Originally Posted by Sliver (Post 528562)

I had a rousing debate with a woman once about this. She wouldn't even let her children watch things like the Power Rangers etc... It was too violent. Me? Mine are 12 and 9. They can watch pretty much any horror film that they're interested in watching. (Although the 9 year old's more of a wimp for them so we let her choose the 'scare level'.)
Her whole point was that children cannot tell the difference between fantasy and reality.
My whole point was that children deserve more credit. (That, and as a parent you should be discussing these things with them!) A child could watch Sylvester get clobbered over the head with a shovel, and laugh. The same child could then go for a walk with their parent and watch a pedestrian get smoked by a car at an intersection. The child would be horrified, hands down.

Originally Posted by XtRaVa (Post 528547)

I wrote an academic essay on the subject of video game violence, and its effect on young children for University.

I came to the conclusion, that generally speaking, the evil or violent behaviour that could lead to pre-meditated murder already lies in the persons psyche. Nurture can play a role, but mostly its nature that causes it.

Scientific studies have shown that many mass murderers have had similar brain cat scan results, which in some cases was down to their genes, and other times was even due to brain damage caused by knocks to the head which could have happened when they were very young.

Theres also been lots of tests where random people were shown neutral images and had their brain activity, pulse rates and other things measured whilst viewing them. Then they would show violent images and take note of the changes. They would then often do the same test on people that played violent video-games more than any other genre (and also people that liked violent/horror films) and saw that their response to the violent images were less significant to the random subjects, showing dissensitisation.

Anything can cause dissensitisation though, we see violence every day in films and games, but more importantly on the news and in real life, so to blame violent movies or games for people murdering others is quite stupid, but to blame the parents can also be as equally wrong.

Generally speaking in my opinion, and from investigations, it seems to be nature rather than nurture/real life experiences, hobbies and interests that creates psychopathic killers.

Originally Posted by Romjon13 (Post 531647)

Hey, I got to give it to you, you have done studies on this and you know your stuff. But one thing that you contradicted is that if some of the subjects that were psychopaths and sociopaths fell on their heads at some point in their childhood and you said yourself that they could inherited this disease through genetics which is totally up to their parents...right? If their parents didn't pay enough attention to them as infants like Britney Spears did, dropping the kid on his head numerous times, well, what do you expect? Who started it...? The kid or the parent? If the parent kept the kid inside and never allowed them to go play with other kids if they become sociopaths, who allowed it? If the kids inherited the psychopath gene from let's say their grand-pa...did they want to be born from a family with a history of head disease?

Please answer to these above and rethink of your last statement.

Originally Posted by XtRaVa (Post 531659)

When I said it was down to their genes, I meant that for some reason something didnt develop right in their brain which is beyond the control of anyone. I didnt mean that the parents were evil and produced evil, I just meant that it happened naturally (nature not nurture) but there wasnt some "evil gene" that was the cause.

As for the bumping of heads, I didnt specify whether it was due to a parent dropping them, it could have been any accident. Also I was just giving an example as to how some of the subjects might of had these similar cat scans, which showed differences to cat scans of "normal" people.

You dont have to believe anything I say or come to an agreement with me, theres no cold hard evidence to say its because of one way or another. Theres DEFINATELY some people that had fucked up heads which is why THEY were mental, and theres DEFINATELY some people that had fucked up childhoods which is why THEY were mental. However I was merely saying that after studying into it, it appears that the later happens less often and results of studies by scientists often comes to the conclusion that in most cases its down to nature not nurture.

You can believe its mainly down to nurture and no one can say you're wrong. Just as I can believe its mainly down to nature and no one can say I'm wrong, especially seeing as theres more evidence for my belief on the subject. The only way you can be wrong is if you say its ALL down to one or the other, because it clearly and obviously isnt.