Charles Whitman analysis and the Influence of the Amygdala What could cause an individual to commit acts of destruction, could it be that everyone has an inner desire to destroy everything in their path or is that desire to destroy evolves as one experiences life. The case study report Charles Whitman: The Amygdala & Mass Murder by Rhawn Joseph gives an insight on this topic. The article explains the important life events of Whitman and the factors that cause each specific phase of his life, one can see Biological or psychological factors that have played in the desire for Whitman to massacre his fellow peers. These genetic and environmental factors can be interpreted into a broader scale known as the nature-nurture debate. In order to understand the article as it analysis the article one must comprehend the nature-nurture debate. The nature-nature debate is about whether an individual is influence more by his or her genetic inheritance or do environmental factors contribute towards one development. Those that argue that nature plays a major role in the development of a person...
Many influences may push young people such as Lee Boyd Malvo to perform violent acts. Psychological, sociological and biological factors play a coexisting role in young adults life. Violence can be caused by disruptions, damage or undeveloped brain or can be brought on by something else such as economic difficulties or social or cultural difficulties. The nature vs. nurture question has been an ongoing debate. It can be argued that John lee Malvo born with predetermined genes or biological factors that played an integral part in creating his homicidal tendencies or that he become murderous through his surroundings partnered by the psychological influence that Mohammed had over him.
...t shown physically, it plays a much bigger role. However, nature does not overpower the role of nurture, which is essential in establishing our behavior. Our genes and our experiences make us the people we are today. Both nature and nurture interact in a way that makes us unique. They are designed for each other. Nurture cannot work without nature, and nature cannot thrive without nurture.
The case of whether serial killers are born with the lust to kill or if they are truly victims of their environment has been a hot debated question by both psychologists and the FBI today. A serial killer is traditionally defined as one that kills 3 or more people at different times with “cooling off” periods in between kills. Both psychological abuse as a child and psychological disorders are to blame for the making of a killer. The nature vs. nurture debate is best applied to the mysterious behaviors and cases of serial killers and their upbringing and environment. Nature is the genetic and biological connections a person has, personality traits, and how genetic make-up all relates to a killer. Nurture is examining the upbringing and environment that a person is around that affects what a person becomes. In some cases however, the effects of only upbringing or only biological problems were the reasons certain serial killers committed crimes. Although there is no definitive answer to what plays the bigger role: nature or nurture, they both are contributing factors that make a serial killer. These deviants of society are afflicted with problems in either their upbringing or have psychological disorders, and are able to blend into our everyday lives with no apparent differences, yet they wreck havoc through their unremorseful killings.
“Dime con quien andas, y te dire quien eres.” This popular spanish phrase translated in english states “tell me with whom you walk with, and I’ll tell you who you are.” The question is, can you? Does a persons surroundings play a role on who they become and their behavior in life or is it innate? Since philosophers like Plato, Aristotle, Hermes, and even Socrates there has been great debates about whether we as humans are born wired a certain way versus becoming products of our environments. This argument, commonly referred to as Nature versus Nurture continues today to be a topic of debate amongst us today. Most recently, the concept of nature versus nurture has been used in the gay, homosexual, bi-sexual community. While many argue that sexual preference is a decision one makes based on sexual exposure and experiences, others argue that people are actually born that way. The idea is that they were born with the “gay gene” and have no control over their sexuality. While sexuality is currently the “hot” topic within the nature versus nurture concept, the makeup of killers and mass murderers has long been a part of this back and forth debate. Are people born to kill? If you believe in the theory on evolution, then as animals, it is quite possible that we are born to kill by nature as killing is a survivability trait. On the contrary, if you are a believer of the church and the idea that man was created by God, then that would mean we must be creatures of our environment. In this paper I will be discussing a variety of theories and ideologies often used by scientists and psychologist alike when arguing their views. I will also discuss and compare different cases involving serial murders trying to find similarities as well as diffe...
The nature vs. nurture debate: the nature side, are those such as biologists, psychologists and others in the natural sciences, argue that behavioral traits can be explained by genetics. Those taking the nurture side are sociologists and others in the social sciences, they argue that human behavior is learned and shaped through social interaction. This argument should be dismissed because you don’t have to look far to see that both genetics and our environment, plays a role in who we are and our behaviors. (Glass). The point is there is a complex relationship between nature and nurture, either one alone is insufficient to explain what makes us human. (Colt). Our heredity gives us a basic potential,...
Nurture versus nature has been a long-standing debate. Nature, also known as pro-heredity in this essay, is about what a person’s genetic predispositions are related to behavior and intentions. The Monoamine Oxidase A gene (MAO-A) has earned the nickname “warrior gene” because it has been linked to aggression in observational and survey-based studies (Johnson and Tingley). In an actual study, a man named Jim Fallon, who has studied the biological basis for behavior for nearly 20 years, discovered he had the particular variant, MAO-A, that diminishes the calming effects of serotonin. Not only did Fallon discover this, he also found out that “one of his direct great-grandfathers…was hanged for murdering his mother. That line… produced seven other murderers… Lizzy Borden… ‘Cousin Lizzy’… was accused… of killing her father and stepmother with an ax…” (Hagerty). This is surely due to the fact that this compulsion to killing was inherited down the family lines.
Mass Murderers and Serial Killers are nothing new to today’s society. These vicious killers are all violent, brutal monsters and have an abnormal urge to kill. What gives people these urges to kill? What motivates them to keep killing? Do these killers get satisfaction from killing? Is there a difference between mass murderers and serial killers or are they the same. How do they choose their victims and what are some of their characteristics? These questions and many more are reasons why I was eager to write my paper on mass murderers and serial killers. However, the most interesting and sought after questions are the ones that have always been controversial. One example is; what goes on inside the mind of a killer? In this paper I will try to develop a better understanding of these driven killers and their motives.
In “The Brain on trial”, David Eagleman (2011) recounts the horrifying events which occurred on August 1, 1966. Charles Whitman entered the University of Texas with a rifle and secured himself in the bell tower. He then proceeded to shoot and kill 13 people and injure 32 more. Whitman was also shot and killed; however, during his autopsy it was discovered that a tumor was pressing against his amygdala. According to Eagleman, “The amygdala is involved in emotional regulation, especially of fear and aggression” (2011). Therefore, Whitman was possibly experiencing a fundamental change in his emotions and personality due to the tumor. Though Whitman did not survive, his case still poses questions as to whether or not he should be held accountable for his actions; moreover, should Whitman have received the maximum punishment for the murder he committed? Charles Whitman may not have had control over the feelings of “rage and irrational thoughts” (2011) he was experiencing; however, the precision of the attack indicates he was well aware of the actions he was committing.
“The term “nature versus nurture” is used to refer to a long-running scientific debate. The source of debate is the question of which has a greater influence on development: someone's innate characteristics provided by genetics, or someone's environment. In fact, the nature versus nurture debate has been largely termed obsolete by many researchers, because both innate characteristics and environment play a huge role in development, and they often intersect”. (Smith, 2010 p. 1)
The amygdala is responsible for the perception of the emotions of fear, sadness, aggression, and anger. This brain structure stores memories of events and the emotions affiliated to them, so the person can recognize a similar event in the future. An example of this is, a person is burnt by a hot stove top, the next time around a hot stove they will be more fearful of the pain and be cautious next time. The amygdala can also process emotions of arousal and pleasure (The Amygdala, N.d).
The hypothesis given explores the role of the amygdala when it comes to ability to express and evaluate facial expressions of emotion. It specifically speaks to if the amygdala is damaged and how that could affect the ability to express and evaluate facial expressions of emotion. They studied a woman who is referred to as S.P. throughout the article. She had a number of procedures two being the removal of her right amygdala as well as had two biopsies in the left amygdala. Other participants in this study consisted of twenty subjects who were of similar age and education level. The twenty control subjects were measured on facial affect evaluation, lexical affect identification, and facial affect generation, as well as subject S.P.. Performance of S. P. was compared to the control subject’s performance.
Nature is described as our physical attributes and genes from when we are born. Our genetics that make us who we are include our eye colour, height and hair colour, as well as our natural talents, abilities and our intelligence level.
One of the hottest debates is and has been nature vs nurture for years, but what is the difference between the two? Nature is what people think of as already having and not being able to change it, in other words, pre-wiring (Sincero). Nurture is the influence of experiences and its environment of external factors (Sincero). Both nature and nurture play important roles in human development. Scientists and researchers are both trying to figure out which is the main cause in development because it is still unknown on which it is. The best position to side with is nature. Nature is also defined as genetic or hormone based behaviors (Agin). Regardless of the involvement in everyday life, or nurture, this argumentation centers around the effect genes have on human personalities. Although it is understandable on reasons to side with nurture, nature is the better stand in this controversy. Reasons to side with nature is because of genes and what genes hold. Genes is what
“Heredity Versus Environment – The Nature – nature controversy, exploring heredity and environment: Research Methods, beyond heritability”
Nature vs nurture debate is one of the oldest arguments in the history of psychology. It is the scientific cultural, and philosophical debate about whether human culture, behavior, and personality are caused primarily by nature or nurture. Nature and nurture are both equally important. They are the two are major influences that affect the person you grow to be and will determine what your children will be tomorrow. Nature refers to heredity, which are traits and features that are inherited from your parents and ancestors. At birth you, as a person, inherits 50% of each parent 's genetic material that are passed along through the chromosomes found in the DNA. Hair color, height, body type, and eye color are some examples of characteristics