The root cause of ALL evil.

[sebbysteiny]

In a previous thread, we were trying to find the mechanism that created terrorists.

 

But there was one great tangent about what is the mechanism for creating a 'criminal'.

 

In this thread we are going to find out the real causes of crime by pooling together all the information we know. At the end of it, we should all be complete geniuses on the criminal mind and its motivations and causes.

 

Ambitious? Perhaps.

 

I'm going to start with two hypotheses.

 

1) "All crime is caused either by nature (ie by the genes) or by nurture (ie by external influences). There can be more than one mechanism each of which may require nature or nurther or both."

 

2) "If the crime is caused by nurture, then the mechanism must be sufficient to cause a 'reasonable person' to commit the crime.

 

 

Now, I believe there must be certain catagories of crime which all rely on the same or similar mechanisms.

 

So my catagories are:

 

Theft type offenses;

Violent offences;

Murder;

Corruption type offences;

Anti social behavior;

Offenses motivated by an extremist ideology.

Any others?

 

 

And here are my possible causes;

Nature: Intelligence; psycopathic instinct; unstable mind.

Nature: wealth; physical disability (as an influence on the mind, not a cause); success; education; family; friends / teachers; culture; beliefs; and of course, DRUGS (incl alcahol).

 

Any other candidates?

[Bobo]

ALL crime is inherrently nurture based, because our individual concepts of crime (ie right and wrong) are abstract ideals tought or learned by the individual, not inherent ideals. In many of the acts listed as crimes also have leagal names for varying circumstances, although the actual action may be the same its "societal aceptance" is mitigated by other circumstances. Killing someone has many names, including murder. SOme are legetimate actions others are socially unacceptable in our current cultural situation (which varys widely by local and time).

 

We may step beyond the issue and decide that whatever the action is, the "crime" is what is dictated by society and what influences the individual to break these ground rules that most accept.

[sebbysteiny]

Interesting thoughts Bobo. Hadn't thought about it that way. As crime is an abstract concept defined by society not man, is it possible to have a genetic disposition towards it?

 

Still, do you really think that we can get rid of nature as a factor altogether? Might there be a genetic influence making people 'break ground rules most accept'.

 

And do you accept that intelligence, honesty, psycopathic instinct and mental health may play a strong role in the cause of some crimes and that they are based on nature not norture?

 

Also, one of my personal beliefs is that everybody wants to have their human rights respected. Nobody wants to, say, be murdered. I can't think of one society in which killing a full member with the intention to kill was considered legitimate.

[InfiniteNow]

I'd like to see anybody seperate nature and nurture in any more than a semantic way. I contend that the two are inextricably linked, and it's pointless to discuss one without the influence of the other.

[sebbysteiny]

I'd like to see anybody seperate nature and nurture in any more than a semantic way. I contend that the two are inextricably linked, and it's pointless to discuss one without the influence of the other.

 

What about being born a psychopath? Of course many psychopath's do not commit crimes, but it certainly creates a propensity to crimes, particularly the violent ones.

[InfiniteNow]

How is one born into a socially applied label? You can be born male or female. You can be born with lobster hands. You can be born with a particular skin color... but...

 

In terms of behavior, the challenge remains and I restate my contention that you cannot seperate nature and nurture. Your example above does not address this issue.

 

 

Even a wolverine can be trained to lick a child's face softly...

[TheFaithfulStone]

Even a wolverine can be trained to lick a child's face softly...

 

Thereby lulling the child into a false sense of security!

 

Excellent Idea! :beer:

 

TFS

[Zythryn]

The root of almost all crime?

 

Fear.

 

I believe that is it. Greed is the fear of loss.

Fear of not fitting in (peer pressure/gangs).

Fear of not being able to support family/self.

Fear of not being remembered.

Fear of losing livelyhood/shelter/food.

 

Where it gets complicated, is that different people have different fears and at different levels. I have a slight fear of heights, others have no fear of heights or a major fear of heights.

 

I do believe there is a mental abberation that will cause people to commit crimes for no reason. I am not sure if this is genetic or enviornmental. My opinion, is that it is minor in comparison to all crime.

[sebbysteiny]

I take it you accept that being a psycopath can be a cause of some crimes. What your disputing is whether it is nature or nurther.

 

A psychopath is somebody who is born with the complete inability to empithise with the feelings of others.

 

It's a condition and it's genetic. No amount of medicine, treatment or upbringing can stop a psychopath from being a psychopath even though it could still help in stopping them from committing crimes.

[sebbysteiny]

The root of almost all crime?

 

Fear.

 

I believe that is it. Greed is the fear of loss.

Fear of not fitting in (peer pressure/gangs).

Fear of not being able to support family/self.

Fear of not being remembered.

Fear of losing livelyhood/shelter/food.

 

Where it gets complicated, is that different people have different fears and at different levels. I have a slight fear of heights, others have no fear of heights or a major fear of heights.

 

 

I think you have made a valid point. Fear could cause a normal person to commit a crime. But then, one could argue you are acting in self defence.

 

The one thing I was not happy with in your examples is that you did not seem to me to be using fear as we all understand it. By simply replacing the word 'fear' with the word 'desire' and making the sentence the negative, what you are saying still works.

 

Greed is the desire to gain.

Desire to fit in (peer pressure/gangs).

Desire to support family/self.

Desire to be remembered.

Desire to sustain livelyhood/shelter/food.

 

Is desire now the cause of all crime?

 

Equally, numerous verbs could work with that pattern and they all would suggest a different cause. Want, need, compusion, addiction, pride and evolutionary instinct would all work just as well. Instead, those 5 examples may in themselves be potential causes regardless of what verb one choses to attach to the beginning.

 

I accept that it might be a cause in some types of crime. Would you agree in light of the above that fear might not be the one size fits all approach to the causes of crime?

 

I also want to talk about your last paragraph, which I think must be considered.

 

I do believe there is a mental abberation that will cause people to commit crimes for no reason. I am not sure if this is genetic or enviornmental. My opinion, is that it is minor in comparison to all crime.

 

This raises a great point. Is there an aspect of a person that is completely unpredictable, random and without cause? Or is there always a particular influence that acts on a person who may have a particular disposition to that influence that causes that person to commit crimes? Do we accept, to steal a phrase from quantum science, that god plays dice with people's propensity to commit crimes, or do we not?

 

As a scientist, I feel very uncomfortable with that notion and it goes against my every instinct.

 

So we have hypotheses 1: that people can randomly commit crimes without any cause.

And hypotheses 2: that there is always SOME cause for normal people to commit crimes, be it by nature or nurture.

 

Any way of testing to see which is right that you can think of?

 

Perhaps we could do this by induction. We could find a number of crimes and see if there is indeed an external or genetic cause. If we can find a cause for all the crimes we bother to analyse, by induction, it is extremely likely that there is no random element.

[InfiniteNow]

I think you have made a valid point. Fear could cause a normal person to commit a crime. But then, one could argue you are acting in self defence.

When one is afraid, it does not necessitate that they are being attacked or must defend themselves. One could only argue they were acting in self defence if they were, in fact, defending themselves from something, and even that does not mean they were afraid when they did so.

[Zythryn]

I think you have made a valid point. Fear could cause a normal person to commit a crime. But then, one could argue you are acting in self defence.

 

The one thing I was not happy with in your examples is that you did not seem to me to be using fear as we all understand it. By simply replacing the word 'fear' with the word 'desire' and making the sentence the negative, what you are saying still works.

 

Greed is the desire to gain.

Desire to fit in (peer pressure/gangs).

Desire to support family/self.

Desire to be remembered.

Desire to sustain livelyhood/shelter/food.

 

Is desire now the cause of all crime?

 

This would lead into another topic, it is my opinion that fear is a root emotion which other emotions are built out of. Desire is comprised of fear. As is greed although it is a particular type of fear. I would suggest greed is an irrational fear of not having resources even when a sufficient amount of resources are already owned.

 

Equally, numerous verbs could work with that pattern and they all would suggest a different cause. Want, need, compusion, addiction, pride and evolutionary instinct would all work just as well. Instead, those 5 examples may in themselves be potential causes regardless of what verb one choses to attach to the beginning.

 

Four of the five are other words for fear. Different strengths of fear, but fear. Addiction implies some physical or physchological abberation which forms a basic need for the item one is addicted to.

 

This raises a great point. Is there an aspect of a person that is completely unpredictable, random and without cause? ...

 

My apologies, I was unclear. I did not mean that the mental abberation also meant 'random' or 'without cause'. By mental abberation I mean something like a brain tumor which impacts the persons emotions or feelings of right vs wrong. Or a chemical imbalance or genetic mutation leading to something like sociopathy.

 

Perhaps we could do this by induction. We could find a number of crimes and see if there is indeed an external or genetic cause. If we can find a cause for all the crimes we bother to analyse, by induction, it is extremely likely that there is no random element.

 

While my personal belief is that any crime has a cause behind it, I don't know that you could ever prove a negative. E.G. no one has ever commited a crime for no reason.

[sebbysteiny]

When one is afraid, it does not necessitate that they are being attacked or must defend themselves. One could only argue they were acting in self defence if they were, in fact, defending themselves from something, and even that does not mean they were afraid when they did so.

 

Technically, all crimes require mens rea. This means an intenision to cause some kind of crime. Murder is killing with intent to kill or cause grevious bodily harm, for example.

 

Self defence by law is measured not by what was necessary, but by what they percieved as being reasonably necessary. So, in English law (and yes this is a REAL case) a person who saw a snake in his dream and, out of fear, strangled the snake only to discover that his girlfriend was the snake was found not guilty of murder by reason that there was no intention to kill the girlfriend, just the snake.

 

If you push somebody off a cliff because you are afraid of heights, there is a really good case to say you were acting in self defence.

 

I'm not saying it will work every time everywhere, but it is something that should be considered regarding whether fear can cause crimes.

[HydrogenBond]

There are crimes committed that are not really crimes. For example, the witches of the 1600's were doing nothing wrong, technically, especially by today's standards. But at that time they were considered capital criminals with respect to the laws of the day. Using 20/20 hindsight, the real criminals ran the show and the innocent were burnt at the stake. Culture called the real criminals good citizens and called the victims capital criminals.

 

The point I was making is that culture sets the standards. These are not always based on absolute standards making some criminals more in the absolute right than what is considered good behavior. In modern times, victimless crimes are not technically crimes since there is no victim. How can one have a crime without a victim? Culture on the other hand makes up for that by victimizing those who participate in victimless crimes. This shows how nurture can cause a majority of a culture to become criminals in the real sense, creating victims.

 

Another example, is connected to the Boston Tea Party. Based on the laws of the day they were vandals, treasonists, etc. But through the miracle of 20/20 hindsight, we now called them freedom fighters. In other words, criminals can be in high places making laws that create victims. Anyone who resists is called a criminal. It is done with smoke and mirrors. Many people go along with the smoke and mirroe illusion and use it as an excuse to express their own criminal propensities. The British soldiers would have been more than happy to torture and kill the freedom fighters at the Boston Tea Party, since they saw themselves, in the smoky mirror of their criminal leaders, as righteous.

[sebbysteiny]

This would lead into another topic, it is my opinion that fear is a root emotion which other emotions are built out of. Desire is comprised of fear. As is greed although it is a particular type of fear. I would suggest greed is an irrational fear of not having resources even when a sufficient amount of resources are already owned.

 

That's an interesting idea I havn't heard before. Please say what you think are the other 'base emotions' and how they interact. Also, is there any advantage of interpretting emotions in this way, ie this model be used to *explain* anything?

 

Four of the five are other words for fear.

There were 6 words though. What about the other two? If other words are not pride and still explain all the above sentences, then fear alone cannot be the sole cause of crime surely.

 

By mental abberation I mean something like a brain tumor which impacts the persons emotions or feelings of right vs wrong. Or a chemical imbalance or genetic mutation leading to something like sociopathy.

That would classify as nature or nurture depending on whether the cause was genetic.

 

 

Perhaps we could do this by induction. We could find a number of crimes and see if there is indeed an external or genetic cause. If we can find a cause for all the crimes we bother to analyse, by induction, it is extremely likely that there is no random element.

 

While my personal belief is that any crime has a cause behind it, I don't know that you could ever prove a negative. E.G. no one has ever commited a crime for no reason.

 

That's right. That's the drawback of a proof by induction. But it's still a decent logical argument which adds significant weight to the premise even if it does not prove it absolutelly in the philosophical sense.

 

But I just want answers we can use.

 

Which brings me to Hydrogen Bond's post.

 

There are crimes committed that are not really crimes. For example, the witches of the 1600's were doing nothing wrong, technically, especially by today's standards. But at that time they were considered capital criminals with respect to the laws of the day. Using 20/20 hindsight, the real criminals ran the show and the innocent were burnt at the stake. Culture called the real criminals good citizens and called the victims capital criminals.

 

The point I was making is that culture sets the standards.

 

You raise a very good point about what is a crime. For example, in Nazi society, the laws were in themselves part of the criminal activities of the regime. Is something a crime just because there is legislation? Or is there some kind of more clear cut act? I would say that in the witch trials, the purpertrators were criminals.

 

But this is all very philosophical. I agree that we must decide what is or what is not a crime (after all, I'm making catagories of crimes), but at the end of the day, I want something tangable and usable for every day life without the philosophical complications of proving we all exist etc.

 

What do you suggest to help resolve this problem?

[Zythryn]

Seby, as I think that would be hijacking, I have started a new thread to explore the idea of base emotions and get input from others.

I started it at http://hypography.com/forums/social-sciences/9149-just-how-many-emotions-there.html#post142695

[sebbysteiny]

I think the introductory phrase of this thread is now over.

 

So I'll continue by proposing factors that may cause crime and discuss exactly how they do it before moving onto the next factor.

 

So factor number 1 is ....

 

DRUGS.

 

Drugs cause an addiction and people are willing to go to any lengths to satisfy that addiction. Moral limits may be further subverted by dillusions not too similar from mental illnesses.

 

Theft type offenses; Drugs require money for payment.

Violent offences; may be necessary to obtain money but also may be necessary to stop somebody percieved as getting in the way of their addiction.

Murder; addicts are often actually prepared to kill if necessary, the addiction is that strong.

Corruption type offences; no link to drugs.

Anti social behavior; 'high' teenagers may cause disruption but am not convinced drugs is a significant cause of this.

 

Offenses motivated by an extremist ideology; no effects caused by drugs.

 

 

So drugs is a root of most evil but not all.

 

Does anybody disagree with the conclusions, the effects drugs may have on any particular crime and the reason why drugs have that effect?

 

If not, I'll move onto the next cause: genetics.