[quote name='dohdough']You're not reading into anything I'm say. All you're doing is projecting your own biases onto it. Operating from the assumption of people being solely responsible for their actions and immune from any outside influence completely flies in the face of how psychology and sociology work.
If you just want to squabble about the ratio of influence and responsibility of society, it's something that we can discuss when more information becomes available, but since the only thing you're interested in is saying that society has no responsibility whatsoever because you want to use the dictionary as your argument, then you didn't really understand what you read.
Hmmm...in that post you quoted, I was responding to 3 different points by 2 different people and you're wondering why it doesn't seem consistent(it actually is)?
Btw, I know the difference between being sociopathic and psychopathic, but you don't seem to. Also, a psychological trigger can also be a catalyst, not just a light switch. Since I need to explain these things to you, maybe I'm not the one that should be looking up definitions.
Re-read my posts until you understand them. Or I dunno, maybe read the first paragraph where I said that maybe we'll get some answers now that he was arrested.
The Milgram Experiment and the Stanford Prison Experiment say otherwise. Given the right leverage, your "average" person is capable of some pretty cruel and violent behavior as well as passive and docile behavior when experiencing the former. You might as well ask why the IRA was bombing the shit out of everything when England and Ireland are such a great places to live.
Actually, I specifically said that we should do our damnedest to make sure this doesn't happen again, which is different from saying that we completely stop it from ever happening again. A more apt analogy is that you saw my door, didn't want to go through it, and decided to use a sledgehammer to make your own because you didn't like the moulding.
Seriously, my quote is on the same damn page as your reply and for everyone to see. It's even in one of your own posts! How hard is it to look a couple posts up and correctly reference it?
Do YOU know the difference between psychopaths and sociopaths? Seems to me like you're assuming that only psychopaths exist and sociopaths don't. I still don't know how you jumped from me saying that most people aren't narcissistic sociopaths to the Tsarnaevs being psychopaths. Are you confusing me with someone else? Cause I'm not making the arguments that you're accusing me of.
[/quote]
You debate like a politician, never actually saying anything that answers the core questions. I liked the part where you claimed to know the difference between between sociopaths & psychopaths, but never actually said what is was. So we obviously don't agree here I don't like to waste anymore time here besides what I write below, so if you feel like I'm an idiot and want to scream and shout to try and make your point go for it. Congrats, you're opinion will be king of the vs. section on discount gaming online forum. None will oppose you...
Let me break down your own statement then explain how I see it differently:
"We are them and they are us. At what point do we as a society take some responsibility for what happened? What is it about our society that causes people to take such extreme action?"
"Tamerlan and Dzjokhar Tsarnaev are just as human as anyone of us. To imagine them as something other than one of us is to ignore any lessons we can glean from this and there are indeed things we can learn about ourselves. Events like this truly bring out some of the worst in all of us to reveal our prejudices that's ever present and always simmering just underneath our superficial veneer of civility."
My question is what makes you think it is just this society that causes such actions? How do you have any idea besides the one in your mind that that is even the case? You hide behind the idea that with the arrests maybe answers will come, but the problem is you are already making a statement (yet posing it as a question) that shells out blame to society with no real reason behind it. What do you think is so "not crazy" about the 2 suspects & the events that have taken place? Did you do a psychological evalution on Tamerlan when nobody else was looking? I never said society has no responsibility, our society pushes people everyday and everyday people lash out. I am simply saying that unlike yourself there is no evidence yet to say it does in this situation. You think I'm altering and projecting things, you are the one simply projecting your impression of society on this situation. I could be off base with my thoughts too. I could sling around big words and be a dick about everything said here like you. But I won't make an empathic interrogative statement and then say I hope maybe we'll get some answers. No I'll take a more rational approach and wait for answers before I start blaming society ills and acting like these brothers are victims of our society.
On the topics of sociopaths & psychopaths. Psychopaths have no empathy or conscience for anyone. Sociopaths on other hand may not feel empathy for the society in general but often there are a select few in his or her life for which that is not the case. (See it wasn't that difficult) There are other things like the theory of the origin of them being different. Sociopathy is said to often be rooted in one's development in early environment where as psychopathy is rooted more in one's biology & psychology, yet can still be affected by environment. Other theories like sociopaths are typically less calculating & organized vs. psychopaths who are more calculating. Sociopaths thrive in a social network of people vs. psychopaths who tend to be more loners clinging to a false reality of sorts. There are perhaps even more similarities than differences, but those are the differences I know of. Both exist yet one person cannot be both a sociopath & psychopath.
Now to be fair, I didn't intend to call the 2 bombers psychopaths though I can see where you think I may have inferred that at some point. From what we know now, I'd fairly certain only the older brother could put fairly into that category (he beat his wife, no friends, people who met him seemed to think he was abrasive/unfriendly, didn't understand nor care for the society he lived in, was deep into the jihadist/extremist movement, etc.), The younger brother seemed much closer to his family and had a real network of friends. The point I was eluding to by bringing up psychopaths is to question how society takes the burden for & work towards stopping people like psychopaths? Charles Manson for instance, by even most professional opinions a true psychopath, is he really society's creation? Is it an affront to his victims to say he is psychopath (as you suggest it is with this case to call the bombers crazy or mad)? What about Kaczynski? Norway has some different societal norms than we do in the States, but do you say their society bears some responsibility for what Breivik did? If it is embedded in the biology of some humans what is it that society is doing wrong? Sociopath, psychopath, etc, the actual word doesn't matter really but you're point seems to be that the bombers are a reflections of us and a problem in our society and it's wrong to say otherwise. I'm simply asking you why do you think that is?
And yes, you are in fact being at least a little inconsistant here. You said that society is not largely sociopaths and you also said that the bombers were just like us (meaning society). You also said they were not crazy or mentally defective. So is it that the suspects are sociopaths or just that society is largely capable sociopathic behavior such as blowing up a sidewalk full of innocent people? You seem to infer that both are true at different times. Now you are putting you're reasoning behind the Milgram & Stanford Prison Experiments. I see what you are saying but I am not seeing how it entirely applies to what happened. Despite both experiments show a darker side of human nature in general, the point of the experiments revolved around what happens when some subjects have full authority and the other subjects have none. You have no authority figure in this scenario. Who has the leverage, the bombers or society? Besides the fact the it proved many people have sadistic tendencies buried in them & use those tendencies given the right conditions I don't see much there relating to this.
I'm not saying society is perfect the way it is, but as long as people exist so will sociopaths, psychopaths, etc. and society's defense against that is absolutely limited unfortunately. Crazy & sadistic behaviors have existed in our society and essentially every society ever since the start of mankind. Has that suddenly changed, is our society so different now in this regard than it always has been. Neither experiment reinforces your concept that society is suddenly broken somehow, is responsible for the work of even sociopath, psychopaths or whatever in it, and must work toward trying to mitigate things like the bombings in the future. Hell the Milgram experiment is over 50 years old, yet even according to you applies today. You could easily argue that today's society is different than it was back then.
You also talk about the lessons to be gleaned from all this, but what lesson? Besides political fervor such as immigration issues and so on what is the lesson for society to learn? Prejudice exists, and again it is a problem that has always existed in every society. I view that superficial civility as society's best coping mechanism against it.
People target innocent individuals every day in every society around the world, but very little can be done about it. So then why does society suddenly take the gutshot from you now for the actions of 2 individuals who at this point may or may not have been somewhat deranged? Your whole theme seemed to be that if we simply classify this as the work of 2 crazed individuals then society has failed all the victims. Yet some times tragedies like this, like Dorner, like Norway, etc. are just that. Society has no good explanation or defense for it. Society cannot in my opinion be brought to bear the burden for the ill deeds of each individual. It sucks but that is how things work. I actually really hope you are right and somehow society has all the responsibility here and do it's damnedest to work toward a better tomorrow, but deep down I don't really believe that is the case.
And one last thing, you can't take a quote that is basically expressing the same opinion as you and then call it superficial and step up to your high horse. The point of that quote is similar to the one you raised. That the punishment for a crime is revenge not justice. Her point was the legal system has to go beyond merely a prison sentence or the like to ensure justice is maintained. Your quote, "Merely punishing those that committed the acts is NOT justice...that's just revenge." I know you think every thing is superficial & I'm wrong. Yet still curious, if you can respond and not sound like an angst ridden teenager that is, in your opinion what is the difference between revenge & justice? If Dzhokhar is found guilty and sentenced to death for example, is that revenge or justice to you?
him.
