The Great Debate: ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE (OFFICIAL) - (Part 2/2)
Summary
TLDRこのスクリプトは、ヒトやチンパンジーの暴力性、親子関係、環境の影響、そして暴力行為を予測する脳機能の研究を巡って、専門家が議論している様子を記録しています。彼らは、非暴力運動の成功、子供への親権者技能の向上、そして暴力メディアの影響について話し合い、さらには未来において脳スキャンに基づく事前犯罪処罰システムの可能性と倫理的な懸念を提起しています。
Takeaways
- 🦍 チンパンジーは他の霊長類に対して暴力をふるうことがあるが、ゴリラに対しては暴力的な行動は報告されていない。
- 🤔 チンパンジーの暴力的な性質がホモサピエンスの他のホモイド種に対処する際の優位性に寄与した可能性があるが、具体的な因果関係は不明。
- 🧬 現代人類(ホモサピエンス)には、ネアンデルタール人の遺伝子が3~4%含まれており、完全に他の種を排除したわけではない。
- 🏘️ トゥルカナ族は言語や文化的な基準で定義される民族言語グループであり、特定の人々の数ではなく共有される文化的な基準が「イングループ」を定義する。
- 🔍 最小集団実験は、人間の集団内・外的认知境界が非常に柔軟であることを示しており、実験参加者は小さな基準に基づいてすぐに内集団と外集団を形成する。
- 👶 幼児期からの環境的な要因、特に母親の喫煙、栄養不足、アルコール摂取は、子宮内での胎児の発達に影響を与え、将来の犯罪行為につながる可能性がある。
- 👨👧 親権者への教育は不足しており、親権者技能を高めるプログラムが子供の非社会行為を減少させることが示されている。
- 👫 親権者と子供の関係は子供の成長に影響を与えるが、仲間環境も子供の言語、アクセント、ファッション、音楽の好みなど大きな環境的影響を及ぼす。
- 🎮 暴力的なビデオゲームやテレビ番組に曝露されることが、特にすでに非社会的で攻撃的な子供たちに対して、攻撃的な行動を少し増加させる可能性がある。
- 📉 実際には、暴力的なビデオゲームの人気が高まるにつれて、実際の暴力犯罪の比率は低下しているという仮説が示されている。
- ⚖️ 脳の機能に基づいて潜在的な犯罪者を事前に犯罪を非難し、処罰する「少数報告」スタイルのシステムを検討する必要性があるが、それによる個人の権利侵害が懸念される。
Q & A
チンパンジーは他の猿種に対して暴力的行動をとるでしょうか?
-チンパンジーはガリラや他の猿種と共存するが、暴力的な行動は報告されていません。ただし、人間に対しては時折危険な行動をとる可能性があります。
チンパンジーの暴力的行動はホモサピエンスの他のホモイド種に対処する際の優位性に寄与した可能性はありますか?
-ホモサピエンスが他のホモイド種と接触した際の暴力的な行動が優位性に寄与した可能性はあると考えられていますが、具体的な理由は不明です。
ターカーナ民族とはどのような集団ですか?
-ターカーナ民族は約100万人の人々で構成され、言語、文化、信仰、習慣を共有する民族言語集団です。
「イングループ」と「アウトグループ」を定義する要素は何ですか?
-「イングループ」と「アウトグループ」は、文化的基準、信仰、価値観、そして特定の社会的規範に基づいて定義されます。
最小集団実験とは何であり、人間の内集団と外集団の認識はどのように形成されるか?
-最小集団実験は、人々の内集団と外集団の認識が非常に柔軟であることを示す実験であり、小さな基準に基づいて人々をグループ分けすると、すぐに内集団と外集団の偏りが生じます。
子供の前頭葉皮質を刺激するために親はどのようなアクションを取るべきですか?
-妊娠中に健康的な食生活を送り、喫煙やアルコールの摂取を避けることが重要です。また、親としてのスキルを高めるプログラムも効果的です。
子供の周囲の環境はどのようにして彼らの行動に影響を与えるか?
-子供の周囲の環境、特に仲間グループは彼らの言語、アクセント、服装、音楽の好みに大きな影響を与えます。
暴力的なエンターテイメントは子供の暴力行為を促進する可能性はありますか?
-実験的研究表明、暴力的なビデオゲームやテレビ番組は、特に既に反社会的である子供の攻撃的な行動を若干増加させる可能性があります。
暴力性エンターテイメントの影響について心理学者の間でどのような議論があるか?
-多くの心理学者は暴力性エンターテイメントと実際の暴力行為の間に関連性があると考えていますが、その関連性が実際に重要な犯罪行為にまで及ぶかどうかについては議論が分かれる。
なぜ暴力は予想されるよりも少ないのですか?
-社会的構造、教育、経済的要素などが暴力行為を抑制する可能性があり、また、社会的連帯感や貿易の増加も暴力行為の減少に寄与しているとされています。
20世紀の住民が政府や戦争によって殺される可能性はどのくらいでしたか?
-20世紀の住民が生涯にわたって政府や戦争によって殺される可能性は1~2%でした。
現代の社会で戦争は減少していると言われていますが、イラクやアフガニスタンでのアメリカの介入はどのように説明されるべきですか?
-冷戦後の「警察官戦争」と呼ばれる現象として、開発された国々が内戦を止めたり、自国民を殺害する極めて悪い政権を排除するために兵力を派遣するケースがあります。
潜在的な犯罪者の脳機能を用いた事前犯罪処罰システムは危険ですか?
-脳スキャンや遺伝子検査が潜在的な犯罪者を特定するのに役立つかもしれない反面、彼らを犯罪を犯する前に検出して処罰するという考え方は倫理的に問題があると懸念されています。
Outlines
🦍 チンパンジーの暴力行為とホモ・サピエンスの優位性
この段落では、チンパンジーが他の霊長類に対して暴力的行為をとることと、それがホモ・サピエンスが他のホモイド種に優位性を持つ原因となっている可能性について議論されています。チンパンジーとゴリラが共存する環境では暴力的な行為は観察されておらず、ヒトに対しては時折危険な行為をとることがあるとされています。さらに、ホモ・サピエンスが他のホモイド種と接触した際の暴力的な行動が、彼らの優位性に寄与した可能性について触れられています。
🏘️ イングルーとアウトグルーの定義と影響
この段落では、イングルーとアウトグルーの概念、およびそれらがどのように形成されるかについて説明されています。ターカナ民族を例に、言語、文化、信仰、そして共通の行動様式を持つ民族言語集団として定義されています。また、最小集団実験に基づいて、人間が非常に柔軟に自己と他者を区別する能力があることが示されています。
👶 幼児期の環境と暴力行為の関係
この段落では、幼児期の環境が将来の暴力行為に与える影響について議論されています。妊娠中に母親が喫煙や栄養不足、アルコールを摂取する場合、子が大人になって犯罪者になるリスクが高まるとされています。また、親の育児スキル不足が子どもの非社会行為につながることも指摘されています。
🎮 暴力メディアの影響と社会的動向
この段落では、暴力的なメディアに曝露されることが子どもの攻撃的行動に与える影響について議論されています。実験的証拠から、暴力的なビデオゲームやテレビ番組は攻撃的行動を誘発する可能性があるとされています。しかし、その関連性については心理学者間で意見が分かれると指摘されています。
🕊️ 戦争の減少と社会の変化
この段落では、戦争が減少していることとそれに伴う社会の変化について議論されています。特に、冷戦後、開発された国々が民間紛争を止めたり、酷い政権を排除したりする「警察官的役割」を果たしていることが触れられています。また、イラクとアフガンの戦争がその一例として挙げられています。
🧠 脳機能と潜在犯罪者に対する社会の対応
最後の段落では、脳機能を用いて潜在的な犯罪者を予測し、その情報を使用して社会がどのように対応するかについて議論されています。少数報告のように犯罪を犯行する前に人を非難し、処罰するシステムに対する懸念が述べられています。
Mindmap
Keywords
💡暴力
💡ホモサピエンス
💡チンパンジー
💡ネアンデルタール人
💡集団心理学
💡イングループとアウトグループ
💡親子関係
💡環境的要因
💡暴力メディア
💡犯罪予防
💡アミグダラ
💡事前犯罪処罰
Highlights
Chimpanzees do not exhibit violence towards gorillas, another ape species sharing their habitat.
Chimpanzees have been known to occasionally harm humans, including killing babies in different countries.
The discussion suggests that war might have been a part of interspecies contact, contributing to Homo sapiens' dominance.
Dr. Krauss highlights the presence of Neanderthal genes in modern humans, indicating interbreeding rather than complete elimination.
The Turkana are described as an ethno-linguistic group sharing cultural norms, beliefs, and practices.
In-group and out-group boundaries are shown to be highly malleable, even influenced by trivial criteria.
Trade relationships and economic interdependence can expand cognitive boundaries of in-group perceptions.
Parenting skills are suggested as a critical factor in reducing antisocial behavior in children.
The proposal of making parent skills classes compulsory in high schools to improve parenting quality.
The role of peer environment in child development is emphasized, often more impactful than parenting.
Exposure to violent media has a modest effect on aggressive behavior, especially in at-risk children.
Christopher Ferguson raises doubts about the connection between media violence and real-life harm.
A comparison is made between the rates of violence in society and the rates of traffic accidents, suggesting different societal tolerances.
The decline in violent crime in the United States is noted alongside the rise in violent entertainment.
A strict metric for determining the success of a movement is discussed, focusing on removal of leaders or territorial independence.
The Iraq and Afghanistan wars are framed as 'policing actions' rather than traditional wars.
Concerns are raised about the potential for a pre-crime punishment system based on brain functioning.
Transcripts
okay that's it
ready okay
well that was fun
okay you have to get violent okay okay
so there are lots of questions and
they're really good questions and we
obviously don't have time for a lot of
them but we'll try and pick up a bunch
and I'm actually very pleased that there
are no anonymous questions which is an
so um
Jacob w-where are you Jacob yay okay so
we'll start with chimpanzees okay do
chimpanzees exhibit violence against
other species of apes and could this
quality have played a role in the
dominance of Homo sapiens over other
humanoids do chimpanzees exhibit
violence towards other species of apes
well there are two species of apes that
live in the same environments as
chimpanzees one is Garos and no one has
seen any anything like violence directed
by chimpanzees towards gorillas and you
think you know why the other species is
humans and chimpanzees have actually
occasionally harmed humans they have
killed babies on several different
occasions in several different countries
they are dangerous and now the second
part of the question was something like
could they could this explain the
dominance of Homo sapiens I guess
assuming maybe killing Neanderthals or
or or something like that I guess is the
idea
[Applause]
dr. Krauss gets a girl star and so does
the questioner certainly we don't know
what is responsible for sapiens out
competing all of the other hominoids but
you have to say that given the way in
which chimpanzees behave and given the
way in which are our own species has
behaved when we come into contact with
other members of our species that we did
not know before then you have to say
that war is very likely being a part of
the inter species contact but of course
we do know also that it wasn't totally
eliminating because we've all got our
three to four percent Neanderthal genes
well most of you anyway okay we'll go to
the XY nice actually a quick question
for Sarah I think from Sylvia wherever
you are
okay Sylvia is more quiet than jacob but
that's good what defines an in or out
grew an in or out group and who is turqu
anna and who is not is it just a
political tag and is that is that there
for the vowels okay so the Turkana are
about a million people and they
constitute what people would call an
ethno-linguistic group so they speak a
language and the most important thing is
that they share cultural norms beliefs
ideas and a way of doing things and so
that's in some ways what defines the
ethno-linguistic groups not a certain
number of people because we know that
ethno-linguistic groups have gone from
being really small a few hundred people
a thousand people in some
hunter-gatherer societies to
nation-states in which or religious
entities in which thousands and millions
of people constitute a shared cultural
group so in some ways the Turkana are a
tribe in which everybody agrees on
certain social norms on certain beliefs
about how to treat others how to do
things and that's what constitutes the
in-group
okay yeah the you know I teach
introductory psychology and one of the
staples of the introductory psychology
curriculum is the minimal group
experiment which shows that our
cognitive boundaries of what is an
in-group and out-group can be highly
malleable in this experiment you divide
people up as they come into the lab on
any trivial criterion you want you are
the fans of clay you're at the fans of
Kandinsky and immediately each group
thinks the worse of each other and they
favor their in-group members over
members the other group even by the way
if they're divided by their flip of a
point you're in that group you're in
that the other group and they
immediately start to distrust each other
for years this was thought of as a
rather depressing fact about our species
clearly it's the cognitive ability that
gets engaged by ethno-linguistic groups
in a more natural context but on the
other hand the boundaries are so elastic
that that we can expand them as well as
creating new divisions and one of the
things that seems to have been happen
it's behind the decline of war is that
we no longer as easily think of other
ethno-linguistic groups as the as out
groups a salient case would be the
attitude toward say the Japanese which
during needless to say during World War
two Japanese were treated as subhuman
there were all kinds of demeaning racial
stereotypes and now you know I think
most of us even if we tried could really
not muster a whole lot of hatred against
the Japanese if for no other reason that
they you know make our Nikon and Sony
appliances and indeed the rise of trade
has been credited as one of the things
that helps expand the cognitive
boundaries of who's in your group and
who isn't if people are are your trading
partners you're less likely to want them
to come to harm you need them to buy
your stuff you need them to sell you
their stuff okay anyone else okay Adrian
you you've provoked a lot of questions
you stimulated I don't know whether it
was the prefrontal cortex or the
amygdala you stimulate a lot
Sara asks the following question
I find this a fascinating question what
would you advise parents of young
children between newborn and seven years
old to do to help stimulate the free
prefrontal cortex great question Sara
very good one well first of all I think
this thing's you can do even before the
borns because you know we know that moms
during pregnancy who take smoke
cigarettes their offspring are three
times more likely to grow up to become
violent criminal offenders if she has
poor nutrition during pregnancy they're
two and a half times more likely to grow
up to become offenders we know that
alcohol during pregnancy raises the odds
also of juvenile delinquency and adult
crime so even before the child is born
there are things that people can do that
we can do society can do to take away
these turreted Jones which affects the
developing fetal brain which have
knock-on effects to future crime but I
imagine you know all of you aren't there
with the younger kids seven eight nine
turning away from my research parenting
you know parent skills it's something
that we need to do more of
we know that poor parenting is
associated with crime we know that
programs that enhance parenting skills
reduce antisocial behavior in children
and you know when I step back from that
and I think well I've got two kids and
I'm not such a great parent and I think
well you know was I ever taught how to
be a parent in school no I wasn't is
having a kid one of the most important
things that any of us ever do ever does
yes
it's a one thing we taught nothing about
in school so I wonder whether we would
ever make parent skills classes
compulsory to high schools secondary
school students to enhance
to enhance the level of parenting for
all of us and you know what's so bad
about that that's something I wonder
about that's it yeah
that's what we should all wonder about
that I think anyone else have any any
advice for parents yeah I obviously want
to concentrate on environmental levels
levers of influence on all aspects of
the developing child I tend to think
that we underestimate the role of the
peer environment and that parents
sometimes get blamed a little too
quickly a lot of studies that look at
effects of parenting never control for
the fact that parents are genetically
related to their kids and so if you have
parents who are likely to engage in a
particular kind of behavior they are
likely to have kids who are genetically
more likely more predisposed to do some
things as opposed to others and unless
you do the studies with adopted kids
it's very hard to distinguish whether
it's the parenting per se or the kind of
people who do the parenting which is not
to contradict the idea that people
should be instructed on the basic
qualifications for for not screwing up
your kid but I think far we shouldn't
though because it's so easy to acquaint
nurture environment with parenting we
forget about a source of the environment
that I think is far more consequential
and that is the add the peer group
something that's obviously much harder
to control but you when you grow up you
have the language of your peer group you
have the accent of your peer group you
wear the same styles of clothing you
listen to the same kinds of music that
is a massive environmental influence
that is a little harder to control
because there's no classes to control a
peer group it's a viral phenomenon where
fads come and go and things reach a
tipping point but a better understanding
of the dynamics that lead to whether
it's cool to be a juvenile delinquent or
it's cool to to stay in school would be
another way of influencing likelihood of
violence through an environmental
manipulation here's a question actually
related to the to the vial to an
environmental factor from Julia and this
is a questions often asked and it's
actually wasn't discussed anywhere here
so so it's open to everybody to jump in
quickly does exposure to violence or
violent entertainment encourage violent
behavior so who wants to start oh I know
a little bit about that it's not my area
of research but experimental studies
have shown that exposure to violent
video games violent TV does have a
little bit of effect in raising the
chance of aggressive behavior in the in
the in the kid it's especially true of
kids who are already at risk for being
antisocial and aggressive but there is
experimental research on that as well as
you know hundreds upon hundreds of
studies showing this relationship
contrarian good view of that it is
certainly true that if you were to poll
most psychologists they would say that
there there is a relationship but create
a Christopher Ferguson and others have
cast a lot of doubt on whether those
studies have anything to do with
violence as we really care about it like
real harm or just kids being a little
more rambunctious after they see a
roadrunner cartoon or filling out a
questionnaire and be more likely to
unscramble words so that they spell out
the violent words measures that are not
terribly connected with with real life
in fact if you look at I tend to think
that the concern over violent video
games is a kind of moral panic that
flies in the face of what's happened in
society as a whole
namely that during the era in which
violent video games including the
gruesome first-person shooter games just
exploded in popularity crime violent
crime in real life has fallen through
the floor the rate of violent crime in
the United States today is less than
half of what it was 20 years ago no one
completely understands the reason but
this is the same era in which in which
we'd have special effects in movies that
seem to increase the level of simulated
violence
and the popularity of violent video
games also a Harold Schechter who's
actually studied the history of violent
entertainment points out that pretty
much at all points of history people
take enormous pleasure in watching
scenes of gruesome violence enacted
before their eyes if you look at
Experian tragedies if you look at Punch
and Judy if you look at penny dreadfuls
and pulp fiction and the lives of the
saints the Old Testament there's
gruesome entertainment all the way
through and I think people do I tend to
think that people disconnected from
whether they want to commit violence in
real life anyone want to disagree with
both these gentlemen by the way the
solution of parenting is a P I'm a
grandparent it's a lot easier all the
fun and none of the trouble the one one
thing we might discuss or have on the
table Lisa's the question is why isn't
there more violence given how easy it is
to do and let me just give you a couple
of sort of comparative in comparisons
the worst societies pretty much are ones
that have a homicide rate of about one
hundred and a hundred thousand there's
some cases where it's even worse than
that but that's really bad and pretty
unusual and the question is that's that
your if you live in that society some of
the worst societies there are in terms
of homicide your chance of being killed
is about one in a thousand per year and
the question is why isn't that one in
five hundred or one and two hundred why
isn't why isn't it get higher and it's
so that an interesting sort of thing
I was talking to one of the people here
now in the conference about homicide in
Japan which is now so low it's a
question that could it conceivably get
lower I mean Japan and everybody else
has a certain quota murderous
Psychopaths and you're down to the level
where you basically at that level
details of fish in Japan by the way
[Laughter]
[Applause]
thank you one other one other statistic
everybody in here who is over the age of
fourteen lived during the 20th century a
very murderous time with big Wars and so
forth and also murderous governments
which killed more people than Boris and
I tried to calculate if you were a
resident of the 20th century what was
the likelihood you'd be killed either by
a government or by a war any kind of war
civil war international order whatever
and it comes out to be somewhere between
one and two percent over a lifetime
which would end of course they stopped
they stopped counting and so then the
question is if you're an American what's
your chance each year of being over a
lifetime of being killed an automobile
accident
it's about between one and two percent
and it's sort of a eerie comparison one
of obviously we're completely tolerant
of having this murders for
transportation the other we're not we're
not acceptable so it's I'm not sure what
and that's right that could be I'm not
sure what good that comparison does but
it's sort of interesting to see
go ahead yeah I you know I think that
knowing the numbers on rates of violence
is a highly informative and educational
way of approaching it to put things in
perspective which you don't do reading
the newspaper where the human mind
because of the availability heuristic
just judges probability based on how
easy it is to recall anecdotes and
events so a number of numbers matter so
let's just take as a comparison so
though the most violent countries in the
world today have a homicide rate of a
hundred four hundred thousand per year
Japan and other peaceful countries it's
less than one per hundred thousand per
year do you know what the figures are
for chimpanzees and Sarah do you know
what the figures are the Turkana the
estimates are in the low hundreds
something like one or two hundred which
is lower than some of the
hunter-gatherers certainly those figures
exist for the Turkana yeah I know the
data that the 1% of male adult mortality
is due to interpersonal violence that's
over a lifetime
yeah 1% but 50% from intertribal warfare
okay
well we'll move to Erica I'm trying to
get a question for everyone I want to
end with a another question but Erica
this is one that occurred to me too and
in your study how do you determine
change or success in a movement
what what what determines whether it's a
success mm-hmm well we use the pretty
strict metric there are a couple of
criteria the movement has to meet the
first is that it achieved either the
removal of a leader completely through
irregular means or they achieved
territorial independence that is de jure
independence not just de facto
independence and that would basically be
similar to the the selection criteria of
the cases we only looked at those cases
where they were trying to remove the
incumbent leader through a regular means
or that they were trying to achieve
territorial independence the second
criteria was that we looked at whether
the campaign could have had you know you
can sort of make a reasonably good
argument that the campaign had a direct
impact on that outcome
right so if an international power came
in and just took out the leader we
didn't count that as a campaign success
if the leader died in office of a heart
attack even though you might make a
conceivable argument that they were
stressed out because of the movement we
did we didn't want to give our skeptics
any ammunition so we didn't count that
as a success so we only looked at cases
where it was clear that the movement had
an impact on the outcome and that
outcome had to have occurred within a
year of the peak of the campaign meaning
that if you know campaign ends but then
four years later they get the outcome
that they wanted we didn't count that as
a success so this is actually a very
strict criterion of success we applied
it equally across both the nonviolent
and violent campaigns just to defend
against any skepticism that we were
going easy on the nonviolent cases okay
great
now we don't have much time we started
ten minutes late so I want to I want to
try and but I have one quick question
I'm sure a lot of PE this is the kind of
question to get a lot so I thought I'd
pick this one it's from Michelle and
said if war is on the decline and the
last war as many years ago how do you
explain the conflict of the u.s. was
engaged in in Iraq Afghanistan
Afghanistan right now yeah there's a
phenomena I call it policing lawyers
after the end of the Cold War
the notion was that there weren't really
big enemies anymore
among developed States and they all saw
of the world pretty much the same way so
exactly example there's a civil war in
Bosnia they didn't necessarily know how
to solve the problem but they all agreed
it was a bad thing
so since since the end of the Cold War
there's been amongst a bunch of policing
laws in which troops from developed
countries have been sent into various
areas to try to either stop civil wars
or to replace regimes that are basically
really horrible and killing their own
people and there's been a number of
these there they do not seem to be it
does not seem to be a growth industry
and so I would put both the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan particularly one in
Afghanistan in that category in general
no one wants to lose very many lives and
those kinds of things because they're
essentially humanitarian and the these
two wars are obviously tied to
of a belief and that they're relevant to
national interest at any rate I think
we're now living through something
called the Iraq syndrome or maybe the
Iraq Afghanistan syndrome and the the
enthusiasm for engaging in any more Wars
like that is extremely low as we saw
this summer last summer with the respect
to the Syrian thing no one even wanted
to think about even punitive bombing in
which no Americans would be killed to
punish Assad for using chemical weapons
and Barack Obama moving in that
direction backed away and I think we
lived after Vietnam with the Vietnam
syndrome
we lived after World War two with the
world war two syndrome there were no
Laura World War two is no more two
Korean Wars and I think we're now in the
Iraq syndrome and it's very unlikely
that they will venture into other
conflicts of that sort unless there's a
really direct attack on the United
States okay that's probably gonna call
some discussion during the break I bet
but the the last question I think since
we're gonna go to the future after the
break I thought this was appropriate and
and it's from Kathleen and it's sort of
directed towards you but but is there
any danger of society using the brain
functioning of potential criminals in a
sort of minority report style pre-crime
punishment system that is accusing and
condemning people before they commit a
crime based on their brain functioning
go ahead Kathleen I think it this is a
great question and I have a vested
interest in this insofar as my brain
scan looks very much like that of a man
who kills 64 people in the 12-year
period and I do not want to be locked up
for a crime I did not commit
just because of my brain scan or if you
do lock me up I want a chance to kill
some of my critics first
but yes but this is seriously it's it's
an important question and it's it's one
of concern the Minority Report
will we ever screen and intervene
earlier on in life because all the boxes
are checked the social boxes the
psychological the genetic the brain and
I think there's a legitimate concern
about that and partly guilty of this
because with my colleagues and I we
brain scanned adults in the community
and found that those with a smaller
volume of the amygdala part of the brain
that gives us a sense of compassion
conscience and remorse
those men with the smaller amygdala
volumes were four times more likely to
commit a violent act in the next three
years and that's prediction over and
above other risk factors we use to
predict violence like you know
employment background and so and so on
so I'm torn at one level no it would be
terribly wrong to detain someone before
they've committed a criminal act on the
other hand we have to make decisions
every day about which prisoners to let
out early because they're not at risk
and which prisoners to keep in prison
because they are dangerous and if brain
imaging and genetics in the future gives
us added value in making more accurate
decisions about who are the risky people
in society well wouldn't it be wrong not
to use that information okay well I know
that that's gonna lead to discussion so
I'm going to stop it one of the things
we try and do in Origins is is is deal
with open questions questions that
haven't been resolved fundamental
questions where we might learn things
and and and of course one of the things
I've seen from this meeting is that this
is such a question and questions that
allow us to confront conventional wisdom
and and to try and make the world a
better place and I want to thank this
panel for illuminating these issues
for us before
we will see you in the very short future
to discuss the future have a good
intermission
浏览更多相关视频
【ゆっくり解説】当てはまると危険!今すぐ別れるべき親の特徴7選
The Great Debate: ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE (OFFICIAL) - (Part 1/2)
レオザ家族に深刻な問題が発生しましたのでご報告します。【レオザ切り抜き】
子どもの頭が激烈に悪くなり中学受験で失敗しやすくなる家庭の共通点を5つ紹介します
【アダルトチルドレン:AC】7つの特徴/親子逆転?親の感情をお●●してきた●●な人たち…他人に●●されるとムカつく!気を使い過ぎる?心あたりありませんか?【橋本翔太】心理相談ライブ/12月25日配信
0~12歳【子育ての大切な価値観】今の幸せ・時間を大切にしてほしい/子育て勉強会TERUの育児・知育・幼児教育・子どもの教育講義
5.0 / 5 (0 votes)