Hey its my room too!!!

anywho, i think all of you were making pretty good points in the argument, in some way all of you were right about it, it was more of what the cause usual is i think. i dunno, i could be wrong. i wasn’t paying attention to the whole thing :P

Oops! I forgot to thank you for your hospitality Nef — yes, it’s your room too. Thanks for having us over :). I promise I won’t make such fuss next time I come over.

No need to stop. Feel free to make as much fuss as you like, anytime. :) It keeps things interesting ans livens the place up.

Tudor, you DIDN’T buy the riding crop for the next meeting?! A-bomination!! Eric did say to spank your opportunity clock. You wouldn’t be acting without precident. :)

I would have, but I had to save my money for the nipple piercing I got today — I can only make so many kinky purchases in a single week.

Depends entirely on how much you want to let fallacies GOVERN YOUR EXISTENCE.
I say no.

Here’s a thought: you’re all wrong. :P

Criminality has more to do with a tendency toward antisocial personality, than greed or economic conditions. To blame criminal behavior on low socioeconomic status or ghetto conditions goes nowhere because most people in those situations DON’T commit crimes.

Try this on for size: criminal behavior, which may have roots in socio- and psychopathic personality, may be genetically determined.

Do your research!

Congratulations! Yours is the single worst argument I have heard so far, for the simple reason that it ignores the strong positive correlation between economics and violence. If you have some credible evidence to back up your point I might believe you :).

Try this for size: why does crime occur so much more frequenly in poor communities? And why are black people over-represented in the prison population in the US? My theory is that people in desperate circumstances (e.g. poverty) will do desperate things. Your “theory” leads to a flagrantly racist interpretation of available data.

And since you’re so stuck up on research, you should know that purely psychopathic personality disorders (like Paul Bernardo’s) are responsible for a minority of the crimes committed (less than 1%).

To clarify, I never argued that socioeconomic levels absolutely determine criminality (i.e. if you’re born poor you’ll become a criminal). My argument went a bit deeper than that …

Um, no. Your argument reflects a deeply ingrained MYTH that inner city poor folk respond with rage to a society that has excluded them from the mainstream and made ideals of happiness and success beyond their reach. What you’re basically saying is that crime is an adaptive response to growing up in soul-searing conditions of the slums and ghettos, and that he disproportionate number of blacks in U.S. prisions are casualties of a society that has robbed them of hope and virtually *forced* them into crime just so that they can survive.

Please.

Crime knows no social boundaries. Can you say Martha Stewart? Sam Waksal? Bernie Ebbers? Enron? Crime does not occur more frequently in poor communities: arrests and convictions do. Your sociological explanation for crime, plausible as it may seem, is simplistic. If it were correct, we’d have far more criminals than we do. Criminals come from all kinds of families and backgrounds and neighborhoods. Most poor people are law-abiding, and most kids from broken homes are NOT delinquents. Children may bear the scars of neglect and deprivation for their entire lives, but most do not become criminals. I’m not saying that environment doesn’t have some effect, but people perceive and react to similar conditions of life very differently. Economic adversity affects us all. Your theory is flawed because MOST people “in desperate circumstances” — regardless of their background — choose to work a second job, longer hours, or find some other non-criminal means to cope with their financial stress. Ultimately, it comes down to how each person chooses to deal with adversity.

And au contraire re: psychopathy and crime. It’s also known as sociopathic personality disorder in some circles, but I prefer the term Antisocial Personality Disorder. It has a strong correlation with criminal behavior and the latest literature (what little there is) suggests a strong genetic component.

As for my argument being the single “worst” you’ve ever heard…yours is the single most plebeian. So there.

It’s all about the easy money. People see dealers and gang members with nice cars, flash money and good clothes and they want that.
Rich white bankers scam money from companies and investors, comment fraud and other white collar crimes. They do it for the money.
It’s all people chasing the same goal, they just have different ways of going for it.

RE Antisocial Personality Disorder: how many people currently incarcerated suffer from this disorder? Are you trying to convince me that the Martha Steward is deeply psychopathic?

Do you have any idea what the fuck you’re talking about? Paul Bernardo is perhaps the most clear (and recent) case of a psychopath committing vicious crimes. 99% of criminal cases don’t fall under this category.

Though your theory is bad enough to be unfalsifiable, it’s still full of shit.

And if by “plebeian” you mean my theory is the most widely accepted and most accurate interpretation of the data we have so far, then I confess: my theory is plebeian.

**RE Antisocial Personality Disorder: how many people currently incarcerated suffer from this disorder?**

It’s estimated that perhaps as many as 80% of those incarcerated do.

**Are you trying to convince me that the Martha Steward is deeply psychopathic?**

It’s Stewart, and…what a good question, actually. ASP disorder, like crime, is not limited to any one group. CEOs, judges, police officers, nurses — even university students — etc. are all affected.

**Do you have any idea what the fuck you’re talking about? Paul Bernardo is perhaps the most clear (and recent) case of a psychopath committing vicious crimes. 99% of criminal cases don’t fall under this category.**

Yes, I have a very good idea “what the fuck” I’m talking about. It’s quite clear to me you don’t. No one is arguing that Paul Bernardo isn’t a psychopath. Read up on the disorder (“Bad Boys, Bad Men” by Donald Black would be a good start for a novice like you), then get back to me.

**Though your theory is bad enough to be unfalsifiable, it’s still full of shit.**

Why are you so threatened by the ASP view of criminality? And why must you always resort to vulgarity whenever your views are legitimately challenged? Your profanity only shows the weakness of your argument. Otherwise you’d be able to counter my assertions with something more substantial than four letter words. And, FYI, this isn’t my theory, but one I do subscribe to.

**And if by “plebeian” you mean my theory is the most widely accepted and most accurate interpretation of the data we have so far, then I confess: my theory is plebeian.**

I meant that it is commonplace and simplistic. You have done zero research in this area. If you had, it would show.

I’ve taken enough psychology courses to realize that what you’re telling me is complete bullshit. Here’s the thing:

Some disorders do have a strong genetic component (like Schizophrenia). However, environmental factors are ultimately responsible for triggering most mental disorder. In other words, there are few disorders that are strictly genetic (to prove that a disorder is purely genetic you have to find genes that can be turned on and off and you have to find a 100% correlation in twin studies).

Here’s a perfect example of what I’m talking about. Think of depression. Yes, there is a genetic component to the disorder (some people are predisposed to it). However, lifestyle and socioeconomic conditions ultimately dictate whether this disorder develops or not. And guess what? Some people who are not genetically predisposed still get depressed.

In other words, the environment plays a key role in whether a disorder manifests itself.

So the question remains: why does is this disorder so dominant in poor communities? Why are black people, for instance, overrepresented in the prison system? Are black people and poor people genetically defective? Is eugentics our solution?

OR do adverse socioeconomical a) cause this disorder to occur in healthy individuals b) trigger it in individuals predisposed to the disorder.

Let’s cut the bullshit, shall we. Unless you can provide me with some firm data the criminality is purely genetic, please drop the conversation.

You have zero understanding of how psychological disorders appear in a population. Actually, all of us lack understanding in what causes psychopathology. Thus, I would like to know what makes you so fucking sure it’s genetic.

BTW, I concede the point that APD is present in over 70% of the prison population. This does not prove criminality is genetic, however. It only proves that some people with APD commit crimes.

Remember that you still have to show what causes APD (hint, it’s not genetic).

If you’ve only taken a few psych courses at an undergraduate level, you most likely haven’t covered Antisocial Personality Disorder in any depth. The DSM-IV-TR classifications just aren’t studied at the undergrad level. I understand your passion to be right, but that’s no excuse for promulgating dated views and tired myths.

The data you are seeking are out there, and they’re startling. I’ve already given you a title that draws on case studies and scientific data. Read it if you dare. You will discover that criminality tends to run in families, regardless of socioeconomic background. Some people are just born bad no matter how good or nurturing their environment is. No, not all criminals have ASP, and not all people with ASP are criminals. I never suggested otherwise. What I did say in an earlier post is that there is a strong *correlation* and the data *suggest* a genetic link. Career criminals tend to have a different brain structure, seratonin levels, and even the presence for speech ability in both hemispheres of the brain. (How the last item relates to criminality is still being investigated, but it’s a notable feature nonetheless.)

You mentioned depressive illness. Why would you be open to that being genetically caused and not ASP? Perhaps because being depressed doesn’t necessarily lead to antisocial, criminal behavior and it’s not tied in with conscience and morality the way ASP is. (The same reason psychiatrists hate to have ASP “victims” as patients and why so few research dollars are funneled into ASP studies.)

The reasons for the disproportionate number of minorities (i.e., blacks and Hispanics) in the U.S. prison system are many. Most are in for drug crimes (Rockefeller sentencing laws) and most can’t afford justice to stay out…or get out. So they languish in prisons. But not all blacks and Hispanics turn to crime — those that do are caught more easily because of the way the racist justice system is set up in the U.S. Efforts to catch inner city criminals are more highly focused than those to catch white collar, corporate or suburban criminals. You do the math.

We are clearly misreading one another. Here’s my argument about APD in a nutshell:

Most psychopathologies, even those with a strong genetic component, do not manifest themselves unless the right environmental triggers are present.

I’m not denying that there may be genes out there that code for this disorder. But this specific psychopathology, like other mental disorders, likely manifests itself because of environmental factors (e.g. abuse, neglect, poverty, etc.)

And be careful with arguments like “it runs in the family.” Remember that most families not only share some of the same genes, they also share the same environment. Thus, if abusive environments cause APD, then this disorder will be prevelent in dysfunctional families.

You still have to disprove that the environment plays a major role in APD. Saying “it’s genetic” doesn’t prove anything — most “genetic” disorders are more dependent on the environment than on genes.

The example I gave with depression was meant to illustrate the point that even though some people may be more susceptible to a disorder because of their genes, very often it’s an environmental trigger that makes the disorder manifest itself.

And note that DSM-IV only gives diagnosis criteria. It does not say anything about the causes of a disorder (genes vs. environment) except for the somatic disorders which get their own axis.

Also note that brain anomalies are present in people suffering from Schizophrenia. The question is whether the enlarged ventricles cause Schizophrenia, or whether Schizophrenia causes englarged ventricles. In cases like this it’s easy to mistake cause for effect.

Thus, I find your argument unconvincing at best.

Most psychopathologies, even those with a strong genetic component, do not manifest themselves unless the right environmental triggers are present.

That’s simply not true. As I said, people can be raised in the same family (i.e., environment) and one will be predisposed to criminal behavior while the other won’t be. So what environmental triggers are you speaking of? Peer pressure? Drugs? If so, you need to go one step further and ask yourself what could cause a person to seek out criminally-minded peers, or to use drugs. You’re ignoring personal responsibility (whether that’s biologically determined or not) here, while placing too much weight on nebulous environmental triggers, some of which may be present as a direct result of the criminal’s own behavior!

I’m not denying that there may be genes out there that code for this disorder.

That’s progress.

And be careful with arguments like “it runs in the family.” Remember that most families not only share some of the same genes, they also share the same environment. Thus, if abusive environments cause APD, then this disorder will be prevelent in dysfunctional families.

So how do you explain four siblings, each a year apart, and one of the middle ones turns out to be a killer? They all went to the same schools, shared the same parents, etc. but 3 turned out OK, and 1 didn’t. Environment? I don’t think so.

You still have to disprove that the environment plays a major role in APD. Saying “it’s genetic” doesn’t prove anything — most “genetic” disorders are more dependent on the environment than on genes.

It’s hard for some people to accept that there may be a biological component to antisocial personality disorder because it pathologizes crime. They think that if criminal behavior is the result of some biological aberration, how could a criminal ever really be guilty? In any event, I would never want to disprove that environment plays some role; my point is that it is not the *only* role, and in my view, doesn’t play nearly as large a role as previously thought.

even though some people may be more susceptible to a disorder because of their genes, very often it’s an environmental trigger that makes the disorder manifest itself.

Often, perhaps, but the depressive illness will manifest eventually…in *any* environment. Certain situations may trigger episodes, or make the illness more (or less) severe, but the tendency toward depression is there and will make itself known somehow.

And note that DSM-IV only gives diagnosis criteria. It does not say anything about the causes of a disorder (genes vs. environment) except for the somatic disorders which get their own axis.

Never said it did. I said it was unlikely you studied ASP as an undergraduate. I pointed out another text that discusses the nature v. nurture argument. I’d be happy to suggest several more, but somehow I think you’d be resistant.

Also note that brain anomalies are present in people suffering from Schizophrenia. The question is whether the enlarged ventricles cause Schizophrenia, or whether Schizophrenia causes englarged ventricles. In cases like this it’s easy to mistake cause for effect.

Good point. All kinds of behavior have been shown to modify (or be the result of) various deep brain structures. We don’t have enough data yet to determine which came first, the chicken or the egg.

Thus, I find your argument unconvincing at best.

It’s tough to swallow the data at first, and I understand your resistance. But when you’ve worked with people who have ASP for as long as I have, and you look at family histories, you can’t help but wonder. There is a whole other school of thought, and that is the personal choice school, but I’ll save that for another rainy day…