aaron.ebner
Active member
saw this a few weeks back, if any of you are interested in manson or any stuff like that, you'll dig this for sure.
MInd of a KILLER
- Thread starter aaron.ebner
- Start date
aaron.ebner
Active member
it'd be sick if there were more people willing to actually find something interesting to talk about.
shragler
Member
Kind of interesting but not really. I think his argument about genes is not solid. People are a direct consequence of their environment and morals/ values they are installed with from a young age. Behaviour is the result of experience and a reaction to the world surrounding the individual. I think its a cop out that he did not back up any statements about genetics. He only tried to back up his claims with comedy about his own families history. Would he also argue that he has a fat gene and eating right and exercise would not change his appearance and behaviour?? Sure these killers might carry similar genetics but this type of argument could be expanded into an infinite number of scenarios. I do not see how you can argue that the DNA of any species has a direct correlation on behaviour.
Lanceasaurus
Member
Pretty odd.... the brain damage shits crazy
TheMajesticLife
Member
he has one crazy family tree
TheQuailman
Active member
"People are a direct consequence of their environment and morals/ values they are installed with from a young age."
People are not a direct consequence of their environment. I agree that part of a person is dependent upon his environment and upbringings, but not completely. I'm sure you would agree that genes control things like skin color, body size, hair color, facial features etc. You can't agure that genese do not control physical traits. Fat parents generally have fat children, and black parents generally have black children. Ofcourse this is not always the case, because gene inheritance is a complex process.
But why do you think its so unrealistic to believe that genes can also control behavior? Smart parents are more likely to have smart children, and aggresive violent parents are more likely to have aggressive children. Ofcourse, nothing is as simple as that, different combinations of many genes can create many outcomes, some of which are simply random chance generated.
And by the way, he did back up the gene explanation. He said that the MAOA (sp?) gene which codes for aggressive behavior was found in all the killers he looked at. Then he explained how the seritonum (sp?) floods and desensitizes the brain.
People are not a direct consequence of their environment. I agree that part of a person is dependent upon his environment and upbringings, but not completely. I'm sure you would agree that genes control things like skin color, body size, hair color, facial features etc. You can't agure that genese do not control physical traits. Fat parents generally have fat children, and black parents generally have black children. Ofcourse this is not always the case, because gene inheritance is a complex process.
But why do you think its so unrealistic to believe that genes can also control behavior? Smart parents are more likely to have smart children, and aggresive violent parents are more likely to have aggressive children. Ofcourse, nothing is as simple as that, different combinations of many genes can create many outcomes, some of which are simply random chance generated.
And by the way, he did back up the gene explanation. He said that the MAOA (sp?) gene which codes for aggressive behavior was found in all the killers he looked at. Then he explained how the seritonum (sp?) floods and desensitizes the brain.