| Author |
Message |
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Sunday, August 23, 2015 - 6:18 pm 
The nature versus nurture debate is no longer a debate. It's both/and. Not either/or. Each situation must be evaluated *individually* and not by prejudices or preferences. Experts today use integrated theories that take into account all possible factors: genetics, neurophysiology, biology/brain development, personal experiences, and societal influences. It's the interaction of ALL these things that create a certain behavior or trait. Rarely any one in isolation!
I don't know any true experts in the field that still debate in terms of one or the other. Genetics influences behavior, which influences brain development which influences behavior and so on. No one has a single thought without a matching measurable biological event.
If genetics exhibit control over sexual preference, why is it so hard to believe that genetics influence sex drive, or overproduction of testosterone, or underdevelopment of the prefrontal cortex (critical for impulse control and empathy). In fact, there are studies that show uterine environment can cause changes in brain development that later leads to sexual deviance!
That's why I don't like the term "bad seed." It's overly simplistic and offers nothing of value in understanding the etiology of behavior.
So, not it's not a matter of "choosing" which studies we favor. A scientist looks at the total of the research and that points toward an all-inclusive view of multiple factors. That is the state of the art understanding.
And let me also note, that just because you have a biological predisposition toward a certain trait, does not mean it is destiny. Sometimes it is, but most times it is not. Human beings are quite malleable in most cases.
So, we treat each case as if it is curable, while always keeping in mind that we may be working with a brain that will work against that cure.
Want more proof? There's a fascinating case study out there of a man who developed an attraction to children in his 40s. He was diagnosed with a brain tumor. The tumor was treated, the attraction went away.
A year later the attraction came back. The tumor was back.
So, it's pretty clear that this kind of behavior CAN be mediated entirely by biology.
|
Muffin
Member
08-29-2007
| Sunday, August 23, 2015 - 6:56 pm
It's the location of the brain tumor that causes certain actions in the person, it's not just a brain tumor. Each part of the brain is different! And I know this because my sister had a brain tumor.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Sunday, August 23, 2015 - 7:00 pm
Yes, Muffin, that is exactly my point. The behavior/desire is mediated by a specific area of the brain, and that was precisely the area of the brain in which this man's tumor was located. The right orbitofrontal lobe.
There is another case, by the famous neurologist Oliver Sachs (one of my heroes), where that same area of the brain was removed, and the result was an obsession with child porn and hypersexuality. The man was arrested, and charged, and Dr. Sachs argued for leniency, stating that the brain surgery had created an irresistable urge, that could be controlled (now that it was knownn) with antipsychotic medications.
|
Ophiliasgrandma
Member
09-04-2001
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 9:50 am
I love the education you are giving us, Kar
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 10:19 am
Thanks OG! Dr. Sacks truly is responsible for my education in neuropsychology, having read one of his books early in my college career. I had thought I wanted a career in counseling, but after reading The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat, I was hooked on the idea of how much the brain affects what we are *able* to perceive and feel. And his book Awakenings which inspired the Robin Williams movie. So I ended up majoring in psychology with a minor in biopsychology, and then on to a Masters in Neuroscience.
Sadly, he has struggled with cancer for many years, and a few months ago announced that he understood his life would now be measured in months. I've not heard anything since, but I presume he is in the end stages.
His books are very accessible to people who have no training, and his autobiography "On the Move" where he recounts (quite hysterically) his coming to terms with being gay, and his friendship with Robin Williams is very engaging and delightful.
|
Ophiliasgrandma
Member
09-04-2001
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 10:44 am
What a wonderful career you took on. You've probably made a big difference in many peoples' lives.
To quote an old saying, 'I try to be open-minded…but not so much that my brains fall out'..
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 10:55 am
LOL!
I actually left that career somewhat soon after I started it, because I started a very successful business. However, that allowed me to also work pro bono for many years with abused and/or disabled children (and later war veterans), in conjunction with a therapeutic ranch, using horses as facilitators.
Then the economy tanked and I had to go back to my business full time.
I do continue to read and stay up to date on the latest research, because I keep thinking one day I'll go back to it, but time is running out... 
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 11:04 am
As far as Josh and his molesting of his sisters and the addiction to porn....it doesn't matter to me if it's nurture or nurture. Is hypocrisy now going to be excused due to medical reasons, mental health reasons?
My feelings haven't changed. Josh was never allowed to be a sexual human being so he acted out his "curiosity" on his sisters and then as a married man on AM.
This AM website and cheating on his wife is not all that out there....who cares. The sister molestation is perverted, in my eyes.
His upbringing was unnatural. We are all sexual animals and to deny that is asking for trouble. To live in a world of side hugs and waiting till marriage to kiss is strange and will bring out the strange in people.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 11:12 am
Lilfair, no one in this thread has ever excused the hypocrisy.
The article we are most recently discussing wasn't about the hypocrisy either. It was an article espousing an unfounded opinion that his issues were *totally* a result of his family experience.
That's the idea I find fault with. The *facts* are that there are many people with Josh's issues who were not raised that way, and there are many people raised that way who do not have Josh's issues.
You can "feel" whatever you want, but the *science* does not support those feelings.
In fact, there is ample research out there that rigid religious beliefs are often protective and successful in preventing inappropriate behavior. That's why the single most successful anti-recidivism programs in jail are very authoritative religious ones. These programs impose discipline on very undisciplined people, making them better citizens.
So, feelings aside I'll stick with the science, because it's more reliable, and more helpful, than feelings. IMO. 
|
Roxip
Member
01-29-2004
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 11:52 am
Wouldn't that be akin to saying that a serial killer's siblings have a predilection to become serial killers just because they were raised in the same environment? Wow, that would be harsh.
When I think of serial killers I always think of that guy who killed the women in one of the national parks whose brother had been kidnapped (I think the movie was "I am Steven" or something like that. Was he twisted out of his normal life path because of the drama surrounding his brother or was he always inclined towards violence?
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:02 pm
Mar, yup I never said anyone here ever excused Josh's hypocrisy. But I'm sure you are aware of the Duggar0ditto heads. They are all over the internet. Excusing the hypocrisy by saying things like god forgives sinners when they repent.
I hope no one read my post as accusing posters here as forgiving the hypocrisy.
I don't know how serial killers and Josh's sex-capades are the same? He didn't kill anyone. Sexual repression is a real thing. Teen age years(puberty)is when you naturally become a sexual being. Not saying teens should all go out and have wild sex but that is when you become a sexual being and I can't help but think when that is squashed strange things happen....molesting of sisters. They said he was just curious....curious = horny. It's just not natural to oppress sexuality.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:04 pm
yes, Roxip, if we blamed families/upbringing for all deviant behavior, we'd have quite a mess, and it wouldn't be helpful.
No one blames atheism when an atheist is a mass murderer. It's only religion that gets blamed when someone goes off the rails like that.
As for your question about the murderer, the answer is maybe. The likelihood is that it was both, brain morphology that predisposed him toward violence (possibly developed genetically or through trauma at a young age) that was exacerbated by life experiences.
Brain studies of violent criminals almost always show severe deficits in the prefrontal cortex - the area responsible for impulse control. How those deficits developed is the more important question. That area of the brain continues to develop into the early 20s, so deficits can also develop throughout that time as well.
You'd have to look at his entire lifespan to make any kind of assessment. Did he have violent outbursts when he was very young? Did they start after his brother was kidnapped? After puberty? What was his family environment like? And on and on.
That's why the common knowledge (which is highly accurate) that when a child starts abusing animals at a very young age (and I mean serious abuse, not just pulling their tails etc), it's a serious signal that something is amiss in that child's brain development. And intervention at that age is likely to be more effective, while the brain is still somewhat malleable.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:12 pm
Lilfair, I wouldn't say "it's not natural to suppress sexuality." I would say it's more beneficial to educate children in age-appropriate ways, to teach them responsibility from a young age.
Yes, we all sometimes have to suppress our sexuality, it's a skill we must all learn. So that's different to me than education.
I don't doubt that the parents' unskilled response to his curiousity may have made things worse for him. When a teen has a strong urge to explore, it needs to be redirected in healthy ways. Simply making it forbidden may have the effect of making it more intriguing and exciting.
But we also need to acknowledge that testosterone levels vary *greatly* by individual, and those levels also dictate just how "curious" someone might be. That's where biology comes in.
So, again, I'm simply saying that the parenting/religion didn't create a monster. It's a complex array of factors, and to single out the religion is just silly to me. When in fact, we have good evidence that rigid authoritarian beliefs can be VERY helpful to people with poor impulse control, in keeping them from acting out.
|
Roxip
Member
01-29-2004
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:27 pm
Darn it Karuuna, that is interesting. If it wasn't thread hijack this would be a great long-thread topic!
|
Ophiliasgrandma
Member
09-04-2001
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:45 pm
Speaking of forgiveness, this is what Jesus had to say:
Matthew 18:21-22New American Standard Bible (NASB)
Forgiveness
21 Then Peter came and said to Him, “Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him? Up to seven times?” 22 Jesus *said to him, “I do not say to you, up to seven times, but up to seventy times seven.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:50 pm
OG, that's a good point.
Honestly, if his family wants to forgive him, and they believe God forgives him, that's none of my business really. I don't care. It's up to them how they want to deal with it, and I always have hope people really mean it when they say they are sorry. Only time will tell.
And he may fall again, it happens. And then they will need to decide again how they want to deal with it. Again, that's up to them.
As I've said before, my only problem with the whole Duggar affair is their condemnation of others. But that's not about sinning and failing and forgiveness. It's about judging other people using a Biblical interpretation that I find faulty.
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 12:53 pm
Kar, I beg to differ. Suppressing sexuality as a teenager is never good thing. It doesn't mean to run out and have sex with anything that moves but sexuality is a human thing that begins in the teen years. In that house of side hugs...well it didn't work out too well.
If Josh had even a bit of freedom as all teens need as they move into adulthood and was able to have girlfriends, hold hands, kiss he probably wouldn't be going after his sisters vaginas.
I'm not saying that every kid that lives in a side hug household will look for their sisters vaginas. But logic says Josh couldn't handle it. He really turned out a bit on the shall we say "curious" side of sex.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 1:24 pm
Lilfair, re suppression, we may be saying the same thing in different ways.
Of *course* there are times you have to suppress your sexuality. You can't start masturbating because you feel the urge in science class.
And sexuality begins long before the teen years. It just peaks then. Many young children masturbate, they just don't have the same understanding as teenagers about what it is.
I would say that I completely disagree that having the ability to kiss, hold hands, etc somehow provides sufficient outlet for sexual urges. It actually increases them. Not only does it not make sense scientifically, but as the mother of a 21 year old, who was the confidant for many of his friends and many of their parents, I have a lot of experience in helping teenage boys through those urges in healthy ways.
As for Josh, we simply don't know that if he were raised in any other household if he would or would not have done the same thing. We don't. I know plenty of young men who weren't raised in similar households who acted inappropriately also.
So, again, the actual evidence, when we look at all these kinds of situations, says we cannot draw conclusions for a *single* case without doing an assessment of all factors involved in that case.
Do I think his family acted in the best way possible to help him? No. But he's not the first kid to be curious, and raised in such a household. And they don't all offend. That means it's not the method of raising him *alone* that caused him to act out. And allowing him to be able to kiss and hold hands would not have prevented it. Only a successful therapeutic intervention would have.
And even with the best parenting possible, he may still have acted inappropriately. It happens.
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 2:04 pm
There was an article maybe 2 years ago that one of the sons was caught masturbating and was punished by doing many chores with his hands tied.
Can't draw conclusions, generally speaking. But in this Duggar household you can't shy away from what is pretty much in your face. If he didn't come from this side hugging family I 'm certain that he would have had his curiosity met in more conventional ways....not from sisters vaginas.
Sexuality is part of life it's not taboo. And sexuality doesn't mean only intercourse. It's holding hands, kissing, touching, and flirting. We all need to experience that in our teen years. It's unnatural not to act on natural feeling. What happens to some (not all) who are shamed by these all so natural feelings we get the Josh Duggars of the world.
And when sexuality is suppressed some girls ahem Duggar girls don't even realize they have been violated. That's very scary.
|
Karuuna
Board Administrator
08-30-2000
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 2:14 pm
Lilfair, my point is that it doesn't mean anything when you say that it only happens in "some" cases.
Because we get inappropriate behaviors in families were kids are not shamed also.
That's like saying some happy kids were raised by miserable families. And some happy kids come out of happy families.
If we get the same result in either case, it's not causal, not by itself.
That's my point.
We don't get kids acting out sexually from one single cause, generally. There were likely several factors involved.
But people only want to blame the religious views, and I'm sorry, but that is faulty logic. It is only one part of the picture, and by itself is NOT causal. Because it doesn't happen to everyone raised that ways.
I would also say that we don't ALL need to experience touching, kissing, holding hands. Some kids just have no interest in that in their teen years, and you know what, that's okay too.
And no, it's not unnatural not to act on those feelings. In many cases, it's mature not to act on them.
|
Naja
Member
06-28-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 8:00 pm
One thing is for sure, Josh Duggar's upbringing didn't prevent him from being a cad.
|
Naja
Member
06-28-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 8:07 pm
One thing I learned today while reading articles around the net is that Anna's siblings all left the church Anna and the Duggar's belong to.
|
Naja
Member
06-28-2003
| Monday, August 24, 2015 - 8:44 pm
Anna Duggar's brother and sister sure have something to say about all this. And it's not good. They want Josh out of their sister's life.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/tv/celebrity/anna-duggars-brother-calls-josh-duggar-a-pig-begs-her-to-leave/ar-BBm3x61
|
Rehtse
Member
08-17-2005
| Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - 3:33 am
Good points, Lil
|
Lilfair
Member
07-09-2003
| Tuesday, August 25, 2015 - 4:30 am
Thanks Reh, I have no sympathy for Josh . He crossed the line with his sisters and that didn't that didn't happen in a vacuum. Teens Being told ones normal sexual feelings need to be suppressed never ends well....as we have seen with Josh.
|
|
