Is Social Conditioning or Biology responsible for negative behavior?

[Flolfolil]

If biology is responsible, then we are all "lower" beings with the chance of becoming "higher" so negative actions come from within. Thoughts?

 

If social conditioning is responsible, then we all start as perfect enlightened beings. If this is true, where do negative actions come from? It doesn't make one ounce of sense that we could be born perfect and then deviate from it due to social conditioning. Where does the "evil" come from to corrupt us? Thoughts?

[三江源]

It doesn't make one ounce of sense that we could be born perfect and then deviate from it due to social conditioning.

I'd love it if you could explain your rationale here.

Edited June 16, 2013 by cat

[Flolfolil]

I'd love it if you could explain your rationale here.

Gladly.

 

i just wanted to see what people who actually believe in good and evil have to say about this, because i don't

 

i am admitting that it is something that i don't understand. i never declared my misunderstanding as an absolute, but it seems like you took it to mean that. my apologies

[Seeker of Wisdom]

Ignorance -> negative behaviour -> negative impressions in substrate consciousness -> born in a realm around people who reinforce the negative behaviour and with a physiology that supports it -> more ignorance and negative behaviour unless you try to improve yourself.

 

This is a 'chicken or egg' situation.

[johndoe2012]

.

Edited August 18, 2013 by chris d

[ion]

Infants are blank sheets, totally receptive to the most promminent features of their environment which are the people in their lives. Although we may be born with certain tendencies, our one and only survival skill/instinct is to emmulate and become part of the culture we're born into.

 

Culture is our survival mechanism and we absorb and reflect it as we grow into it. That is why an infant can be born anywhere, Sweden for instance, but if that child were somehow removed from its biological parents and transplanted into a pygmy group in Africa, that child would grow up a pygmy, with a pygmy world view, pygmy body language, and speaking pygmy language. That person would feel more comfertable with its pygmy family and would find the customs of its biological relatives to be foreign and strange.

 

That child would not transfer any of the Swedish culture it was born from to is adopted culture.

 

Enculturation is the process where by the culture is transmitted from the culture to its off spring, it is how we learn to speak the "language" and assimilate its customs, likes, preferences, moral code and virtually EVERYTHING we consider to be our selved and what makes us uniquie.

 

Our psyches are not something we are born with but are 100% programmed starting at the time of birth.

 

There has not yet been a seat of consciousness within the human brain, a place that can be identified as the reference point to which the human experienced is had; the ego has no biological aspect. It has been discovered that we have a type of specialized neurons that record the process of an event being seen while also firing the neurons to experience the act it is witnessing.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mirror_neuron

"

A mirror neuron is a neuron that fires both when an animal acts and when the animal observes the same action performed by another.^[1][2][3] Thus, the neuron "mirrors" the behavior of the other, as though the observer were itself acting. Such neurons have been directly observed in primate and other species including birds. In humans, brain activity consistent with that of mirror neurons has been found in the premotor cortex, the supplementary motor area, the primary somatosensory cortex and the inferior parietal cortex."

 

This is part of how behaviour spreads through a culture from person to person and culture to culture and part how a person assimilates a culture and largely how sin spreads through time space.

 

I think that most of us have concluded that ego is pretty much the sourcde of all negative behavior.

 

 

Because there is no biological ego, and because of our bilogical cultural nature, being that we are born to be components of a whole, I think it is safe to believe that the ego is a developed concept and not a reflection of our nature. Ego may be an inevidable consequence of being born into a culture of egos, or even of being human and sensing as linear form and space, the ultimate self destructive by-product, but because we are not born with one it is possable to never aquire one if you were born into an egoless culture, and in one there would be no sin or negativite behavior.

[Flolfolil]

but where do the egos come from for people that do have them? You can't just say "society" because society itself had to get it from somewhere

 

the only theory that makes any sense to me is "anything that can happen will happen, just because" and i have mixed feelings about this

[ralis]

To answer your question is more left to science classes. Do want or need others to think for you? Do you read books or are you in the least bit curious? Critical thinking skills? Evolution is about the study of survival, adaptation and conditioning.

 

I would start with this book by Gregory Bateson.

 

http://www.amazon.com/Steps-Ecology-Mind-Anthropology-Epistemology/dp/0226039056/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1371414366&sr=1-1&keywords=gregory+bateson

Edited June 16, 2013 by ralis

[Flolfolil]

Do want or need others to think for you? Do you read books or are you in the least bit curious? Critical thinking skills?

Want. No one needs anything if you think about it the way i do.

 

Obviously, or else i wouldn't be doing anything but laying down waiting for death.

 

Can you tell me the difference between thinking and critical thinking? i could just look it up, but if i do and post about what i read something makes me think you will tell me i am wrong no matter what conclusion i draw.

[ralis]

Want. No one needs anything if you think about it the way i do.

 

Obviously, or else i wouldn't be doing anything but laying down waiting for death.

 

Can you tell me the difference between thinking and critical thinking? i could just look it up, but if i do and post about what i read something makes me think you will tell me i am wrong no matter what conclusion i draw.

 

Why not research it and find out for yourself, which is always a great place to begin. Bateson's books are highly recommended.

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/138688905/Gregory-Bateson-Mind-and-Nature-Bookos-org

 

http://www.scribd.com/doc/131741057/Steps-to-an-Ecology-of-Mind

 

On Scribd you can read these books for free. Bateson for some is difficult reading. I recommend jumping ahead of one's comfort zone as a personal challenge.

Edited June 16, 2013 by ralis

[Flolfolil]

okay, thanks

[zanshin]

I don't know which it is or even if it has to be one of those two things. Talked to guy this weekend who thinks personality is a result of what's going on at conception. Sort of interesting would probably be really hard to test since most parents might not know exactly when, or remember, or be honest about details.

[teknix]

I think that it is society that decides what behavior is negative, and it is biology that allows us to think or ponder society, so you excluded atleast one middle option.

Edited June 16, 2013 by teknix

[Tsunami_MAPUA]

I couldn't help but think you watched some Blueprint Decoded.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gh8tinbBxpQ

 

On topic, as far as some Eckhart Tolle things I read, we're born perfect, but once we developed ego, we lost touch of that egoless state. No different from the Christian tradition of losing the sinless state.

 

But reading Bruce Frantzis, he talked about "birth trauma." I'm not sure about that, but that's also something to consider.

Edited June 16, 2013 by Tsunami_MAPUA

[HoldorFold]

I've studied proper astrology for about 10 years and can say that there are aspects in an astrological chart which can predispose someone to negative behavior from birth. These aspects can point to negative events in the person's early life though which end up shaping their behavior later on. These events are karmic/fated to happen but at the same time there is always free will and choices in life. There will be opportunities to work on becoming a better person and the person will have to make a choice which path they want to go down.

Edited June 16, 2013 by HoldorFold

[idiot_stimpy]

Where does the "evil" come from to corrupt us? Thoughts?

 

From the 'thoughts'.

[hydrogen]

No Right, No Wrong

 

Do you really believe it? Or just another catch phrase of the day?

 

If you do, then why are there positive and negative? Good and evil? Higher and lower?

 

I guess the "no right, no wrong" model won't work. Besides, what's wrong with being "wrong"? Or what's right about being "right"?

Edited June 17, 2013 by hydrogen

[Marblehead]

Is Social Conditioning or Biology responsible for negative behavior?

 

If we are going to make value judgements (and we will regardless of what we think) then the answer to your question is: Both.

[三江源]

.

Edited April 23, 2015 by 三江源

[Apech]

Being wrong feels weird.. being in the wrong place is an unpleasant feeling of being skewed off balance. Energy too wiry and thin or too inert or too fiery or something like that.

 

Being right inside feels harmonious and relaxed.

 

Being wrong in a thought is irrelevant so long as someone canhelp to correct it. Being right in a thought is just convenient and expedient.

 

Being right in deed is nice for everyone. Being wrong in deed is not much good for anyone.

 

Is negativity always wrong? And what does being right mean anyway?

[三江源]

.

Edited April 23, 2015 by 三江源

[skydog]

.

Edited June 17, 2013 by skydog

[de_paradise]

Being wrong feels weird.. being in the wrong place is an unpleasant feeling of being skewed off balance. Energy too wiry and thin or too inert or too fiery or something like that.

 

Being right inside feels harmonious and relaxed.

 

Being wrong in a thought is irrelevant so long as someone canhelp to correct it. Being right in a thought is just convenient and expedient.

 

Being right in deed is nice for everyone. Being wrong in deed is not much good for anyone.

A good example that illustrates this is polygraph tests, which are so good at measuring lies because they measure how the body is somehow upset by this wrong behavior. If telling the truth and lying were the same, the body wouldn't be stressed, and show up on the polygraph measurements.

[Flolfolil]

Do you really believe it? Or just another catch phrase of the day?

 

If you do, then why are there positive and negative? Good and evil? Higher and lower?

 

I guess the "no right, no wrong" model won't work. Besides, what's wrong with being "wrong"? Or what's right about being "right"?

First off i love the misquote

 

Secondly, what i mean by "No right No Wrong" is that when someone interprets something as right or wrong, that is just there own personal perception - and UNIVERSAL right and wrong don't exist. The "No Right" part accounts for the fact that i could be completely wrong and there could be an actual universal moral code. This "catch phrase" isn't some rigid barrier i put up around myself, but an extremely fluid general guideline.

 

i go by what is useful and what is not useful to me. If something upsets me, that is just me feeling sympathy due to brain chemicals and not some morality imposed on me by some deity. If something makes me happy, there is a big chance that i stepped on something else to get that happiness. Take a part off of a plant to eat? That made you happy, but it harmed the plant. Depending on the perspective it could be considered good or bad. (Also keep in mind that i don't believe we are higher animals and that plants are simply here to serve us)

 

This thread was intended for people who DO believe in good and evil. The entire point was to get people thinking about their perception of good and evil and how trivial it can be. But if everyone wants to pick it apart and make it about me, go right ahead. You are only talking to yourself.

[Marblehead]

But if everyone wants to pick it apart and make it about me, go right ahead. You are only talking to yourself.

Hehehe. Isn't it a nice feeling to be the center of attention?