sufferers are said to be having small amygdale with refrains them from understanding or showing regard to other people’s feelings thus making him show violent behavior. Siegel (2008, p. 286) quotes Lewis who has written in her book name Guilty by Reason of Insanity that “death row inmates have a history of mental impairment and intellectual dysfunction.” Siegel further identifies many biological factors that are responsible for violence which include borderline personality disorder, depression, pathological lying, and abnormal personality traits. He states that it comes with no surprise to the criminologists that a lot of murderers commit suicide after committing crime. This relates to their mental dysfunctioning. How is the Brain Associated with Violence? Intensive research and studies have been conducted in the field of neuropsychiatry that supports that brain is directly associated with the development of aggressive and criminally violent conduct. Although environmental factors do play their part in influencing an individual’s behavior, biological factors are found to be primarily responsible which are eventually scheduled and worked by the brain. Kotulak (1997, p. 78) asserts that Marie Asberg in 1976 first discovered the linkage between brain and aggression/violence by detailing “a link between low serotonin and violent suicides.” She found that people who had low serotonin levels were ten times more at risk of violent death than those who had the same grade of depression but with higher serotonin. Serotonin is actually the most important neurotransmitter or chemical messenger in the brain that is responsible for controlling an individual’s behavior and its reduced activity results in raised impulsivity and aggression. People with low serotonin have been found suffering from conduct disorder in their adolescence that includes behavior like physically harming other people and damaging their property. According to Slap (2008), “the major metabolite of serotonin, were found to be lower in children with disruptive behavior disorders than in children with obsessive-compulsive disorder.” He further states that the levels of serotonin show inverse correlation with aggression and direct correlation with social competence starting from the child’s very early years Another hormone called noradrenaline, that directs the brain how to function in emergencies, also has a great impact. When high noradrenaline combines with low serotonin, the person acts violent toward others; however, when low noradrenaline is overlaid with low serotonin, the person maintains the aggression within himself that leads to depression (Kotulak). Elliot (as cited in Jones, 2009) also suggests that neurochemicals are majorly responsible for invoking certain behavioral patterns in specific areas of the brain. These neurochemicals include “monoamine oxidase (MAO), epinephrine, norepinephrine, serotonin, and dopamine.”Low MAO activity in the brain causes dis-inhibition and impulsivity which are main traits of anti-social behavior. Dysfunctional MAO activity is commonly diagnosed in criminals or people with personality disorders. MAO is said to be related to various other neurochemicals in the brain which are all responsible for psychosis. Dopamine is the neurotransmitter present in the brain that is linked with pleasure and aggression. Its abnormal levels activate affective and predatory aggression that finally leads to disorders like Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). Browner and Price (2001, p. 720) found that abnormalities in the frontal lobe of the brain are responsible for “the actions of some persons charged with, or convicted of, violent crimes, who apparently fail to inhibit impulsive, trivially motivated, or habitual aggression.” Frontal lobe injury or dysfunction has been found to cause anti-social personality disorder. Damage to orbitofrontal cortex results in poor control over behavioral patterns involving violent aggression aimed at other people, vulgar language and insensitive relationships. This abnormality is often termed as pseudo-psychopathy because of its association with aggression and violent criminality. Siegel (2008) has also discussed many biological factors that are responsible for violent behavior. According to him, Personality disturbance is linked to some personality trait or characteristic. Neuroscientists claim to have found differences in both the limbic system and the prefrontal cortex of the brain that separates aggressive, violent people from the more level-headed and reasonable…if some defect or injury impairs communication between the limbic system and the frontal cortex, a person might not be entirely able to moderate his or her emotional reactions (p.286). Hence, it is evident by research that there is great genetic contribution in the development of aggressive and violent criminality in a person’s behavior, directed and planned by brain. Abnormal levels of neurochemicals in the brain or specific brain injuries have been found to be major causes of psychotic disorders and violent acts inflicted upon oneself or others. How are the Genes Associated with Violence? Evidence for the interaction of genes predicting violence has come from twin, adoption, and family studies and laboratory experiments (Jones, 2005). Researchers like Tehrani and Mednick (2000) conducted their research on twin, adoption, and family studies and found that genetic factors are involved in violent criminality. Twin studies involve research on the behavior of monozygotic and dizygotic twins to see the concordance rate to anticipate to what extent genes influence violence. If this rate is higher in monozygotic twins than in dizygotic twins, then this means that genes influence violent criminality (Tehrani & Mednick, 2000; Joseph, 2001). Researchers (Brunner et al., 1993) conducted research on family and adoption studies to extract the evidence because these studies show the influence biological or adoptive parents can have on their children. Brunner et al. (p. 578) state that genetic and metabolic studies have been performed on many males proving that violent individuals possess borderline mental retardation. When the urine of violent individuals was analyzed, it was concluded that the samples showed noticeably abnormal monoamine metabolism which is a syndrome that occurs due to the abnormality in the enzymatic activity of monoamine oxidase A (MAOA). They consucted the experiment on five males and found that A point mutation was identified in the eighth exon of the MAOA structural gene, which changes a glutamine to a termination codon. Thus, isolated complete MAOA deficiency in this family is associated with a recognizable behavioral phenotype that includes disturbed regulation of impulsive aggression (p. 578). Eysenck (1990) and Denno (1988) also concluded that genes are fairly responsible in studying an adult personality trait like violent criminality. Walters (1992) conducted a research on existing researches to study the gene-crime relationship and concluded that there is great genetic influence on violent behavior. Research evidence given by Arseneault et al. (2003) tells the genetic contribution toward the antisocial behavior and violence in young children. Thus, we see that researchers have been studying the genetic influence on violent activities and have always supported the biological contribution in the development of violent behavior in an individual. Counter-Arguments Literature and research where focuses on the genetic and biological factors related to the adoption of violent behavior, it also discusses the evolutionary factors that compels humans to conduct violent behavior leading to destructive warfares. Kurtz (1999) in the section ‘nature versus nurture’ of his book asserts that humans are not inherently violent; instead, they are forced to show violence through their social or cultural experiences. According to him, it is accepted that “violence is not universal among animal species” and it cannot be scientifically acceptable that our genetic makeup is such that compels us to indulge in violent wars with others of our species. He asserts that no violent behavior has been “programmed” into our genetic makeup so it is not correct to identify any biological reasons for violence. He suggests that human evolution has made a natural selection of those human beings who show aggression and that human brain is not violent biologically. Many other researchers are of the same point of view stating, as Kurtz does, that biology or genetics are not responsible to compel a human being into conducting war and it is the “biological pessimism” that is not freeing the human species for searching peace and harmony. They state that if humans can invent warfare, then they can invent peace as well. However, as we have proven in previous paragraphs using scientific evidence, there is more to violence that just evolutionary violence. Although, it would be unfair to ignore the evolutionary aspects; but, violence cannot be truly understood if only the evolutionary aspects of human nature are approached. Conclusion The report has proved using scientific evidence, literature and research studies that violent behavior cannot be properly understood if it is approached through evolutionary aspects only because there are many biological and genetic factors related to the adoption of violence that cannot be ignored. Although the evolutionary or environmental aspects are significantly important, but in order to better understand the theories and causes, we must look into the genetic makeup and biological impairments in the individual who is indulged into violent activities. Criminologists look into the biological profiles of the criminals before going into their background histories because it is scientifically proven that violent criminals certainly possess some kind of mental disorder or biological damage to some part of the brain, or some abnormality in the level of certain hormones. The report has discussed how brain and genes are responsible for the adoption of violent behavior. Some counter arguments have also been discussed to make the paper argumentative but the sources cited have been enough to prove the thesis statement. References Arseneault, L., Moffitt, E., Caspi, A., Taylor, A., Rijsdijk, FV, Jaffee, SR, Ablow, JC, & Measelle, JR. (2003). Strong genetic effects on cross-situational antisocial behaviour among 5-year-old children according to mothers, teachers, examiner-observers, and twins' self-reports. Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, and Allied Disciplines, 44(6), 832-848. Browner, MC., & Price, BH. (2001). Advances in neuropsychiatry. J NeurolNeurosurg Psychiatry, 71, pp. 720-726. Brunner, HG., Nelen, M., Breakefield, XO., Ropers, HH., & Van Oost, BA. (1993). Abnormal behavior associated with a point mutation in the structural gene for monoamine oxidase A. Science, 262, 578-580. Denno, D.W. Human biology and criminal responsibility: free will or free ride? University of Pennyslvania Law Review, 137, 651-671. Eysenck, HJ. (1990). Genetic and environmental contributions to individual differences: The three major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality, 58, 245-261. Ferguson, C.J. (2008). An evolutionary approach to understanding violent antisocial behavior: diagnostic implications for a dual-process etiology. Journal of Forensic Psychology Practice, 8(4), 321-343. Joseph, J. (2001). Is crime in the genes? A critical review of twin and adoption studies of criminality and antisocial behavior. The Journal of Mind and Behavior, 22, 179-218. Jones, CM. (2005). Genetic and Environmental Influences on Criminal Behavior. Retrieved March 15, 2011 from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/jones.html Jones, CM. (2009). Neurochemicals in criminal and anti-social behavior. Genetic and Environmental Influences on Criminal Behavior. Retrieved March 16, 2011 from http://www.personalityresearch.org/papers/jones.html Kotulak, R. (1997). How the brain gets damaged. Inside the Brain: Revolutionary Discoveries of How the Mind Works. United States of America: Andrews McMeel Publishing. Kurtz, L.R. (1999). Nature versus nurture. Encyclopedia of violence, peace, & conflict. USA: Academic Press. Seigel, L.J. (2008). The causes of violence. Criminology. USA: Cengage Learning. Slap, G. (2008). Epidemiology. Adolescent Medicine. USA: Elsevier Health Sciences. Tehrani, J., &Mednick, S. (2000). Genetic factors and criminal behavior. Federal Probation, 64, 24-28. Walters, G. (1992). A meta-analysis of the gene-crime relationship. Criminology, 30(4), 595-613. Youth Violence. (2001). Chapter 3 -- The Developmental Dynamics of Youth Violence. Retrieved March 15, 2011, from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/bookshelf/br.fcgi?book=youth&part=A12504 Read More