Criminal Biopsychology

Alexander Kulla kulla at
Fri Mar 20 10:31:42 EST 1998

> Fernando Barbosa wrote:
> >
> > Dear newsgroup friends,
> >
> > I'm conducting a doctoral research inscribed in the scientific area of
> > biopsychology of crime. I'm trying to prove that the relapsing criminals
> > have a reduction in the biopsychological resources needed to choose
> > alternative behaviours to crime. So, they do not resist to an opportunity of
> > a criminal action and, as matter of fact, they create their own
> > opportunities. From a neuropsychological and psychofisiological point of
> > view, they have a reduction in their freedom of choice and behaviour.
> > I would appreciate contributions about how to assess this reduction in the
> > degrees of freedom within the neuropsychological and psychofisiological
> > research paradigms and tools.
> >
Second part (as you like).

I wonder what the natural history of crimes is? If we look on the
evolution of our social system and the evolvement of law and order in
our societies is there something we can learn about people excluding
themselves from that?

Sorry to bother you with my simple thoughts:

I reffer to crimes in many cases as doing things to fulfill my own needs
no matter which other person may suffer from this. O.k. let´s make it
simple: I see somebody having something that I would like to have (money
in a wallet). 
Normal thinking: Well, that´s life, you always come across people who,
for one or the other reason have more money then I do... Or: Well, this
guy has a lot of money, I wonder if I worked harder (or cleverer) maybe
one day I will have the same standart...
Criminal thinking: I would like to have the money, so I just take it
away from this guy (most criminal: smashing the head, criminal: some
tricky betraying, less criminal: raising taxes).
The in our view most criminal way, eat or die, is maybe the most common
form among not socially attached life forms. The obvious disadvatage of
this sort: Maybe the guy is stronger than me, he will smash my head
instead... For the direct aim there is a very high danger to pay a very
high price (many mathematicle models exist for this sort of
The more the social system is evolved, the more we have the situation
that in an ideal case we share risks and outcome for the benefit of a
"better" life (whatever better might mean, different people have
different thoughts about this definition). Behaviour within this society
could be something like bell-shaped comparing individuals to behaving
from totally altruistic to totally egoistic (I don`t really know if it
is bell shaped or whatever, just an assumtion!). Law in this construct
would be a mechanismen to avoid fake and betraying and in this respect
self-justice is more and more institutionalized to abide to the needs of
a member of a society and not of an outstanding individual. 
If we break the law, we- in a more drastic way than with our everyday
egoismen- try to take an advantage for the costs of others. How big this
insult to society is, I guess it depends on the crime we commit.

So if on and on we break the law, we first of all don`t give a shit to
the values of society.

The reasons for this must be evaluated:
Never learned the concept of society, Never understood the concepts of
society, Never was included in society, Don`t see any other chance,
Being a natural asshole, Willing to pay the price (if judgement day
comes at all), physiological disorder...

Any more suggestions?

More information about the Neur-sci mailing list