My poster and research topic explores the origins and neurological
aspects of
aggression and criminal violence. I will be focusing on a comparison
of the biological
and sociobiological aspects of aggression. The first, relies on
cause and effect
relationships which create the need for aggressive behavior. The
second, uses adaptation
through evolution, and the instinctual nature of aggression to
explain violence in humans.
There is one major point of similarity between these two spheres,
which I would like to
quote beforehand. “Both sociobiologists and social scientists
would agree that human
behavior rests on an interaction of environmental and genetic
variables.” This is not,
however, to be confused with interactions between genetic variables
and environment.
This idea is important because it provides a foundation for the
origins of aggression, as
well as instinct. As a result, it can be maintained from both
perspectives. I would also
like to note that the opinions I am using are general similarities
between researchers in
each field. Rather than attempt to discuss all of them I just
drew conclusions and
incorporated them together.
Biologists would tend to believe aggression is not instinctual.
For our purposes,
instincts are those similar to involuntary desires, such as, eating,
sleeping, and mating.
Aggressive behavior results from the constant threat of nature.
This constant threat also
leads to the development of self-preservation abilities and a
form of individualism, which
declares “every man for himself.” Eventually, basic logic and
reasoning skills force
people together into communities.
This new intellect gives way to self-identification of groups
or individuals, which
allows them to differentiate themselves from both other species,
as well as other people
and groups. This would be done through competition and conquest,
in order to
demonstrate power (another desire, I believe, inspired by self-identification).
Inevitably,
inequalities arise, at least through the species perspective,
between species and people.
This, in turn, allows for social environmental issues to surface
among human groups.
Advancement in the species due to human ingenuity, begins to eliminate
the
constant threat of nature. Obviously, at this point I am referring
to some of the more
advanced cultures. A more permanent group mentality is formed
and aggressive
tendencies, as well as other survival traits become somewhat dulled.
This can be
attributed to the improving standard of living. At this point,
aggression is replaced with
morality, rational thinking, and problem solving abilities. It
was also at this point, that I
brought Robert Wright’s book The Moral Animal into my research.
Wright follows along
with Darwinian theory, to some extent, in terms of the development
of morality and a
conscience before the fall of uncontrolled aggression. More specifically,
he mentions the
traits of sympathy and guilt as being intrinsic in the hindering
of aggression.
It is accepted that some form of aggression is present in all
humans, which is why
biologists would rather focus on “abnormal aggression” and “unacceptable
violence.”
There are five areas of study into the causes of stimulation of
aggressive behavior which
have been deemed “related” in some way. These are also some of
the topics I will be
doing further study on through surveys and interviews. (1) The
Bad Seed represents the
idea of a person born devoid of morality and innocence. It also
deals with genetic trait
transmission between family members. (2) The Limbic System is
a part of the brain to
which aggressive behavior has been traced. It specifically deals
with the amygdala and
various ways it responds to input. (3) A number of criminals claimed
they had received
head injuries, which knocked them unconscious, at some point in
their lives. This is
believed to have had some affects on their behavior. (4) Aggressive
stimulation has also
been related to chemical imbalances. (5) Sexual hormones, androgen,
found in males,
and estrogen, in females, are believed to be important in controlling
aggression, and, in
addition, relates to aggression in children.
Evidence of aggression in our genes is beyond our level of detection,
if present at
all. However, it is believed by most biologists that activation
of these unknown
aggressive traits results from social environmental problems and/or
resulting in
physiological abnormalities prompting violence.
I will now discuss some of the sociobiological explanations of
aggression, defined
here as more of an instinct. While some sociobiologists choose
to explain aggression
through the concept of original sin, the inherently evil human,
others take an evolutionary
approach. The latter is what I will discuss because original sin
is a religious perspective
and not really relevant at this time.
Aggression is present in all species, and it is “instinctual behavior.”
It is as
natural to humans, as eating and sex. Furthermore, it serves three
purposes, undoubtedly
necessary instincts of survival. First, aggression is used to
even distribution of animals in
a specific area. Second, it is used to select, and eliminate,
candidates for breeding.
Third, aggression is used to select candidates for protection
of the young. We even have
personal instinctual defenses in the form of adrenaline, related
to anxiety, and
noradrenaline, which is closely related to aggression stimulation.
The stimulation of aggression can evidently be linked to the jeopardizing
of main
values of animals, such as territory, food, and mates. From Darwinian
theory we gather
that aggression is adopted from our predecessors, certain primate
species. Humans,
unlike primates, are adaptive species. The fact that we have the
ability to control our
aggression is evidence of our adaptation. Furthermore, values
become more generalized
in humans. Points of importance, implying in need of protection,
become specific to
each person or group.
Finally, sociobiologists theorize that aggression is spontaneous,
but release of this
“innate” energy is necessary. Animals release through rituals,
similar to those practiced
by various chimpanzee communities discussed in Jane Goodall’s,
Through a Window.
Chapter ten reports of territory patrols and raids, certainly
not premeditated, but rather
ritualistic and instinctual. Humans do not have rituals like hunting,
mating, and
conquering to vent aggression. In fact, crime and neuroses are
results of the repression of
aggression. However, the sociobiologists cure is competition.
It not only vents
frustration and aggression, it also helps us to better recognize
and control our aggressive
impulses.
I hope to recover enough data to thoroughly explore both regions
of this proposal.
Particularly, since both have very good support in some areas,
while lacking in others.
Some of the implications of the research I have done so far seem
somewhat pessimistic,
but so much of this field revolves around supposition of things
which can not be tested
yet. I am merely interested at what my own findings will turn
out to be like. I also
intend to incorporate gender issues, some population statistics
reports, and possibly some
speculations as to where we are, should be, and will be in this
area of study.
Bibliography
Siann, Gerda.
Accounting for Aggression.
1985.
Wright, Robert.
The Moral Animal.
1994.
Goodall, Jane.
Through a Window.
1990.
Goldman, George D.
Milman, Donald S.
Psychoanalytic Perspectives on Aggression.
1978.
Stoff, David M.
Cairns, Robert B.
Aggression and Violence.
1996.
Volavka, Jan
Neurobiology of Violence.
1995
Greenhaven Press
Violence. Opposing Viewpoints.
1996.
Next Article
Previous Article
Return to the Topic Menu
IMPORTANT: For each Research Response, make sure the title of the response is different than previous titles shown above!