Women With Suntans Will Be Arrested, Iran Police Chief Warns

SamCogar wrote:Crying, ..... reacting to loud noises, ...... reaction to fear ..... are inherited traits.

.

How does your theory on nurturing address psychopaths and sociopaths, both of which have a complete disregard for the feelings and rights of others. , fail to feel remorse or guilt, lack a conscience, are completely self-serving, routinely disregard rules, social mores and laws, unmindful of putting themselves or others at risk?

Aaron wrote:How does your theory on nurturing address psychopaths and sociopaths, both of which have a complete disregard for the feelings and rights of others. , fail to feel remorse or guilt, lack a conscience, are completely self-serving, routinely disregard rules, social mores and laws, unmindful of putting themselves or others at risk?

First, lets define the words, to wit:

sociopath, psychopath (plural psychopaths)

1. A person with a personality disorder indicated by a pattern of lying, cunning, manipulating, glibness, exploiting, heedlessness, arrogance, delusions of grandeur, sexual promiscuity, low self-control, disregard for morality, lack of acceptance of responsibility, callousness, and lack of empathy and remorse. Such an individual may be especially prone to violent and criminal offenses.

2. A person diagnosed with antisocial or dissocial personality disorder.

3. A person who has no moral conscience.

4. A person who perpetrates especially gruesome or bizarre violent acts

So Aaron, if they are calling a person who displays or exhibits a pattern of the above stated traits a sociopath, ….. then what do they call people who displays or exhibits a pattern of just one (1) or more of said traits, but not all of them, nor all the time? Or people who selectively display or exhibit a pattern of just one (1) or more of said traits towards another person depending on (1) who said person is, (2) what the situation is, or (3) where the situation occurs, etc?

Now Aaron, given the fact that every person at one time or another exhibits one (1) or more of said traits, of different severity (a little lie vrs a big lie), …… then said traits must have been learned (nurtured) as a result of some environmental stimulus because of the above stated three (3) selectivity reasons.

Aaron, here below I created you a “Sociopathic Grading Chart” containing all the above listed traits, with a Frequency Grading Scale of “0 to 9” of how often each of said "traits" are employed, with “0” being non-sociopathic, a total regard for the feelings and rights of others and “9” being sociopathic, a complete disregard for the feelings and rights of others.

So now Aaron, grade yourself, me, another forum poster, your kid, your friend, Obama, a suicide bomber or whoever to see what level of "psychopathic" nurturing your chosen person has experienced for each of said traits.



And Aaron, if you do a chart on yourself and then tell me you "checked" the 0 (zero) column for all of them ..... then I will know you should have at least "checked" #5 in the first one.

Aaron, pretty much every child up to 18 months old will have a rating of "0" in every column, and after that, as they mature into and through their teenage years, ...... those "check marks" will progress across one or more of those columns as each year goes by and as their environment nurtures them.

Especially their "peer environment", as you probably already know, having had to attempt to straighten your boys out on 2 or 3 things they "learned on the street", ....... RIGHT.


,

Thing is Sam, a whole of people smarter then you and me say these people are born that way.

But if they ain't, how do you nurture a person to feel NOTHING?

Aaron wrote:Thing is Sam, a whole of people smarter then you and me say these people are born that way.

But if they ain't, how do you nurture a person to feel NOTHING?

Aaron, when you see old film footage or pictures of the Jews being liberated from those German "Internment Camps" by the Allied Forces ...... how many of them do you think were "feeling something"?

And GEEEZUS, man, there are and have been dozens n' dozens of Posters to the Gazette, Daily Mail and this Forum that "feel NOTHING" for anyone claiming to be a Republican.

And how many American GIs, after having seen what they had done, felt NOTHING at alll for a Japanese soldier and would shoot, bomb, knife or napalm any of them they could.

And iffen you want to read about some really good "feel NOTHINGs" then read about the Civil War, especially about Andersonville Prison, to wit: http://www.nps.gov/history/seac/andecon.htm

But Aaron, the real answer you are "looking for" to answer your question of "how can one nurture a person to feel NOTHING" can be found by reading about the schooling of German youth by the Nazis that resulted in so many German Officers "feeling NOTHING" about the people they were ordered to conquor, to wit:

The Hitler Youth group played a major role in Nazi control of youths especially in 1939 when it became compulsory to attend. The Nazis took what the children wanted such as group activities, hiking, camping and singing and added in extra activities such as marching, learning about Nazi policies and practicing military exercises. Many of the members were merely drawn to the youth group due to the leisure opportunities it offered and some just did not have a choice as other organisations were shut down and made illegal.

As the Nazis wanted to control each aspect of a child's life they realised that education played a very important role. They altered textbooks to include Nazi history and also Nazi views of History. Students were taught about the injustice of German government and how the Jews were slowly taking over. The National Socialist party also managed to glorify the military in each school subject. They also made sure that the students had to study race and ideology everyday.

As the Nazis needed to control each aspect of a child's life to have full hold on the child they realised that it was a necessity to control a child's home or family life, in many cases this meant isolating a child from his/her family. It became increasingly common in Germany for the children of the household to be much more pro-Nazi than their parents. This is because the children grew up being controlled by Nazi forces and therefore found such things as routine household checks normal, whereas older family members found it an invasion of privacy. This often resulted in family disputes and caused unsettledness. This was also caused by the fact that the Nazi party always expected to be put before everything, even before your family.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_the_Nazi_Party_control_education_and_youth_groups

Now do you understand why US textbooks are being rewritten to contain Socialist agendas and why Al Gore's movie on Global Warming is being shown over n' over in school classrooms?

You nurture the children "to think and to do" whatever it is that you want them to think and do, ........ even if its to strap a bomb around their waist and deteonate it wherever you tell them to deteonate it.


.

Aaron wrote:Thing is Sam, a whole of people smarter then you and me say these people are born that way.

But if they ain't, how do you nurture a person to feel NOTHING?

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, when you see old film footage or pictures of the Jews being liberated from those German "Internment Camps" by the Allied Forces ...... how many of them do you think were "feeling something"?

I don't know Sam but that does not answer my question, which was about sociopaths who are born with the inability to feel anything emotionally, not what a human feels after years of treatment you or I can't even begin to imagine.

SamCogar wrote:And GEEEZUS, man, there are and have been dozens n' dozens of Posters to the Gazette, Daily Mail and this Forum that "feel NOTHING" for anyone claiming to be a Republican.

Once again, that's no where near relevant and in no way addresses my my question.

SamCogar wrote:And how many American GIs, after having seen what they had done, felt NOTHING at alll for a Japanese soldier and would shoot, bomb, knife or napalm any of them they could.

Once again, that's not the same thing, no where near relevant and in no way addresses my question.

SamCogar wrote:And iffen you want to read about some really good "feel NOTHINGs" then read about the Civil War, especially about Andersonville Prison, to wit: http://www.nps.gov/history/seac/andecon.htm

I've read about it. Once again Sam, it's not the same thing and in no way addresses my question.

SamCogar wrote:But Aaron, the real answer you are "looking for" to answer your question of "how can one nurture a person to feel NOTHING" can be found by reading about the schooling of German youth by the Nazis that resulted in so many German Officers "feeling NOTHING" about the people they were ordered to conquor, to wit:

The Hitler Youth group played a major role in Nazi control of youths especially in 1939 when it became compulsory to attend. The Nazis took what the children wanted such as group activities, hiking, camping and singing and added in extra activities such as marching, learning about Nazi policies and practicing military exercises. Many of the members were merely drawn to the youth group due to the leisure opportunities it offered and some just did not have a choice as other organisations were shut down and made illegal.

As the Nazis wanted to control each aspect of a child's life they realised that education played a very important role. They altered textbooks to include Nazi history and also Nazi views of History. Students were taught about the injustice of German government and how the Jews were slowly taking over. The National Socialist party also managed to glorify the military in each school subject. They also made sure that the students had to study race and ideology everyday.

As the Nazis needed to control each aspect of a child's life to have full hold on the child they realised that it was a necessity to control a child's home or family life, in many cases this meant isolating a child from his/her family. It became increasingly common in Germany for the children of the household to be much more pro-Nazi than their parents. This is because the children grew up being controlled by Nazi forces and therefore found such things as routine household checks normal, whereas older family members found it an invasion of privacy. This often resulted in family disputes and caused unsettledness. This was also caused by the fact that the Nazi party always expected to be put before everything, even before your family.

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/How_did_the_Nazi_Party_control_education_and_youth_groups[/color]

No Sam, the real answer I'm looking for is if sociopaths are born to feel nothing emotionally. And if not, how are they nurtured to feel absolutely nothing without going to a Jewish or Confederate Prision Camp or serving extensively with the Pacific fleet island hopping during World War 2?

SamCogar wrote:Now do you understand why US textbooks are being rewritten to contain Socialist agendas and why Al Gore's movie on Global Warming is being shown over n' over in school classrooms?

Yes but it's not relevant to my question. That is an attempt to manipulate all children, not a sociopath who is born with the inability to feel.

SamCogar wrote:You nurture the children "to think and to do" whatever it is that you want them to think and do, ........ even if its to strap a bomb around their waist and deteonate it wherever you tell them to deteonate it..

So then how are sociopaths nurtured "to think and to do" whatever it is that you want them to thank and do when it has been scientifically proven that there are those who without suffering the atrocities you've referenced have zero ability to feel anything emotionally?

Can you answer that question without all the hoopla?

Aaron,

What scientific evidence is there to prove that sociopaths are born, not nurtured? Humor me, and assume that unborn babies are people too and nurturing begins at conception. I'd be very interested to see proof of your claim.

Stephanie wrote:Aaron,

What scientific evidence is there to prove that sociopaths are born, not nurtured?

I never claimed there was such scientific evidence. I told Sam some experts say sociopaths are born while other scientist do not agree. I then ask Sam if they are not born that way, how are they nutrued to feel absolutely nothing. I'm STILL waiting on his answer.

I did do a search and I will say that there is a ton of conflicting opinions.

Have a look see and let me know what you come up with.

Stephanie wrote:Humor me, and assume that unborn babies are people too and nurturing begins at conception.

That's your assumption not mine and I'd be interested to see if you have any proof of your claim.

Stephanie wrote:I'd be very interested to see proof of your claim.

I never claimed any proof so why would you imply I did?

I would be interested in hearing your opinion (unless it involves Jewish Concentration Camps or Confederate War Prisons) on how a person, if they aren't born a sociopath then how are they nurtured to feel absolutely NOTHING emotionally.

Aaron wrote: my question, which was about sociopaths who are born with the inability to feel anything emotionally,

Once again, that's no where near relevant and in no way addresses my my question.

no where near relevant and in no way addresses my question.

in no way addresses my question.

if sociopaths are born to feel nothing emotionally.

not a sociopath who is born with the inability to feel.

So then how are sociopaths nurtured "to think and to do" whatever it is that you want them to thank and do when it has been scientifically proven that there are those who without suffering the atrocities you've referenced have zero ability to feel anything emotionally?

Can you answer that question without all the hoopla?

Aaron, as long as you persist in remaining "stuck on stupid" it is actually a waste of my time trying to answer or explain anything to you.

Your so called "experts" haven't proven a damn thing, scientifically or otherwise, ..... when, how or why ..... a persons suffers the inability to "feel anything emotionally".

Said person(s) could have suffered a biological problem with their brain development as a result of genetic mutation, lack of oxygen/nutrients, drug use by parent(s), etc., ….. or, …. as a result of birth trauma, …… or as a result of their nurturing. The latter one, nurturing, being the most probable cause because the first two (2) are usually accompanied by other physical and/or mental problems and not just a lack of emotions or empathy all by itself.

Aaron, how in hell is it possible for said “experts” to have proven that the people lacking the ability to "feel anything emotionally" …… has never suffered any nurturing that could have possibly caused their problem?

That is absolutely asinine, silly and idiotic to make such a claim unless they have “documented proof” that said person was being “monitored” 24 hours a day, 7 days per week, from the day that they were born, preferably by two (2) people at all times or via video recording.

GEEEZUS, ….. parents, guardians, babysitters, nurses, etc. are not going to tell anyone they mistreated a child. And many of said don’t even realize and/or care if their treatment is likely to cause a child emotional problems. A child forced to wear wet n’ shitty diapers for days on end is “not a happy child”, ya know.

Aaron, "crying", for whatever reason it does it, is an emotional thingy that a child does. And if a child is ignored and left to cry n' cry n' cry for hours n' hours on end, ...... if will finally quit crying ..... and will likely never cry again unless it gets physically hurt. It has thus been nurtured that "no one gives a shit and no one will come" and therefore it has been nurtured to no longer feel anything emotionally.

Ya might say its a "they don't care about me, then I don't care about them".

And Aaron, some "acts of nurturing" of children ...... happens pretty damn quick ..... and will "last a lifetime".

If a young child ...... is bitten by a viscious dog, ...... a snake wraps itself around their arm or leg and/or bites them .... or a big spider scares the bejesus out of them, ....... they will most likely remain deathly scared of them for the rest of their lives.

My buddy's wife, who is 50 years old, justs stands there shivering n' shaking and screaming her head off if she sees a spider in her close proximately. A friend in college was deathly afraid of snakes or anything that looked like a snake. The clowns use to take a rubber hose off a Bunsen Burner and toss it at him. He would scream and jump flatfooted to the table top. Then get down, pick up the hose and toss it back to whoever did it and say "now don't be doing that". And if the guy tossed it right back at him, he would scream again and back on the tabletop he would be.

Aaron, I'm surprised ..... but not really. You reared two (2) boys and you don't seem to understand very much about how you aided and/or contributed in their nurturing.

I wish them

.

A simple "No, I can't answer the question" would have sufficed Sam.

And I reared 4 kids and I hope and pray I affected their nurturing as that was my intent when I turned down 9 job offerings that would have doubled my salary.

Aaron wrote:A simple "No, I can't answer the question" would have sufficed Sam.

Aaron, my posts were literally full of answers to you question, you just refuse to acknowledge them yourself ........ or at least to me.

Like you were nurtured to believe in God and the Bible and refuse to believe anything contrary to that ...... because you were also nurtured not to believe in anything contrary ....... out of fear you would not go to Heaven and would spend an eternity in Purgatory or Hell. And you think about those "fears" every time you think about your own death ....... or when you think about doing something that your Christian teaching told you not to be doing.

And no, you don't remember much about being nurtured those beliefs anymore than you remember being nurtured to understand and speak English. But you remember a lot about being nurtured about those fears because you were surely reminded about them for years n' years.

Here Aaron, educate yourself on Feral Children http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Feral_child

and then maybe you will realize what happens when a child is inadequately nurtured.

And if you had permitted one of your boys to be a "feral child" he would have ended up "in the same kind of boat".

But then, knowing, you probably believe your God would have taught him to read, write, talk, chew gum and walk all by himself.

And then you will tell me I can't prove any different.

And .... yada, yada, yada, ........ ignorance can be fixed, stubborness and stupidity are permanent.


.

Sorry Sam but you don't know what my beliefs regarding God are or how I react to them any more then you've provided and adequate answer to my question.

I provided a page of links to those who sociapaths are born different but all you've provided me is examples of children or adults who've endured hell.

It doesn't explain why one kid from a family of 5 is a serial killer while the other 4 aren't. Yet there are cases studies that show serial killers don't react to certain stimuli that their siblings do.

I don't suppose you can explain any of that, can you Sam? Or Stephanie?

Oh, Aaron..........you provided a link to a google search. I've got stuff I do this time of year. Yesterday I weeded and planted and mulched my arse off. I've got to get all that done in case James (FIL) needs me in the next week or two. He had MAJOR surgery last week and I exepct I'll be staying with him for a while because he's going to need help.

Most important of all to me, I'm busy researching curriculum, trying to prepare for the upcoming academic year. As brilliant and precious as my littlest snowflake is (love the snowflake thing TerryRC), we seem to be having some difficulty with writing. I have to figure out what best to do about this, Aaron. He excels at everything else, so what's up? Is it just lack of interest? Is it because he's a stubborn little shit (my theory). Is it because the instruction and material I've been providing is inadequate? I don't know but right now that is of far greater concern to me because unlike all the psychpaths and sociopaths on the loose and locked away I can actually do something about this.

You're operating under the assumption that when a family of 5 produces 4 "normal" citizens and 1 "sicko", it cannot be the result of childhood experience (nurturing). I don't know if you're basing your assumption on one of those message boards you found during your google search, or something else. I'm telling you a few things.

1) I don't believe in the biblical assertion that people are "born into sin"
2) Psychopaths and sociopaths are created by experience, not acts of supernatural beings
3) Nurturing begins at conception because what happens to a pregnant woman's body has a DIRECT impact on her unborn child. A baby born to a woman who took drugs or drank excessively or didn't have proper nutrition or who was abused or exposed to some sort of toxin is susceptible to having all kinds of difficulties that may not necessarily become evident until they are much older.
4) Children growing up in the same household, being raised by the same parents, still have differt experiences. Susie might be a dead ringer for crazy Grandma Jones who forced Daddy to kneel on salt in the corner for hours while praying for forgiveness for spilling that milk, but Janie resembles her own sweet Granny.
5) Not all childhood experiences take place inside the family home. Johnny may have had a rapist pedophile for a Cub Scout leader, but Joey was more fortunate. He wasn't interested in Scouting, he had a Little League coach who was a terrific role model.
5) Prohibition lead to an EXPLOSION of violent crime in this nation. (I had to go read back to remember WHY we were talking about all this in the first place)
6) Last, but certainly not least, supernatural beings do not make people "good",and they don't make people "bad".

I apologize, Aaron, for my hurriedly frustrated written verbiage.

I got to thinking about it later on and it was then I realized you really didn't have much of a clue as to what I was trying to tell you. It was like me trying to explain a calculus problem to someone who had never ever even heard of algebra.

And Aaron, I hope you take the time to read this lengthy reply, gawd knows it took me long enough to type it up.

Aaron wrote:Sorry Sam but you don't know what my beliefs regarding God are or how I react to them any more then you've provided and adequate answer to my question.

Aaron, you might be surprised at what I know about your beliefs and how you react to them. You see, I know that your conscious thoughts and your physical reactions relative to your religious beliefs are directly controlled by the way your subconscious mind was programmed (nurtured). Just like the programs in your PC, what ever those programs say to do, that's what the PC can do.

Aaron, I am literally an EXPERT on “religious nurturing” because my Mother tried for 18 years, day after day, ….. and “now n’ then” for the next 20+ years ……. to “make me an adamant believer in Christianity”. Why I’ve been drug off to more tent and church revivals than you have probably ever heard about. Why I’ve attended enough of them that giving me 2 or 3 big shots of Vodka to get me wound up and I could preach you a sermon that would make you take back things that you never even stole.

I provided a page of links to those who sociapaths are born different but all you've provided me is examples of children or adults who've endured hell.

Yes Aaron, most everyone has an opinion, but no scientific proof ….. and most of said opinions are illogical, unreasonable and not based in/on sound scientific thinking and reasoning. And I say that because probably 99% of all people believe they are CONSCIOUSLY in control of their actions and thus their destiny, which is DEFINITELY not a truism. One’s SUBCONSCIOUS mind is in control and they can only CONSCIOUSLY do what it permits them to do. But one can consciously re-nurture their subconscious mind to permit them to consciously do things differently.

Aaron, if a sociopath is someone who was born that feels nothing emotionally about 100% of all other people, ……. then what do you call someone who was born that feels nothing emotionally about 95% of other people. Or only 75% of other people. Or 50%, .. 25%, …. 10% … or 1%?

Can one be a “50% sociopath” or must they be a “100% sociopath”? How about 150 years ago in the South when many of the white people felt nothing emotionally about 100% of all black people. Were they Black sociopaths or White sociopaths? Some of those people would just as likely kill a black person as look at them. How could so many people be born a White sociopath back then, but not now?

Aaron, were all the “organized crime” members over the past 100 years, who felt nothing emotionally about killing one (1) of their own or thirty (30) of their competitors ….. all born sociopaths, …… all nurtured sociopaths ……. or not sociopaths at all? Maybe they were just “part-time serial killers”, whatta ya think? To wit:

Cicero gangster Myles O'Donnell and his brother William "Klondike" O'Donnell fought with Capone over their home turf. The war resulted in over 200 deaths, including that of the infamous "Hanging Prosecutor" Bill McSwiggins.

And what about the 1929 Saint Valentine's Day Massacre? Sociopathic killers, were they? All bred n’ born that way, were they?

It doesn't explain why one kid from a family of 5 is a serial killer while the other 4 aren't. Yet there are cases studies that show serial killers don't react to certain stimuli that their siblings do.

Aaron, please tell me, what is the difference between a serial killer and a: serial rapist, serial pedophile, serial bank robber, serial womanizer, serial thief, serial liar, serial bully, serial poisoner, etc. Is not the ONLY difference between all of them the “level” of dislike or disgust that the public assigns to each of said “acts”? Rape 1 female, you are a rapist. Rape 3 females, you are a no good repeat offender. Rape 7 females, you are a serial raping sociopath. GO FIGGURE!!!

Aaron, do all 4 of the children you reared ….. all react the same ….. to the same stimuli? I had 10 brothers and sisters and none of us reacted exactly the same to the same stimulus.

I don't suppose you can explain any of that, can you Sam?

I have been trying too, Aaron, gawd help me I’ve been trying. But I think we have a problem that I can not solve. And that’s because it is your problem, Aaron.

You have nurtured yourself into believing there is only one (1) clear-cut, absolute, precise, literal, definition for “sociopath” and that is “a person who is 100% lacking in any emotional feelings toward all other human beings. I hafta guess that if a person was only 99 44/100% lacking in emotional feelings toward another human being you apparently would not classify them as a sociopath.

Aaron, if a "runner" does not finish a Long Distance Race ..... does one refrain from calling him/her a "long distance runner"?

Aaron, here following are 2 exerted paragraphs from a 3 page article that should give you more insight of how your mind functions. Please read said, to wit:

What Makes You Uniquely "You"?

In Edelman’s grand theory of the mind, consciousness is a biological phenomenon and the brain develops through a process similar to natural selection. Neurons proliferate and form connections in infancy; then experience weeds out the useless from the useful, molding the adult brain in sync with its environment.

Many cognitive psychologists see the brain as a computer. But every single brain is absolutely individual, both in its development and in the way it encounters the world. Your brain develops depending on your individual history. What has gone on in your own brain and its consciousness over your lifetime is not repeatable, ever—not with identical twins, not even with conjoined twins. Each brain is exposed to different circumstances. It’s very likely that your brain is unique in the history of the universe. Neural Darwinism looks at this enormous variation in the brain at every level, from biochemistry to anatomy to behavior.

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/feb/16-what-makes-you-uniquely-you

The above post is why, in my opinion (humble or not so take your pick) Sammy Cogar is da MAN. He so damn clever and injects his own brand of humor (which I adore) into every post he makes.

Now, Sammy baby, you know that the Discover Magazine article is just going to provide fodder for the creationists. God made each of those brains unique. I'm thinkin' that's what will be said.

The resident agnostic says, "Maybe (s)he did, or maybe (s)he didn't. But if God is all powerful and all knowing and the maker of everything that ever has been and everything that ever will be, why does God allow the Devil to tempt all of us poor, pathetic, less than perfect creations he made in his own image? I mean, if he so loved the world (I've always taken that to mean the people who inhabit the Earth) he gave us his "only son" so that we may be forgiven for our sins, wouldn't it just have been a whole lot easier if he'd done it right in the first place and created us all without the capacity for evil? Wouldn't it be better if he put a great big supernatural padlock on Hell so that old Devil couldn't get out to tempt us all? Best of all, why does he allow people to be born "evil"?

I am agnostic. However, if the only possible versions of a god is the versions that most people on the planet worship today then I am an atheist after all. I simply reject the god of both the Old & New Testaments, and the god of the Koran.

SamCogar wrote:I apologize, Aaron, for my hurriedly frustrated written verbiage.

I got to thinking about it later on and it was then I realized you really didn't have much of a clue as to what I was trying to tell you. It was like me trying to explain a calculus problem to someone who had never ever even heard of algebra.

Perhaps the problem is that you’re trying to teach Geometry Sam when the subject is Algebra. Instead of trying to explain how to find the area of a triangle, you're more interested in explaining how Geometry relates to astronomy.

At least that's the case thus far.

SamCogar wrote:And Aaron, I hope you take the time to read this lengthy reply, gawd knows it took me long enough to type it up.

But that's your MO Sam. When one questions you, you have to overload them with responses full of colors, different font sizes, pictures and graphs in your attempts to prove yourself right and them wrong? If you can't prove them wrong or outsmart them then out "word" them, right Sam!!!

SamCogar wrote:

Aaron wrote:Sorry Sam but you don't know what my beliefs regarding God are or how I react to them any more then you've provided and adequate answer to my question.

Aaron, you might be surprised at what I know about your beliefs and how you react to them. You see, I know that your conscious thoughts and your physical reactions relative to your religious beliefs are directly controlled by the way your subconscious mind was programmed (nurtured). Just like the programs in your PC, what ever those programs say to do, that's what the PC can do.

But you have no idea what my subconscious mind was programmed to do thus your making assumptions on what my beliefs are to arrive at the conclusions you do. It becomes a problems when your assumptions are wrong.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, I am literally an EXPERT on “religious nurturing” because my Mother tried for 18 years, day after day, ….. and “now n’ then” for the next 20+ years ……. to “make me an adamant believer in Christianity”. Why I’ve been drug off to more tent and church revivals than you have probably ever heard about. Why I’ve attended enough of them that giving me 2 or 3 big shots of Vodka to get me wound up and I could preach you a sermon that would make you take back things that you never even stole.

Mine didn’t.

SamCogar wrote:Yes Aaron, most everyone has an opinion, but no scientific proof ….. and most of said opinions are illogical, unreasonable and not based in/on sound scientific thinking and reasoning. And I say that because probably 99% of all people believe they are CONSCIOUSLY in control of their actions and thus their destiny, which is DEFINITELY not a truism. One’s SUBCONSCIOUS mind is in control and they can only CONSCIOUSLY do what it permits them to do. But one can consciously re-nurture their subconscious mind to permit them to consciously do things differently.

That’s your opinion.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, if a sociopath is someone who was born that feels nothing emotionally about 100% of all other people, ……. then what do you call someone who was born that feels nothing emotionally about 95% of other people. Or only 75% of other people. Or 50%, .. 25%, …. 10% … or 1%?

A person. What do you call them.

SamCogar wrote:Can one be a “50% sociopath” or must they be a “100% sociopath”? How about 150 years ago in the South when many of the white people felt nothing emotionally about 100% of all black people. Were they Black sociopaths or White sociopaths? Some of those people would just as likely kill a black person as look at them. How could so many people be born a White sociopath back then, but not now?

We’re all born with the ability to do good or evil which is what I have asserted all along. This is more of you trying to cloud the issue with examples like blacks in the south or Jewish prisoners or trying to change the definition of a sociopath. If you want to do that, you’re going to have to take that up with people smarter then me and you.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, were all the “organized crime” members over the past 100 years, who felt nothing emotionally about killing one (1) of their own or thirty (30) of their competitors ….. all born sociopaths, …… all nurtured sociopaths ……. or not sociopaths at all? Maybe they were just part-time serial killers”, whatta ya think? To wit:

Cicero gangster Myles O'Donnell and his brother William "Klondike" O'Donnell fought with Capone over their home turf. The war resulted in over 200 deaths, including that of the infamous "Hanging Prosecutor" Bill McSwiggins.

Another example of you clouding the issue. Algebra Sam, not Geometry.

SamCogar wrote:And what about the 1929 Saint Valentine's Day Massacre? Sociopathic killers, were they? All bred n’ born that way, were they?

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, please tell me, what is the difference between a serial killer and a: serial rapist, serial pedophile, serial bank robber, serial womanizer, serial thief, serial liar, serial bully, serial poisoner, etc. Is not the ONLY difference between all of them the “level” of dislike or disgust that the public assigns to each of said “acts”? Rape 1 female, you are a rapist. Rape 3 females, you are a no good repeat offender. Rape 7 females, you are a serial raping sociopath. GO FIGGURE!!!

If you would leave out these unrelated topics, you wouldn’t spend so long typing post trying to prove me wrong.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, do all 4 of the children you reared ….. all react the same ….. to the same stimuli? I had 10 brothers and sisters and none of us reacted exactly the same to the same stimulus.

I was referring to scientific brain scans and as my boys have never undergone that type of testing that I'm aware of, I can't say how they react to the same stimuli.

SamCogar wrote:I have been trying too, Aaron, gawd help me I’ve been trying. But I think we have a problem that I can not solve. And that’s because it is your problem, Aaron.

No Sam, you haven't. I told Stephanie she was wrong, which she is, and you got all noble trying to impress her thus you came to her defense with pages of mumbo jumbo and thus far, I've not seen anything any different.

SamCogar wrote:You have nurtured yourself into believing there is only one (1) clear-cut, absolute, precise, literal, definition for “sociopath” and that is “a person who is 100% lacking in any emotional feelings toward all other human beings[/b]. I hafta guess that if a person was only 99 44/100%lacking in emotional feelings toward another human being you apparently would not classify them as a sociopath.

No, psychologist and psychiatrist have done that.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, if a "runner" does not finish a Long Distance Race ..... does one refrain from calling him/her a "long distance runner"?

Race organizers label them as someone who didn’t finish the race whether they ran 1% of the race or 99% of the race.

SamCogar wrote:Aaron, here following are 2 exerted paragraphs from a 3 page article that should give you more insight of how your mind functions. Please read said, to wit:

What Makes You Uniquely "You"?

In Edelman’s grand theory of the mind, consciousness is a biological phenomenon and the brain develops through a process similar to natural selection. Neurons proliferate and form connections in infancy; then experience weeds out the useless from the useful, molding the adult brain in sync with its environment.

Many cognitive psychologists see the brain as a computer. But every single brain is absolutely individual, both in its development and in the way it encounters the world. Your brain develops depending on your individual history. What has gone on in your own brain and its consciousness over your lifetime is not repeatable, ever—not with identical twins, not even with conjoined twins. Each brain is exposed to different circumstances. It’s very likely that your brain is unique in the history of the universe. Neural Darwinism looks at this enormous variation in the brain at every level, from biochemistry to anatomy to behavior.

http://discovermagazine.com/2009/feb/16-what-makes-you-uniquely-you [/color]

I’ll have to read the entire article to respond but as I get we’re all different, Sam. We're all born with the ability to do good or bad and the road we takes depends on our nuturing, for the most part. My point is and has been that despite all of that, there is a segment of society that will buck their nuturing and respond differently. You've yet to disprove that statement.

I will give you credit for achieving your one goal Sam.

Stephanie wrote:The above post is why, in my opinion (humble or not so take your pick) Sammy Cogar is da MAN. He so damn clever and injects his own brand of humor (which I adore) into every post he makes.

I see through the smoke and mirrors you've posted for the past couple of days but you have managed to impress Stephanie, which I think we both know is your original agenda.

Unless of course you want to address the original issue that Stephanie and I were discussing, which is that man is in born with the ability to do both good and/or bad. I say humans are, she states rather emphatically they are not.

In less then 1000 words if possible and definately without all the bells and whistles, what say you Sammy?

Aaron wrote:First Sam, I don't have a bible. I have read The Bible as well as a little of The Koran which I found to be not well written thus it didn't interest me as much. I've also read some of the writings of Buddha and I did find those somewhat interesting and very similar to the teachings of Jesus.

As to Stephanie's fallacy, it is that she doesn't believe for a minute that people are inherently evil, or that they are born with evil streaks, or into sin, or any other such foolishness.

You say I'm wrong about this. Prove it, Aaron. Prove to us all that people are born inherently evil, or into sin, or with evil streaks. You call it fallacy..........prove me wrong, buddy.

Stephanie wrote:

Aaron wrote:First Sam, I don't have a bible. I have read The Bible as well as a little of The Koran which I found to be not well written thus it didn't interest me as much. I've also read some of the writings of Buddha and I did find those somewhat interesting and very similar to the teachings of Jesus.

As to Stephanie's fallacy, it is that she doesn't believe for a minute that people are inherently evil, or that they are born with evil streaks, or into sin, or any other such foolishness.

You say I'm wrong about this. Prove it, Aaron. Prove to us all that people are born inherently evil, or into sin, or with evil streaks. You call it fallacy..........prove me wrong, buddy.

I believe I already have with the introductions of sociopaths into the conversation. Unless of course you can contradict what the experts say. Whether you agree with those who believe they are born or those who think they are nurtured, either way, one must possess something within themselves that allows them to preform the dastardly deeds they do. Unless you can show me an example of how a Jeffry Dahmer is nurtured into eating young black males.

And you can wait until you finish up with Loyd's curriculm. I'm in no hurry.

Pal.

No, you've done nothing to prove your case, Aaron. You've found some people who think sociopaths are born. You haven't provided a single expert who believes they are "born". You provided a link to a google search. The one link I clicked from that was a forum, similar to this one, of lay people giving their opposing views. I can clearly demonstrate sociopath after sociopath who endured psychological, physical, and/or sexual abuse. I can show others who suffered serious head trauma. They were not born "evil".

By all accounts, Dahmer was a happy and had normal relationships when he was young. At age 6 he required surgery for a hernia and his father wrote in the book he authored that Jeffrey was never the same child after that surgery. Perhaps something happened to him in the hospital. Maybe he was unfortunate enough to have awoken during surgery and that was the initial trauma. One thing is for sure, he wasn't born "evil". Perhaps his mother neglected and/or abused him after giving birth to snowflake number 2. That happened around the same time.

Dahmer is dead. Even if he were alive there is no way of ever being sure we'd ever know what caused him to lack empathy. He was very young when his behavior altered and he may not have remembered any more anyway.

Mr. Dahmer sr. was a chemist for PPG Industries in Barberton, OH. By all accounts he was a nice man. I didn't know Lionel Dahmer but worked with some people who did.

Stephanie wrote:No, you've done nothing to prove your case, Aaron. You've found some people who think sociopaths are born. You haven't provided a single expert who believes they are "born". You provided a link to a google search. The one link I clicked from that was a forum, similar to this one, of lay people giving their opposing views. I can clearly demonstrate sociopath after sociopath who endured psychological, physical, and/or sexual abuse. I can show others who suffered serious head trauma. They were not born "evil".

By all accounts, Dahmer was a happy and had normal relationships when he was young. At age 6 he required surgery for a hernia and his father wrote in the book he authored that Jeffrey was never the same child after that surgery. Perhaps something happened to him in the hospital. Maybe he was unfortunate enough to have awoken during surgery and that was the initial trauma. One thing is for sure, he wasn't born "evil". Perhaps his mother neglected and/or abused him after giving birth to snowflake number 2. That happened around the same time.

Dahmer is dead. Even if he were alive there is no way of ever being sure we'd ever know what caused him to lack empathy. He was very young when his behavior altered and he may not have remembered any more anyway.

Surgery "nurtured" him to be a venture into committing gruesome murders that involved rape, torture, dismemberment, necrophilia and cannibalism? That's a bit of a stretch, don't you think!!! I do have one question though. If he awoke during surgery and that was his initial trauma, what exactly did it trigger to turn him into the man he became?

At any rate, I disagree with your first sentence as I believe Mr. Dahmer and his young life more then substantiates what I am saying. As you've yet to provide anything of substance to corroborate your theory, the ball is now in your court.

So would you accept this as substantiating my theory that evil is born in some people?

Stephanie wrote:assume that unborn babies are people too and nurturing begins at conception.

You think Dahmer's life proves you theory. You don't know, because you don't know his childhood. You didn't live it. You think he was born "evil" and all of a sudden it kicked in when he hit a certain age? I'm not sure what you think in that regard.

I think something, some event or series of events made him what he became. You cannot prove I'm wrong.

Can a person be born with some sort of mental defect? You bet, it happens all the time. That doesn't change the fact that "people", as in all of humanity, are born so defective they need a supernatural being to "save" them. That is what Christianity says, and that's specifically what I disagree with. That was the point of my initial comment, which you insist is wrong.

Stephanie wrote:You think Dahmer's life proves you theory. You don't know, because you don't know his childhood. You didn't live it. You think he was born "evil" and all of a sudden it kicked in when he hit a certain age? I'm not sure what you think in that regard.

I think something, some event or series of events made him what he became. You cannot prove I'm wrong.

Can a person be born with some sort of mental defect? You bet, it happens all the time. That doesn't change the fact that "people", as in all of humanity, are born so defective they need a supernatural being to "save" them. That is what Christianity says, and that's specifically what I disagree with. That was the point of my initial comment, which you insist is wrong.

Not true. You stated the world would be better off without Christianity and I disagreed with that statement. I still do. And I never argued that the world needs anyone to save them. That's for each person to decide for their self.

What I did was point out the good that is done in the name of Christianity and I stated that the bad that is done and blamed on Christianity is the result of individual actions and would happen if there were no Christian religion as all people are born inherently evil with the ability to become either good or evil.

You claimed I was wrong in that statement. I do not believe I was. I believe, and you must agree as you as your post regarding conception now proves, that there is a segment that is born evil. Sociopaths are merely an example. I also continue to believe that we all have the ability to commit both good and evil regardless of how we are nurtured. Nothing you or Sam has changed that opinion. If anything, both of you have only reaffirmed it.

As for proving anything, when you settle on a solid target, I'll see what I can do. The only thing I ask is that you try to keep it in the same ballpark to what I said and not attribute statements to me I never made.

As for proving anything, when you settle on a solid target

I'm not the person who continues to shift the conversation from one topic to another, Aaron.

all people are born inherently evil with the ability to become either good or evil.

Prove all people are born inherently evil, Aaron. That's about the most assinine thing you've ever said. Was Mother Theresa inherently evil? How about YOUR mom, was she "inherently evil"? Better still, how about Bray.......is she inherently evil?

Babies are born innocent, Aaron, not evil. You think "evil" is an essential characteristic of every human being because you have been programmed to believe that. I cannot fix that for you, but I'm thinking you can.

Stephanie wrote:

As for proving anything, when you settle on a solid target

I'm not the person who continues to shift the conversation from one topic to another, Aaron.

My premise has remained the same. If Christianity has made a difference in this world, it has been for the better as the evil done in the name of Christianity by men such as Hitler would have found other reasons to justify their actions.

Man would find that justification because they are born with ability to commit evil, each and every one of us. On top of that, a small segment are born inherently evil, someone with a predisposition to commit violent acts. Some evolve to murderers and rapist and the like while others live seeming normal productive lives simply because we don't know what goes on behind their facades.

Stephanie wrote:

all people are born inherently evil with the ability to become either good or evil.

Prove all people are born inherently evil, Aaron.

That's part of how you change the subject right there and what I refer to as a moving target. You left off half that quote and then expect me to prove it.

Stephanie wrote:That's about the most assinine thing you've ever said.

I'm glad to see I've topped the last most asinine thing I've ever said.

Stephanie wrote:Was Mother Theresa inherently evil?

Did Mother Theresa have the capability to do evil? I don't know. Perhaps she is the ying to Jeffery Dahmer's yang and as such was born pure. Or perhaps she was born just like billions of us, who in spite of being born with the ability to commit evil acts, do not. It happens every day.

One thing we do know is that she is an example of the good that has come from Christianity which refutes your theory that organized religion has been bad for humans.


[quote="Stephanie"]How about YOUR mom, was she "inherently evil"?

No, she wasn't evil but she most certainly had the capability to be one mean, evil woman. She was self centered, manipulative and controlling and when she wanted to, she could make life miserable. I was one of the few who from an early age didn't fall for her tactics.


[quote="Stephanie"]Better still, how about Bray.......is she inherently evil?

I certainly hope not but I guess I'll find out in time, won't I! Odds are, if she has the dispositon to be like her mother, and grandmothers, she will have the ability to be one mean bitch but as I'm her Poppy and so long as she's not killing and torturing cats and dogs or eating her lesbian dates after she rapes and kills them, I'll likely spoil her rotten.

Stephanie wrote:Babies are born innocent, Aaron, not evil. You think "evil" is an essential characteristic of every human being because you have been programmed to believe that. I cannot fix that for you, but I'm thinking you can.

Really? Wasn’t it you who just say a few days ago stated that nurturing begins at conception? So if a child is nurtured in the womb to be evil, why then would that child not be born evil?

You've also said a person can be born with a mental defect and that it "happens all the time." Once again, if that's the case, why can a child not be born evil or with a predisposition to commit evil?

Like I said, you present a moving argument. When you settle on one stance, let me know.