Archive for April, 2016

VIOLENCE IT’S NATURAL LET IT BE.. Part 1

6 VIOLENCE IT’S NATURAL LET IT BE

“If only it were all so simple! If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?” Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956.

Having spoken about the path and life of a warrior, it’s relevant that I include a chapter on violence and aggression, I do not want this to dissolve into a story of evil and the good fight to protect the innocent, however it is important that we at least have a fleeting glance into the dark side of human nature. Ultimately my book Volitional Attention Training is about the ability for humans to fight and behave in a manner that confronts violence and the science involved in training and teaching others to have that same ability. It’s also important that we understand what we are training for, as violence covers a huge and diverse spectrum of human behaviour, just like our own perspectives are different given the experiences that shape them, violence is different depending on the culture and the mechanisms that drive it.

To some, any violence is wrong, any aggression is wrong, evil has to be banished from our lives forever, they sit firmly on the fence that believes God sees all and that one should not do harm. This is certainly not going to be a chapter on religion and violence; instead I will focus a little more on the evolutionary explanations for violence within the species homeo-sapian.

During previous writing within my book, I introduced Hobbs to the reader and his short statement on the nature of man, this helped to set the scene on why man undertakes violence and the reasons for such actions. Violence in itself is a vast subject and one that has had many books dedicated to the subject, what sticks in my mind is a story that was first introduced by Jainism, a religion traditionally known as Jaina dharma, originally from India. Jainism teaches that the path one should follow is one of non-violence and peace towards all living things, the story is about a king who was once trying to understand how people saw things in the world. He invited five blind men to his palace, he then asked each one to touch an elephant and then to describe what they felt based on their experience. The first touched the trunk and said “elephants are like snakes” the second one who grabbed the tail said “no, to me it feels more like a rope” the third felt the side of the elephant and said “it feels like a wall” the forth put his arms around the leg and said “elephants are more like pillars” the last felt the ear and said “elephants are more like winnowing fans” Hardy (2011). This analogy was also used by Rory Miller in his book Meditations on Violence, to put over the simple fact that violence means different things to different people and that it is a vast subject.

The first thing that should be done is to categorize violence, this will enable us to approach the subject from a specific viewpoint. There is no doubt that many may disagree with this, however we have to start somewhere. Violence has two very basic categories that can then be broken down into further subcategories, a project in the making is the categorisation and explanation of these, so I will not dwell too long here. One area that we will need to cover is why? Why do humans kill? Not only do we kill other humans we also kill in some way most other members of the species ‘Animalia’ all creatures great and small, as well as the plant and ecosystems that supports all life.

Category 1 Social Violence.

Social Violence (SV) encompasses all the violence that as a social people we have come to accept as part of the behaviour of humans. In this category we find all types of sport that involves human aggression, boxing and MMA are the most popular due to their media exposure. We have violence within the community in which we live, especially when it involves a fight or aggression towards another individual, and although not a comfortable subject, aggression and violence by the young from very early ages until they reach adulthood. There are some cultural differences that will become apparent but in the main that covers a lot of violence.

Category 2 A Social Violence.

A Social Violence (ASV) is everything that is not in the social category. The type of violence that usually provokes a violent reaction is found in this level, here we find War, murder, rape, sexual abuse, killings that involve mutilation, gross, graphical use of blades, genocide, infanticide, what is interesting is that many of the words that we use to describe killing end with ‘cide’. This word is again taken from Latin, it is used as a suffix that means “a killer of” or “a person or thing that kills”.

Cultural Excuses

As a species, we are undoubtedly violent, however this propensity to violence is within some cultures considered normal, it is only what could be called “civilized society” that considers violence to be unhealthy and immoral. Countries that consider themselves to be civilized are also the very same countries that have, in some cases, the highest amount of recorded crime. The U.S for example has arguably the highest crime rate in the world and although this may have seen a slight drop in some years it still remains high and has started to escalate. People commit all types of violent acts against animals, plant life, property and even themselves, this writing will only be concerned with violence against other members of the human species and let’s not forget that often violence is carried out by more than one individual, it can take the form of organized violence by a group or gang, all the way to violence committed by the state, ‘War’

Depending upon how severe we class violence and also include aggression, we may find that harmful behaviour also falls within this category. If we are destroying the environment we are also, by default, killing other humans as a result, drought, pharmaceutical discharge, unsafe food, are we not all contributing in some way to this type of violence?

Violence regularly features as a bi-product of a game, within football in the UK violent fights often continue well beyond the finishing of the game and into the streets and pubs of the local area. Not a night goes by where the local or national news is not reporting on violence. It pervades our homes through the box in the corner of the room invading like a swarm of locus; it seeks out young and old with no care for the consequences, by portraying violence within children’s cartoons and entertainment in general, which includes video and computer games. Is it no wonder that our society is still a violent one, having said that according to Gardener (2008) in his book the Science of Fear, we are living in the safest times throughout the whole history of mankind?

Evolution

Darwin introduced the concept of evolution by natural selection in 1858 and from this time man has developed theory upon theory as to what processes have enabled humans to become the dominant species on the planet. One of the supporting arguments is that living beings tend to produce more offspring than the environment can effectively support with its natural resources. The result of competition means that violence has its place in providing a means to resolve conflicts between those that have resources necessary for survival and reproduction and those that don’t. This trait for violence would, according to Darwin’s theory, select those that have the capacity for violence over and above those that do not, therefore over thousands of years of evolution stone age man became more and more adapt at bringing violence to bear on his competitors in order to survive and have the resources required for reproduction.

In his book Selfish Gene, Dawkins (1976) describes the individual, as a selfish machine programmed to do whatever is best for its genes as a whole. He puts it in very clear language, to a survival machine, another survival machine which is not its own child or another close relative, is part of its environment, like a rock or a river or a lump of food, it is something that gets in the way, or it is something that can be exploited, it differs from a rock or a river in one important respect, it is inclined to hit back, because it too is a survival machine that holds its immortal genes in trust for the future and it to will stop at nothing to preserve them. Natural selection favours genes that control their survival machines in such a way that they make the best use of their environment, this includes making the best use of other survival machines, both of the same and of different species. With this in mind it is no wonder that mankind became so adapt at the tool of violence, as in its simplest form this is exactly what it is, you can also now begin to see how this behaviour begins to show itself in our very young children, this I cover in more depth both later in my book and within this blog.

Before I move on, it’s important that violence in children is put into perspective as it would seem that this wiring for violence is inherent in every child and begins to show itself very early during the terrible twos. According to Pincker (2012) the psychologist Richard Tremblay has measured rates of violence throughout the normal lifespan of humans, rather concerning is his conclusion that the most violent period in an individual’s life is that time when they are two, we may have expected this period to be in adolescence or young adult hood, but no, it was when we were hardly old enough to even talk. The usual behaviour shows itself as hitting, biting, kicking and general moody behaviour, this trend of violent behaviour then begins to slowly decrease throughout the infant’s early years. It is therefore of little comfort that these typical children are not capable of wielding any physical tool of violence or else we could see a high number of two year old, on two year old, killings.

The process of natural selection has to also have the ability to pass traits on to future generations, if this were not the case, we would never have adapted to our environment. What this means is that there has to be a mechanism to pass genes on with, this is achieved through heritability and first shows itself during that all too well known stage of the terrible twos.

The blank slate theory was once popular, it was originally believed that parents or any significant caregiver could harm their children by mistreating them, which of course is absolutely true. It was the philosopher John Locke who first proposed the idea that any child could be molded into whatever person he desired, politician, soldier, scholar, this theory became known as the “Educationalists” view and considered that every child born was a “blank slate” and as such they were intellectually and morally clean with no preconceived ideas or knowledge.

This understanding that a child was neither good or bad was at opposite ends to the popular religious views at the time who considered that a child was born inherently bad and that their sins had to be beaten out of them, subduing them to the rod and will power of their masters. A child’s nature therefore is easily manipulated during its early years and those that are close to them have the ability to affect intelligence, social skills, mental abilities and personality. This has been discovered to be not true, however due to later studies that researched separated and adopted children, it was found that they mirrored their peers in values and social identities, indicating that social interaction helped develop these children according to the doctrines and culture of their caregivers, not of their parents. Pincker (2012) states that studies of adopted children showed that they ended up with personalities and iQ scores that are correlated with those of their biological siblings but un-correlated with those of their adopted siblings, this confirms that adult personality and intelligence are more a result of genes than of social environment. What has this got to do with violence? Well there is a theory that violence has a genetic marker and that it is inherited rather than learned.

The above is a short extract from my book Volitional Attention Training.

References

Dawkins, R. (1976) The Selfish Gene. Publishers, Oxford University Press.

Gardener, D. (2008). The science of fear. Published July 17th 2008 by Dutton Adult.

Hardy, G. Great minds of the Eastern Intellectual Tradition. The Great Courses. University of North Carolina at Ashville, Yale University. Downloaded 2014. Publisher The Teaching company (2011).

Pinker, S. (2012) The Better Angles of our Nature. Why Violence has Declined. Published by Penguin Books 2012.

Solzhenitsyn, A, I. (1973). The Gulag Archipelago: 1918-1956. An Experiment in Literary Investigation. Published by Harper and Row Publishers Inc. (1974).

, , , , , , ,

Leave a comment

%d bloggers like this: