4 ms·

So, crime is driven by biochemical processes as well?

by milankovic 8y ago

javier2 8y ago
Maybe a predisposition to moral deviance is biochemical?
- gowld 8y ago
  Do you mean that there's a biochemical "gene" (or similar) for behaving contrary to whatever someone believes is morally correct? Or that morality is an objective state?
  - javier2 8y ago
    I was hypothesising that there may be biochemical processes that regulate your response to (society defined) morally deviant actions. I am only asking questions to point out the answer probably isn't as simple as the poster seem to believe.
    - abiox 8y ago
      well, "biochemical processes" isn't exactly simple. :P
- s_kilk 8y ago
  I love how all the reactionaries come out to glom on to these sorts of findings.
  - MrBuddyCasino 8y ago
    „Democrats and Republicans are rather similar in linking individual characteristics to genes and race, even IQ, aggression and homosexuality.“ https://twitter.com/degenrolf/status/998856273725743104?s=21 https://twitter.com/degenrolf/status/998856273725743104?s=21
    - abiox 8y ago
      not all democrats are progressive. or, perhaps more to the point, not all democrats are non-reactionary.
- milankovic 8y ago
  Downvoted for asking a simple question? Is that what HN has come to? Really? I'm really sorry my friend. They (downvoters) fail to realize that they are shooting the messengers, nothing more. But smart people understand. They know and will never cease to keeping them honest..
  - javier2 8y ago
    Yeah, thanks. I am only trying to hint at the possibility that there are other avenues to consider than a simple "crime gene", ie. the answer is probably not as simple as the poster wants. Genetics and the human body have proven to be increasingly complex.
  - abiox 8y ago
    > Downvoted for asking a simple question this seems a bit reductive. sometimes people asking leading questions that are a bit... let's say tired, aren't all that interesting. if there is a point to be made, they should just make it. "smart people" (as you say) sometimes prefer forthright discussion.
  - sctb 8y ago
    > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
java-man 8y ago
yes. for example, lead contamination leads to increase in crime [0] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violent-crime-lead-poisoning-british-export https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violen... [1] http://theconversation.com/child-lead-exposure-linked-to-aggressive-crime-later-in-life-study-54823 http://theconversation.com/child-lead-exposure-linked-to-agg... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning ...
- aurailious 8y ago
  Isn't it "known" that even something like temperature is also linked to increased crime?
  - milankovic 8y ago
    You are actually correct, I have seen statistics like that. It's really funny where you can find correlations, if you think about it.
- milankovic 8y ago
  Time to abolish prisons now.. is that what you are trying to say?
  - adrianN 8y ago
    Why do you believe that brains have to be magic for prisons to make sense?
    - milankovic 8y ago
      Who's implying to believe in magic here? I certainly don't. I'm just trying to warn about the pitfalls of monocausal explanations for complex issues.. You should try to ask the OP the same question.. But, to be fair, the title of the submission to HN has been changed, to something a lot less of clickbait. Maybe I would not have engaged otherwise, actually. Makes you think.. But still, downvotes = disagreement, I thought HN would be better than that. Apparently, I was wrong.
jm__87 8y ago
Wouldn't every behavior be driven by biochemical processes?
- milankovic 8y ago
  Yes and No, I guess. It depends.. I don't know what someone would achieve by arguing that way, hence my reply. But please enlighten me.. Maybe I am getting it wrong, or am just not seeing it.. But sure, just put it all on "biochemical processes".. and no one is responsible for anything any more. Brave New World.
  - jm__87 8y ago
    Whether or not you like the implications behind something doesn't make it less true. There is a book called 'Behave' written by Robert Sapolsky which lays out that human behavior is determined by the configuration of your brain, hormone levels, culture, the environment you were raised in, etc (basically all things over which you have no control). For example, if you have an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex then you are going to be more impulsive and have a hard time delaying gratification. These people are way more susceptible to committing crimes and it is purely down to bad luck that they weren't born with the right genes (or had some sort of injury that damaged their PFC). Another example is if you have a smaller amygdala, you're going to have a higher pain tolerance and experience less fear than someone with a normal sized amygdala. Again, this can change your behavior quite a bit as you won't be able to relate to what the average person experiences when they are in pain. These people will have less moral compass than others. With those things in mind, Sapolsky agrees that if an individual poses a threat to others, we should still lock them in prison for the good of society. But the more we understand what leads to human behavior, the more we're going to realize how many things are out of our control (almost all of it).
    - milankovic 8y ago
      Whether or not Robert Sapolsky likes the implications behind that does not make it less true (or anyone else for that matter). When did this notion take hold that we can answer such complex matters with simple solutions? Do people on here even realize how old this stupid Nature vs Nurture debate is? Probably not. I guess most older HN users have already abandoned ship, leaving only the greenhorns behind. At least that would explain it. And again, I am not arguing for anything here. I am just the Devil's Advocate.

So, crime is driven by biochemical processes as well?

javier2 8y ago

Maybe a predisposition to moral deviance is biochemical?

gowld 8y ago
Do you mean that there's a biochemical "gene" (or similar) for behaving contrary to whatever someone believes is morally correct? Or that morality is an objective state?
- javier2 8y ago
  I was hypothesising that there may be biochemical processes that regulate your response to (society defined) morally deviant actions. I am only asking questions to point out the answer probably isn't as simple as the poster seem to believe.
  - abiox 8y ago
    well, "biochemical processes" isn't exactly simple. :P
s_kilk 8y ago
I love how all the reactionaries come out to glom on to these sorts of findings.
- MrBuddyCasino 8y ago
  „Democrats and Republicans are rather similar in linking individual characteristics to genes and race, even IQ, aggression and homosexuality.“ https://twitter.com/degenrolf/status/998856273725743104?s=21 https://twitter.com/degenrolf/status/998856273725743104?s=21
  - abiox 8y ago
    not all democrats are progressive. or, perhaps more to the point, not all democrats are non-reactionary.
milankovic 8y ago
Downvoted for asking a simple question? Is that what HN has come to? Really? I'm really sorry my friend. They (downvoters) fail to realize that they are shooting the messengers, nothing more. But smart people understand. They know and will never cease to keeping them honest..
- javier2 8y ago
  Yeah, thanks. I am only trying to hint at the possibility that there are other avenues to consider than a simple "crime gene", ie. the answer is probably not as simple as the poster wants. Genetics and the human body have proven to be increasingly complex.
- abiox 8y ago
  > Downvoted for asking a simple question this seems a bit reductive. sometimes people asking leading questions that are a bit... let's say tired, aren't all that interesting. if there is a point to be made, they should just make it. "smart people" (as you say) sometimes prefer forthright discussion.
- sctb 8y ago
  > Please don't comment about the voting on comments. It never does any good, and it makes boring reading. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html

java-man 8y ago

yes. for example, lead contamination leads to increase in crime [0] https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violent-crime-lead-poisoning-british-export https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2013/jan/07/violen... [1] http://theconversation.com/child-lead-exposure-linked-to-aggressive-crime-later-in-life-study-54823 http://theconversation.com/child-lead-exposure-linked-to-agg... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lead_poisoning ...

aurailious 8y ago
Isn't it "known" that even something like temperature is also linked to increased crime?
- milankovic 8y ago
  You are actually correct, I have seen statistics like that. It's really funny where you can find correlations, if you think about it.
milankovic 8y ago
Time to abolish prisons now.. is that what you are trying to say?
- adrianN 8y ago
  Why do you believe that brains have to be magic for prisons to make sense?
  - milankovic 8y ago
    Who's implying to believe in magic here? I certainly don't. I'm just trying to warn about the pitfalls of monocausal explanations for complex issues.. You should try to ask the OP the same question.. But, to be fair, the title of the submission to HN has been changed, to something a lot less of clickbait. Maybe I would not have engaged otherwise, actually. Makes you think.. But still, downvotes = disagreement, I thought HN would be better than that. Apparently, I was wrong.

jm__87 8y ago

Wouldn't every behavior be driven by biochemical processes?

milankovic 8y ago
Yes and No, I guess. It depends.. I don't know what someone would achieve by arguing that way, hence my reply. But please enlighten me.. Maybe I am getting it wrong, or am just not seeing it.. But sure, just put it all on "biochemical processes".. and no one is responsible for anything any more. Brave New World.
- jm__87 8y ago
  Whether or not you like the implications behind something doesn't make it less true. There is a book called 'Behave' written by Robert Sapolsky which lays out that human behavior is determined by the configuration of your brain, hormone levels, culture, the environment you were raised in, etc (basically all things over which you have no control). For example, if you have an underdeveloped prefrontal cortex then you are going to be more impulsive and have a hard time delaying gratification. These people are way more susceptible to committing crimes and it is purely down to bad luck that they weren't born with the right genes (or had some sort of injury that damaged their PFC). Another example is if you have a smaller amygdala, you're going to have a higher pain tolerance and experience less fear than someone with a normal sized amygdala. Again, this can change your behavior quite a bit as you won't be able to relate to what the average person experiences when they are in pain. These people will have less moral compass than others. With those things in mind, Sapolsky agrees that if an individual poses a threat to others, we should still lock them in prison for the good of society. But the more we understand what leads to human behavior, the more we're going to realize how many things are out of our control (almost all of it).
  - milankovic 8y ago
    Whether or not Robert Sapolsky likes the implications behind that does not make it less true (or anyone else for that matter). When did this notion take hold that we can answer such complex matters with simple solutions? Do people on here even realize how old this stupid Nature vs Nurture debate is? Probably not. I guess most older HN users have already abandoned ship, leaving only the greenhorns behind. At least that would explain it. And again, I am not arguing for anything here. I am just the Devil's Advocate.