PDA

View Full Version : Born bad


Yoshikko
August 24th, 2011, 06:22 AM
I was watching a crime program the other day, and they eventually stated that the person in question was just born bad, and it got me thinking a little.

Do you think it is possible for humans to be a born killer (or anything around that subject), or do you think that it is the environment that we live and grow up in, that influences this?

King Goodra
August 24th, 2011, 06:37 AM
I think it's possible for humans to be born with traits of a killer, but ultimately what I believe to make a killer is not only the environment they grow up in, but how they respond to the environment. The mind frame of a killer is developed early in life, I believe. While they may not have any repercussions until very later in life, they experience traumatizing experiences in their youth and respond to them very, very negatively as a reflection of their possible future.

I'm having a brain freeze right now -- what's the word for people who feel no remorse? I usually associate that with the larger criminals. Granted there could be many other explanations that they may have for their actions, people I mean when I say that include serial rapists, killers, etc. Some people -- like those -- are just born with pieces missing out of a healthy mindset. They don't seem to have any values or morals, and that's something that I think would heavily contribute to however they end up.

To suggest that someone was born to kill is a very, very disturbing thought for me to process.

Melody
August 24th, 2011, 06:49 AM
No one is born bad.

That doesn't mean that you can't be born with mental conditions which can make a person do strange things, including things that most people consider "bad".

It's the culmination of your upbringing and your life experience which makes you do what you do...not usually because you were born that way.

Captain Fabio
August 24th, 2011, 06:55 AM
I don't think it is possible for someone to be born with bad tendencies. A persons childhood environment, friends, family, school all effect their attitude and who they become.

A perfect example is what happened in the UK not to long ago with the riots. It was mainly the youth, not completely, but a good 70% consisted of the youth and why was the reason for this? If you look at the area of Tottenham, if you don't know, it does have gangs, crime (knife and gun) and isn't the most wealthy of areas. A lot of the youth don't have jobs because they don't have qualifications so they have nothing to do except fall into bad ways with bad people. I am not making excuses for them by the way, I think they are all scum who rioted and looted! :3

But like I said above, this hostile environment can make someone into a 'bad person'. However, you do have, on rare examples, people who are born with mental issues that can cloud their vision of what is right, which could be classed as them being born a bad person.
So I think, overall, someone isn't born a bad person, they are made into one.

Yoshikko
August 24th, 2011, 07:25 AM
I think it's possible for humans to be born with traits of a killer, but ultimately what I believe to make a killer is not only the environment they grow up in, but how they respond to the environment. The mind frame of a killer is developed early in life, I believe. While they may not have any repercussions until very later in life, they experience traumatizing experiences in their youth and respond to them very, very negatively as a reflection of their possible future.

I'm having a brain freeze right now -- what's the word for people who feel no remorse? I usually associate that with the larger criminals. Granted there could be many other explanations that they may have for their actions, people I mean when I say that include serial rapists, killers, etc. Some people -- like those -- are just born with pieces missing out of a healthy mindset. They don't seem to have any values or morals, and that's something that I think would heavily contribute to however they end up.

To suggest that someone was born to kill is a very, very disturbing thought for me to process.
I agree, most of the time when someone turns out to be 'bad' in later life, it's because they experienced something when they were young, that might have caused it. I think it's because when you are young, you are extremely influenceable. But I also think that, like Captain Fabio and Pachy said, that if you are born in a hostile environment (that of course includes family members, friends, everything), there is a high chance that you will end up in the criminal world, even though specific bad experiences might not even have taken place.

Also, the thing you said about people feeling no remorse or having no empathy, those are traits of a sociopath. Most of the time though, those are affected by mental/psychological illnesses, but in that case I don't really think it counts as being 'bad' yourself, because it's because of your mental state rather than your personality.

Personally I do think that all people are born neutral, and that, like I said before, things in your environment or traumatizing experiences affect it later in life. I was very surprised to hear that the narrator said that the person was just 'born a killer', because that's just not possible I think.

Freedom Fighter N
August 24th, 2011, 07:42 AM
There are some people who are born bad, yes. And there are also some people who are born idiotic. Get it? (No offence to the guy who stole my theme. I bet he was born bad to think that stealing themes is okay.)

I think that someone's own experiences has a much stronger effect than things that they were born with.

twocows
August 24th, 2011, 08:17 AM
Psychopaths might fit that bill, but the rest of us are shaped more by environment than by genetics.

Truality
August 24th, 2011, 11:55 AM
Well, it seems that for the most part what should be said is said, but let's consider the DNA a bit more, shall we?

There is an interesting report on the independent-uk site that tries to explain such a case. Maybe I should put a clipping here to make things easier:

Proceed at your own risk. STEPHEN "Tony" Mobley has all the attributes of a natural born killer. Nobody could blame his upbringing - he came from an affluent, white, middle-class American family and he was not abused or mistreated as a child. Yet as he grew up he became increasingly violent, and at the age of 25 he walked into a pizza store and casually shot the manager in the neck after robbing the till and joking that he would apply for the job vacancy when the man was dead.


That was in 1991. Now Mobley is waiting on Death Row in Georgia to hear whether his appointment with the electric chair is to be confirmed. His last chance of a reprieve rests with a plea from his lawyer that the murder was not the evil result of free will but the tragic consequence of a genetic predisposition. The genes of Tony Mobley, his lawyers argue, meant he was born to kill.


The chief witness for the defence is Mobley's aunt, Joyce Childers, who has testified that various members of the Mobley family over the past four generations have inexplicably been very violent, aggressive and criminal, although most of them "mellowed" in middle age.
So, according to this, there seems to be no environmental or personal conflict with the criminal that led him to do this (at least from what is known), and therefore we can't exclude the case of genes. Yeah, of course he wouldn't be bad at the tender age of seven, for example, but such genes might show up later on. At least I agree with that theory.

Kyoko
August 24th, 2011, 12:41 PM
I agree with the fact that genetics and the environment both play a role in developing how people will turn out later in life, but it's kinda iffy since there are always exceptions. For example, in Freakonomics, they mentioned two kids who grew up in vastly different family situations: one was a boy who grew up in a family where education was highly valued, the family ate dinner together every night, they were active in their community, and the boy was really smart and ended up going to Harvard.

Another boy was raised in a really poor area where he dropped out of middle school to join a gang, was selling drugs as a teen, and was raised in an abusive household after his mom ran out. He ended up a Harvard Professor while the other Harvard guy who was raised in a better environment ended up being Ted Kaczynski, who bombed places.

So yes, there can be exceptions to every situation, but I still think the genetic traits you were born with mixed with how you respond to your environment will determine how you turn out.

donavannj
August 24th, 2011, 01:00 PM
Well, it seems that for the most part what should be said is said, but let's consider the DNA a bit more, shall we?

There is an interesting report on the independent-uk site that tries to explain such a case. Maybe I should put a clipping here to make things easier:

Proceed at your own risk.So, according to this, there seems to be no environmental or personal conflict with the criminal that led him to do this (at least from what is known), and therefore we can't exclude the case of genes. Yeah, of course he wouldn't be bad at the tender age of seven, for example, but such genes might show up later on. At least I agree with that theory.

That's not necessarily an indication of a genetic factor. They fail to mention as to whether or how often intense familial tensions (like constant fighting among parents) occurred that didn't devolve into any sort of abuse in the eyes of his family. Not saying that some of it couldn't be genetic, but there's still several environmental factors that likely weren't considered by the family, and it's hard to tell what exactly was all considered when it's glossed over like that.

Truality
August 24th, 2011, 01:21 PM
That's not necessarily an indication of a genetic factor. They fail to mention as to whether or how often intense familial tensions (like constant fighting among parents) occurred that didn't devolve into any sort of abuse in the eyes of his family. Not saying that some of it couldn't be genetic, but there's still several environmental factors that likely weren't considered by the family, and it's hard to tell what exactly was all considered when it's glossed over like that.So would this become a debate on "which one affects the person more; genes or environmental influence?" Because I think we agree for the most part that genes do play a role in the behaviour.

Of course, that clipping was merely an example to base my preference on. It's not like I disagree with the environmental affection theory. Call it 'half and half', if you may.

Xyrin
August 24th, 2011, 01:28 PM
No. Nobody is born bad. Some people are psychotic. But besides that people's enviroment and choices affect if they are bad. NOBODY is born wrong, evil, or anything.

Musanim
August 24th, 2011, 03:29 PM
If you were Bin Laden's son; (married;not pregnant. (boy??))

Or the traits of a killer.

Yoshikko
August 24th, 2011, 05:08 PM
So would this become a debate on "which one affects the person more; genes or environmental influence?" Because I think we agree for the most part that genes do play a role in the behaviour.

Of course, that clipping was merely an example to base my preference on. It's not like I disagree with the environmental affection theory. Call it 'half and half', if you may.
I do agree in that genes might have something to do with it. Taste/food preference is also partly genetic, and personality as well. And that the fact that some people might just bluntly enjoy killing is part of their personality (considering they are psychologically healthy), it's not too strange to think that that could be genetic.

It's just that 'evil' is not something you can determine on someone, it's a moral. I don't think anyone can be classified as 'evil' from the moment they were born (and not because of the fact that they can't express themselves, talk, etc.), because the phenomenon 'evil' is something that depends entirely on the situation, the person, the time, sometimes even the place, and the fact that you can not pinpoint it, is kind of the reason that I don't believe it is genetic, because that would mean that you would be able to determine if someone was evil, or if they weren't.

minajeh
August 24th, 2011, 05:13 PM
I don't really know if anyone is born bad...

sure you could have a mental disorder that makes you think 'bad' thoughts or have voices telling you to do bad things, etc. but that still doesn't mean you have to make that decision.

Yoshikko
August 24th, 2011, 06:24 PM
I don't really know if anyone is born bad...

sure you could have a mental disorder that makes you think 'bad' thoughts or have voices telling you to do bad things, etc. but that still doesn't mean you have to make that decision.
I do think that when you have such a disorder, you actually have no other option but to obey e.g. voices in your head, that's what the disorder is all about. And if you were born with such a disorder, you aren't bad yourself, people might consider you bad because the disorder just makes you do bad things, but you certainly aren't bad.

Alice
August 24th, 2011, 11:42 PM
There are scientific studies that suggest that people can be born killers, but 99% of the evidence they give sounds much more like something they've learned as they grew up, not something they were born with.

Truality
August 25th, 2011, 12:53 AM
It's just that 'evil' is not something you can determine on someone, it's a moral. I don't think anyone can be classified as 'evil' from the moment they were born (and not because of the fact that they can't express themselves, talk, etc.), because the phenomenon 'evil' is something that depends entirely on the situation, the person, the time, sometimes even the place, and the fact that you can not pinpoint it, is kind of the reason that I don't believe it is genetic, because that would mean that you would be able to determine if someone was evil, or if they weren't.
Truth be told, there must be a switch somewhere that turns on those instincts, be it prematural or traumatical, or even genetic. So at least an event is needed from the life of the criminal to trigger his behavior. If only a hypothesis, do you think that it's plausible?

Yoshikko
August 25th, 2011, 03:57 AM
Truth be told, there must be a switch somewhere that turns on those instincts, be it prematural or traumatical, or even genetic. So at least an event is needed from the life of the criminal to trigger his behavior. If only a hypothesis, do you think that it's plausible?
I completely agree, most of the time it's also because someone just snaps, and that can come from a lot of things, one of them being stress, and pressure, and that can overcome anyone really. The example you gave, about the guy who grew up in a nice family and a nice environment, went to a good school, and so on, maybe all that just became too much for him to handle in the end. Those are all factors.