Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Morals are very personal and individualistic. Yet, generally, most people tend to share a lot of the same morals as a consequence of being in the same boat IMO.Or do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
We learn them from our parents and early childhood mentors.
Psychopathy runs in families-----------therefore likely that morals has both learned and genetic components.Or do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
....obviously learned...just look at kids if someone tries to take their toy: they scratch/scream/attack/bite....males commit over 85% of the murdersOr do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
Or do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
./kraft-scorecard-56b6a4d65f9b5829f833c706.jpg)
Which is where politicians come from doltWe learn them from our parents and early childhood mentors.
That makes sense. If a child was raised by apes I am sure he would be throwing poop.
We are hardwired for it.Or do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
www.cnn.com
www.theatlantic.com
www.crimetraveller.org
if we have free will--answer this:Or do we learn them? I think we learn them because Humans are capable of great goodness as well as great evil when unchecked by those around them. Society's agreed upon morality (understood rules of decency) is the definition of morality. Today, the largest 'agreed upon' definition of morality is the MSM and Hollywood.
Good topic.
I agree with that we learn them. We learn from our parents and people we look up to. The church or groups we belong to and their peoples influence us, too.
However, we still have free will so one can do great good or the other. I suppose it still comes down to the person.
We can choose to be Republican or Democrat.
I couldn't sleep that well tonight, so just read about this story and now I'm wide awake
"At the age of 5, Kraft was enrolled in the Midway City Elementary school. Although a working mother, Opal was was a member of the PTA, baked cookies for Cub Scout meetings, and was active at church, making certain that her children received Bible lessons.
Kraft excelled at school where he was recognized as an above-average student. In junior high school, he was placed in the advanced curriculum program and continued to maintain excellent grades. It was during these years that his interest in conservative politics grew and he proudly declared himself a diehard Republican.
By the time Kraft entered high school, he was the only child still living at home. His sisters had married and moved into homes of their own. Since both his parents worked and were not often around, Kraft was fairly independent. He had his own room, his own car, and money he earned working part-time jobs.
Kraft seemed like a typical fun-loving kid. While he was academically gifted, Kraft got along well with his peers. He played the saxophone in the school band, enjoyed tennis, and was a founder and participant in a student club focused on conservative politics. Kraft graduated high school at the age of 18, ranking 10th in his class of 390 students."
Afterward, he went away to college and that's when his sexual leanings from high school and the liberal lifestyle swayed him as a collegiate sophomore.
"During his final year of high school and unbeknownst to his family, Kraft began cruising gay bars. After graduating, Kraft enrolled at Claremont Men's College on a full scholarship where he majored in economics. His interest in conservative politics continued, and he often attended pro-Vietnam war demonstrations. Kraft joined the Reserve Officers Training Corps, and in 1964, was a staunch supporter of Republican presidential candidate Barry Goldwater.
During his sophomore year of college, Kraft became involved in his first openly homosexual relationship. He also changed his political affiliation from conservative to left-wing liberal. (He would later explain his years as a conservative as merely an effort to be like his parents.)"
So what's so immoral about that, you say? Read his story. He turned evil. The Dems will blame the Pubs and Pubs will blame the Dems.
Serial Killer Randy Kraft's Scorecard
Serial killer Randy Kraft kept a list of cryptic words that investigators believed would lead them to his victims, and they were right.www.thoughtco.com
It makes no difference on the actions of a human.Well, my 'perspective' is that your 'perspective' is all wrong and possibly immoral. That is my 'subjective' opinion.Morals are subjective to the perspective of the individual.
Sure do miss that INFORMATIVE button.If you are born with a morals gene, then it could be a violence or killer gene which only affects men. 30% to 40% have it, but a mutation could cause an individual to be less in control of himself.
This is the warrior gene and one would be more prone to violent behavior when in a confrontation if they carry its mutation -- MAOA-L or MAOA-H. It could be controlled with serotonin.
"The MAOA gene can be found on the X chromosome and is part of a family of genes which deal directly with chemical messengers such as dopamine, serotonin, and norepinephrine in the brain. Monoamine oxidase A is an enzyme produced by these genes and research has discovered in rare cases this gene can be missing completely or, individuals can have different variants.
In men, who only have one X chromosome, they will either have a low activity variant known as MAOA-L or a high activity variant, MAOA-H. Women, who have two X chromosomes, are more likely to have at least one high functioning variant and are therefore less affected, although studies on women so far have been few.
A growing body of research suggests that the presence of MAOA-L translates to a vulnerability toward violent behavior, particularly when provoked or challenged, hence the term the warrior gene. The presence of the warrior gene suggests that these crucial chemical neurotransmitters in the brain are not being mobilized correctly. Serotonin is a neurotransmitter of particular importance to behavior as it is most closely associated with stabilizing mood and calming us down in anger."
...
Research Evidence
"It was Dutch Professor Han Brunner who made the discovery of an MAOA gene mutation in 1993 when he studied a Dutch family whose male generations displayed extreme violent aggression. It is this research that can be credited with creating the warrior gene debate. Nine of the males from the family were studied and through biological testing it was found these individuals all had a defect; they were missing the MAOA gene completely.
These males also displayed low IQ levels and were found to be introverted with little social inclusions and social activities. Their histories were littered with frequent violent outbursts with little justification, often occurring during periods of little sleep where they also experienced night terrors. The study found that the males in the family who did have the gene had a normal education, were holding down regular jobs and were not displaying the same kinds of anti-social behaviors as their affected male relatives."
...
"Certainly, in the United States, the opportunity to pay for DNA testing to establish the presence of the warrior gene is available. Quite why men would want to pay for such a test highlights the potential misconception that the presence of MAOA-L means any violent aggression is entirely genetic and out-with their control, essentially removing any blame or responsibility from the individual themselves. Mounting research, however, suggests that having the warrior gene alone is not enough to cause any violent behavior. It is more likely that this is a genetic predisposition that can be triggered by external environmental factors.
The fear is that this MAOA-L gene is being labeled as a ‘violence gene’ – if you have it you are more than likely heading into violent criminality. but the reality is much more complex involving both genetic and environmental factors. Furthermore, if up to 40% of the population does have the warrior gene as suggested, and it was a cause of violent aggression, much more violence within the general population would be expected."
...
Study evidence
'Professor of Psychology and Neuroscience, Avshalom Caspi at Duke University, conducted an influential study published in 2002 where he followed research being carried out in New Zealand. From 1972 researchers had been closely monitoring a group of children since birth and through their development, as they got older. Specifically, the study looked at maltreatment during childhood and the presence of the warrior gene.
They found that children who had suffered trauma or maltreatment were more likely to develop anti-social behavior as adults. Those who suffered maltreatment and had the warrior gene showed even higher levels of anti-social behavior and criminality. The risk of developing such behaviors it seems was already present with just the maltreatment history, however, combined with the warrior gene, this risk is considerably higher.
Of the total number of boys studied (422), 12% were found to have both the warrior gene and mistreatment in their childhoods, but this 12% (55) were said to be 10 times more likely to be convicted of the violent crime by the age of 26 years old. Professor Caspi states that even though only a fairly small number of the boys studied had the warrior gene, this small number “accounted for 44% of the cohort’s violent convictions”.'
The Warrior Gene: Genetics and Criminology | Crime Traveller
Examining the research on the warrior gene and its impact in criminology regarding the origins of violence and aggression in criminal behaviour.
Study of Violent Behavior Groups and its Subset Extreme Violent Behavior Groups
