|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
Body Pleasure and the Origins of Violence
By Richard Kieninger (excerpted from James W. Prescott: The Futurist, April, 1975)
Human violence is a global epidemic. All over the world, police face angry mobs, hijackers seize airplanes and terrorists bomb buildings. Wars rage in the Mid-east and South-east Asia. Meanwhile, crime in the United States grows even faster than inflation.
Unless the causes of violence are isolated and treated, we will continue to live in a world of fear and apprehension. Unfortunately, violence is often offered as a solution to violence. Many law enforcement officials advocate ‘get tough’ policies as the best method to reduce crime. Imprisoning people, our usual way of dealing with crime, will not solve the problem because the causes of violence lie in our basic values and the way in which we bring up our children and youth. Physical punishment and violent films and TV programs teach our children that physical violence is normal. But these early life experiences are not the only or even the main source of violent behavior. Recent research supports the view that the deprivation of physical pleasure is a major ingredient in the expression of physical violence. The common association of sex with violence provides a clue to understanding physical violence in terms of deprivation of physical pleasure.
Unlike violence, pleasure seems to be something the world cannot get enough of. People are constantly in search of new forms of pleasure, yet most of our ‘pleasure’ activities appear to be substitutes for the natural sensory pleasures of touching. We touch for pleasure or for pain or we do not touch at all. Although physical pleasure and physical violence seem worlds apart, there seems to be a subtle and intimate connection between the two. Until the relationship between pleasure and violence is understood, violence will continue to escalate.
As a developmental neuropsychologist I have devoted a great deal of study to the peculiar relationship between violence and pleasure. I am now convinced that the deprivation of physical sensory pleasure is the principal root cause of violence. Laboratory experiments with animals show that pleasure and violence have a reciprocal relationship, that is, the presence of one inhibits the other. A raging, violent animal will abruptly calm down when electrodes stimulate the pleasure centers of its brain. Likewise, stimulating the violence centers in the brain can terminate the animal’s sensual pleasure and peaceful behavior. When the brain’s pleasure circuits are “on” the violence circuits are “off” and vice-versa. Among human beings, a pleasure-prone personality rarely displays violence or aggressive behaviors, and a violent personality has little ability to tolerate, experience or enjoy sensuously pleasing activities. As the experience of either violence or pleasure goes up, the other goes down.
The reciprocal relationship of pleasure and violence is highly significant, because certain sensory experiences during the formative periods of development will create a neuropsychological predisposition for either violence-seeking or pleasure-seeking behaviors later in life. I am convinced that various abnormal social and emotional behaviors resulting from what psychologists call “maternal-social” deprivation, that is, a lack of tender, loving care, are caused by a unique type of sensory deprivation, somato-sensory deprivation. Derived from the Greek word for “body,” the term refers to the sensations of touch and body movement which differ from the senses of sight, hearing, smell and taste. I believe that the deprivation of body touch, contact and movement are the basic causes of a number of emotional disturbances that include depressive and autistic behaviors, hyperactivity, sexual aberration, drug abuse, violence and aggression.
These insights were derived chiefly from the controlled laboratory studies of Harry F. and Margaret K. Harlow at the University of Wisconsin. The Harlows and their students separated infant monkeys from their mothers at birth. The monkeys were raised in single cages in an animal colony room, where they could develop social relationships with the other animals through seeing, hearing and smelling, but not through touching or movement. These and other studies indicate that it is the deprivation of body contact and body movement—not deprivation of the other senses—that produces the wide variety of abnormal emotional behaviors in these isolation-reared animals. It is well known that human infants and children who are hospitalized or institutionalized for extended periods with little physical touching and holding develop almost identical abnormal behaviors, such as rocking and head banging.
Although the pathological violence observed in isolation-reared monkeys is well documented, the linking of early somato-sensory deprivation with physical violence in humans is less well established. Numerous studies of juvenile delinquents and adult criminals have shown a family background of broken homes and/or physically abusive parents. These studies have rarely mentioned, let alone measured, the degree of deprivation of physical affection, although this is often inferred from the degree of neglect and abuse. One exceptional study in this respect is that of Brandt F. Steele and C. B. Pollock, psychiatrists at the University of Colorado, who studied child abuse in three generations of families who physically abused their children. They found that parents who abused their children were invariably deprived of physical affection themselves during childhood and that their adult sex life was extremely poor. Steele noted that almost without exception the women who abused their children had never experienced orgasm. The degree of sexual pleasure experienced by the men who abused their children was not ascertained, but their sex life, in general, was unsatisfactory. The hypotheses that physical pleasure actively inhibits physical violence can be appreciated from our own sexual experiences. How many of us feel like assaulting someone after we have just experienced orgasm?
The contributions of Freud to the effects of early experiences upon later behaviors and the consequences of repressed sexuality have been well established. Unfortunately time and space does not permit a discussion of his differences with Wilhelm Reich and this writer concerning his “Beyond the Pleasure Principle.”
The hypothesis that deprivation of physical pleasure results in physical violence requires a formal systematic evaluation. We can test this hypotheses by examining cross-cultural studies of child-rearing practices, sexual behaviors and physical violence. We would expect to find that human societies which provide their infants and children with a great deal of physical affection (touching, holding, carrying) would be less physically violent than human societies which give very little physical affection to their infants and children. Similarly, human societies that tolerate and accept premarital and extramarital sex would be less physically violent than societies which prohibit and punish premarital and extramarital sex.
Cross-Cultural Studies of Physical Violence Cultural anthropologists have gathered exactly the data required to examine this hypothesis for human societies and their findings are conveniently arranged in R. B. Textor’s A Cross Cultural Summary (HRAF Press, 1967). Textor’s book is basically a research tool for cross-cultural statistical significant correlations from 400 culture samples of primitive societies.
Infant Neglect and Adult Violence Human societies differ
greatly in their treatment of infants. In some cultures, parents lavish
physical affection on infants, while in others, the parents physically punish
their infants. The author, neuropsychologist James W. Prescott of the U.S.
Government’s National Institute of Child Health and Human Development,
believes that the pleasure-receiving infants grow into peaceable adults while
the pleasure-deprived infants are likely to become violent when they reach
adulthood. Prescott made a study of anthropological data and found that those societies that give their infants the greatest amount of physical affection have less theft and violence among adults, thus supporting the theory that deprivation of bodily pleasure during infancy is significantly linked to a high rate of crime and violence.
The tables below show how the physical affection or punishment given infants correlates with other variables. For example, cultures that inflict pain on infants appear to be more likely to practice slavery, polygamy, etc. Societies which inflict pain and discomfort upon their infants tend to neglect them as well. In the tables, N refers to the number of cultures in the comparison while P is the probability that the observed relationship could occur by chance and was calculated by the Fisher Exact Probability Test.
Table 1 - High Infant Physical Affection
The coded scales on infancy were developed by cultural anthropologists Barry, Bacon and Child; on sexual behavior by Westbrook, Ford and Beach; and on physical violence by Slater.
Table 2 - Pain Inflicted on Infant By Parent or Nurturing Agent
Adult physical violence was accurately predicted in 36 of 49 cultures (73%) from the infant physical affection variable. The probability that a 73% rate of accuracy could occur by chance is only four times out of a thousand.
Sexual Repression and Adult Violence Thirteen of the forty-nine societies studied seemed to be exceptions to the theory that a lack of somato-sensory pleasure makes people physically violent. It was expected that cultures that placed a high value upon physical pleasure during infancy and childhood would maintain such values into adulthood. This is not the case. Child rearing practices do not predict patterns of later sexual behavior. This initial surprise and presumed discrepancy, however, becomes advantageous for further prediction. Two variables that are highly correlated are not as useful for predicting a third variable as two variables that are uncorrelated. Consequently, it is meaningful to examine the sexual behaviors of the thirteen cultures whose adult violence was not predictable from physical pleasure during infancy. Apparently, the social customs that influence and determine the behaviors of sexual affection are different from those which underlie the expression of physical affection toward infants.
When the six societies characterized by both high infant affection and high violence are compared in terms of their premarital sexual behavior, it is surprising to find that five of them exhibit premarital sexual repression, where virginity is a high value of these cultures. It appears that the beneficial effects of infant physical affection can be negated by the repression of physical pleasure (premarital sex) later in life.
The seven societies characterized by both low infant physical affection and low adult physical violence were all found to be characterized by permissive premarital sexual behaviors. Thus, the detrimental effects of infant physical affectional deprivation seem to be compensated for later in life by sexual body pleasure experiences during adolescence. These findings have led to a revision of the somato-sensory pleasure deprivation theory from a one-stage to a two-stage developmental theory where the physical violence in 48 of the 49 cultures could be accurately classified. In short, violence may stem from deprivation of somato-sensory pleasure either in infancy or in adolescence. The only true exception in this culture sample is the headhunting Jivaro tribe of South America. Clearly, this society requires detailed study to determine the causes of its violence. The Jivaro belief system may play an important role, for as anthropologist Michael Harner notes in Jivaro Souls, these Indians have a “deep-seated belief that killing leads to the acquisition of souls which provide a supernatural power conferring immunity from death.”
Table 3 - Relationship of Infant Physical Affectional Deprivation to Adult Physical Violence
Societies that provide infants with a great deal of physical affection (‘tender loving care’) are later characterized by relatively non-violent adults, Prescott says. In 36 of the 49 cultures he studied, a high degree of infant physical affection was associated with a low degree of adult physical violence—and vice-versa. When Prescott investigated the 13 exceptions he found that all but one (the Jivaro tribe of South America) provide adolescents with a great deal of sexual freedom, thus allowing them to compensate for the lack of physical affection that they experienced in infancy.
The strength of the two-stage deprivation theory of violence is most vividly illustrated when we contrast the societies showing high rates of physical affection during infancy and adolescence against those societies which are consistently low in physical affection for both developmental periods. The statistics associated with this relationship are extraordinary: the percent likelihood of a society being physically violent if it is physically affectionate toward its infants and tolerant of premarital sexual behavior is 2% (48/49). The probability of this occurring by chance is 125,000 to one. I am not aware of any other developmental variable that has such a high degree of predictive validity. Thus, we seem to have a firmly based principle: physically affectionate human societies are highly unlikely to be physically violent.
Accordingly, when physical affection and pleasure during adolescence as well as infancy are related to measures of violence, we find direct evidence of a significant relationship between the punishment of premarital sex behaviors and various measures of crime and violence. As table 4 shows, additional clusters of relationships link the punishment and repression of premarital sex to large community size, high social complexity and class stratification, small extended families, purchase of wives, practice of slavery and a high god present in human morality. The relationship between small extended families and punitive premarital sex attitudes deserves emphasis, for it suggests that the nuclear family structure in contemporary Western cultures may be a contributing factor to our repressive attitudes toward sexual expression. The same can be suggested for community size, social complexity and class stratification.
Not surprisingly, when high self-needs are combined with the deprivation of physical affection, the result is self-interest and high rates of narcissism. Likewise, exhibitionistic dancing and pornography may be interpreted as a substitute for normal sexual expression. Some nations that are most repressive of female sexuality have rich pornographic art forms.
Acceptance of Extramarital Sex May Reduce Violence I also examined the influence of extramarital sex taboos upon crime and violence. The data clearly indicate that punitive-repressive attitudes toward extramarital sex are also linked with physical violence, personal crime and the practice of slavery. Societies that value monogamy emphasize military glory and worship aggressive gods.
These cross-cultural data support the view of psychologists and sociologists who feel that sexual and psychological needs not being fulfilled within a marriage should be met outside of it, without destroying the primacy of the marriage relationship.
These findings overwhelmingly support the thesis that deprivation of body pleasure throughout life—but particularly during the formative periods of infancy, childhood and adolescence—are very closely related to the amount of warfare and interpersonal violence. These insights should be applied to large and complicated industrial and post-industrial societies.
Sexual Pleasure vs. Sexual Violence According to FBI statistics, murder, aggravated assault and forcible rape are substantially increasing in the United States.
There is evidence that points to America’s preference for sexual violence over sexual pleasure. This is reflected in our acceptance of sexually explicit films that involve violence and rape and our rejection of sexually explicit films for pleasure only (pornography). Neighborhood movie theatres show such sexually violent films as “Straw Dogs”, “Clockwork Orange” and “The Klansman”, while banning films which portray sexual pleasure (“Deep Throat”, “The Devil in Miss Jones”). Attempts to close down massage parlors is another example given of our anti-pleasure attitudes. Apparently, sex with pleasure is immoral and unacceptable, but sex with violence and pain is moral and acceptable.
A questionnaire I developed to explore this question was administered to 96 college students whose average age was 19 years. The results of the questionnaire support the connection between rejection of physical pleasure (and particularly of premarital and extramarital sex) with expression of physical violence. Respondents who reject abortion, responsible premarital sex and nudity within the family were likely to approve of harsh physical punishment for children and to believe that pain helps build strong moral character. These respondents were likely to find alcohol and drugs more satisfying than sex. The data obtained from the questionnaire provide strong statistical support for the basic inverse relationship between physical violence and physical pleasure. If violence is high, pleasure is low, and conversely, if pleasure is high, violence is low. The questionnaire bears out the theory that the pleasure-violence relationship found in primitive cultures also holds true for a modern industrial nation.
Drugs, Sex and Violence: The Unholy Trinity Another way of looking at the reciprocal relationship between violence and pleasure is to examine a society’s choice of drugs. A society will support behaviors that are consistent with its values and social mores. U.S. society is a competitive, aggressive and violent society. Consequently, it supports drugs that facilitate competitive, aggressive and violent behaviors and opposes drugs that counteract such behaviors. Alcohol is well known to facilitate the expression of violent behaviors, and, although addicting and very harmful to chronic users, is acceptable to American society. On the other hand, pleasure-inducing drugs that enhance the pleasure of touch and actively inhibits violent-aggressive behaviors are not acceptable. It is for these reasons, I believe, that heroin, for instance, is rejected and methadone (an addicting drug minus the pleasure) is accepted.
The data from my questionnaire indicates very high correlations between alcohol use and parental punishment. People who received little affection from their mothers and had physically punitive fathers are likely to become hostile and aggressive when they drink. Such people find alcohol more satisfying than sex. There is an even stronger relationship between parental physical punishment and drug usage. Respondents who were physically punished as children showed alcohol-induced hostility and aggression and were likely to find alcohol and drugs more satisfying than sex. The questionnaire also reveals high correlations between sexual regression and drug usage. Those who describe premarital sex as ‘not agreeable’ are likely to become aggressive when drinking and to prefer drugs and alcohol to sexual pleasures. This is additional evidence for the hypothesis that drug “pleasures” are a substitute for somato-sensory pleasures. Moreover, for religious considerations, many young adults believe that drug pleasure is more moral than sexual pleasure.
Philosophical and Religious Roots: The Mind-Body Problem The origins of the fundamental reciprocal relationship between physical violence and physical pleasure can be traced to philosophical dualism and to the theology of body/soul relationships. In Western philosophical thought man was not a unitary being but was divided into two parts, body and soul. The Greek philosophical conception of the relationship between body and soul was quite different than the Judeo-Christian concept which posited a state of war between the body and soul. Within Judeo-Christian thought, the purpose of human life was to save the soul, and the body was seen as an impediment to achieving this objective. Consequently, the body must be punished and deprived. In St. Paul’s words: “Put to death the base pursuits of the body—for if you live according to the flesh, you shall die: but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh, you shall live” (Romans 9:13). St. Paul clearly advocated somatosensory pleasure deprivation as well as enhancement of painful somatosensory stimulation as essential prerequisites for saving the soul.
Aristotle did not view a state of war between the body and soul, but rather envisioned a complimentary relationship in which the state of the soul or mind was dependent on the state of the body. In fact he stated that “…the care of the body ought to precede that of the soul” (Politica).
Aristotle also appreciated the reciprocal relationship between pleasure and pain, and recognized that a compulsive search for bodily pleasure originates from a state of bodily discomfort and pain.
This denial of somatosensory pleasure in Pauline Christian doctrine has led to alternate forms of ‘relief’ through such painful stimulations as hair-shirts, self-scourgings, self-mutilations, physical violence against others and in the non-sensory pleasures of drugs.
Experimental animal studies have documented counterparts to these phenomena. For example, animals deprived of somatosensory stimulation will engage in mutilation of their own bodies. Animals deprived of touching early in life develop impaired pain perception and an aversion to being touched by others. They are thus blocked from experiencing the body-pleasure therapy that they need for rehabilitation. In this condition they have few alternatives but physical violence, where pain-oriented touching and body contact is facilitated by their impaired ability to experience pain.
Biblical Origins of the Immorality of Pleasure The question arises as to how Christian philosophy and theology, which borrowed heavily from Aristotle, managed to avoid, if not outright reject, Aristotle’s teachings regarding the morality of pleasure. The roots to this question can be found throughout the Old Testament.
Violence against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition and is spelled out very early on. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament, holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is “a wicked thing”. When the townsmen of Sodom besieged Lot to turn over to them two male travelers, who are guests in his home, so they can have intimacies with them, Lot offers his two virgin daughters to be gang raped in lieu of the two guests.
Given such a tradition, it is understandable that during the Inquisition only women were charged with having intercourse with the devil and put to death for this crime of pleasure. What man has died at the stake for having slept with Satan? This tradition is maintained in modern cultures where women are punished for prostitution but their male customers are not.
The historical and Biblical acceptance of rape down through the ages has brutalized the psyche of males brought up in this tradition. This is well illustrated in the account of Michael McCusker, a Marine sergeant who witnessed a gang rape in Vietnam. McCusker tells of a rifle squad of nine men who entered a small village, raped a girl, and then the last man to make love to her shot her in the head. What is it in the American psyche that permits the use of the word ‘love’ to describe rape? And where the act of love is completed with a bullet in the head!
Modern Origins of Sexual Violence Why do men rape women? Researchers report that most rapists have a family background of paternal punishment and hostility and loss of maternal affection. I interpret rape as man’s revenge against women for the early loss of physical affection. A man can express his hostility toward his mother for not giving him enough physical attention by sexually violating another woman. Another explanation may be that the increasing sexual freedom of women is threatening to man’s position of power and dominance over women that he often maintains through sexual aggression. Rape destroys sensual pleasure in woman and enhances sadistic pleasure in man. Through rape, man defends himself from the sensual pleasures of women that threaten his position of power and dominance. It is my belief that rape has its origins in the deprivation of physical affection in parent-child relationships and adult sexual relationships; and in a religious value system that considers pain and body deprivation moral and physical pleasure immoral. Rape maintains man’s dominance over woman and supports the perpetuation of patriarchal values in our society.
New Values for a Peaceful World It is clear that the world has only limited time to change its custom of resolving conflicts violently. It is uncertain whether we have the time to undo the damage done by countless previous generations, nor do we know how many future generations it will take to transform our psychobiology of violence into one of peace.
If we accept the theory that the lack of sufficient somatosensory pleasure is a principal cause of violence, we can work toward promoting pleasure and encouraging affectionate interpersonal relationships as a means of combating aggression. We should give high priority to body pleasure in the context of meaningful human relationships. Such body pleasure is very different from promiscuity, which reflects a basic inability to experience pleasure. If a sexual relationship is not pleasurable, the individual looks for another partner. A continuing failure to find sexual satisfaction leads to a continuing search for new partners, that is, to promiscuous behavior. Affectionately shared physical pleasure, on the other hand, tends to stabilize a relationship and eliminate the search. However, a variety of sexual experiences seems to be normal in cultures that permit its expression, and this may be important for optimizing pleasure and affection in mature sexual relationships.
Available data clearly indicate that the rigid values of monogamy, chastity and virginity help produce physical violence. The denial of female sexuality must give way to an acceptance and respect for it, and men must share with women the responsibility for giving affection and care to infants and children. As the father assumes a more equal role with the mother in child-rearing and becomes more affectionate toward his children, certain changes must follow in our socio-economic system. A corporate structure that tends to separate either parent from the family by travel, extended meetings or overtime work weakens the parent-child relationship and harms family stability. To develop a peaceful society, we must put more emphasis on human relationships.
Family planning is essential. Children must be properly spaced so that each can receive optimal affection and care. The needs of the infant should be immediately met. Cross-cultural evidence does not support the view that such practices will “spoil” the infant. It is harmful for a baby to cry itself to sleep. By not answering an infant’s needs immediately and consistently, we not only teach a child distrust at a very basic emotional level, but also establish patterns of neglect which harm the child’s social and emotional health. The discouragement of breast feeding in favor of bottle feeding and the separation of healthy newborns from their mothers in our ‘modern’ hospitals are other examples of harmful child rearing practices.
About half of marriages in the U.S. now end in divorce, and an even higher percentage of couples have experienced extramarital affairs. This suggests that something is basically wrong with the traditional concept of universal monogamy when viewed in connection with the cross-cultural evidence of the physical deprivations, violence and warfare associated with monogamy.
A communal family—like the extended family group—can provide a more stimulating and supportive environment for both children and adults than can the average nuclear family. Communal living should not, of course, be equated with group sex, which is not a sharing, but more often an escape from intimacy and emotional vulnerability.
An Openness About the Body No matter what type of family structure is chosen, it will be important to encourage openness about the body and its functions. From this standpoint, we could benefit from redesigning our homes along the Japanese format, separating the toilet from the bathing facilities. The family bath should be used for socialization and relaxation, and should provide a natural situation for children to learn about male-female differences. Nudity, like sex, can be misused and abused, and this fear often prevents us from accepting the honesty of our own bodies.
The beneficial stimulation of whirlpool baths should not be limited to hospitals or health club spas, but brought into the home. The family bath should be large enough to accommodate parents and children, and be equipped with a whirlpool to maximize relaxation and pleasure. Nudity, openness and affection within the family can teach children and adults that the body is not shameful and inferior, but rather is a source of beauty and sensuality through which we emotionally relate to one another. Physical affection involving touching, holding and caressing should not be equated with sexual stimulation, which is a special type of physical affection. Any kind of sexual relations between an adult and child is psychologically damaging to a child, and a child can hardly defend him or herself from such invasiveness.
Teaching Children to Love, not Compete The competitive ethic, which teaches children that they must advance at the expense of others, should be replaced by values of co-operation and a pursuit of excellence for its own sake. We must raise children to be emotionally capable of giving love and affection, rather than to exploit others. We should recognize that sexuality in teenagers is not only natural, but desirable, and accept responsible premarital sexuality as a positive moral good. Parents should help teenagers realize their own sexual selfhood by allowing them to use the family home for sexual fulfillment. Such honesty would encourage a more mature attitude toward sexual relationships and provide a private supportive environment that is far better for their development than the back seat of a car or other undesirable locations outside the home. Early sexual experiences are too often an attempt to prove one’s adulthood and maleness or femaleness rather than a joyful sharing of affection and pleasure.
Sexual Equality of Women Above all, male sexuality must recognize the equality of female sexuality. The traditional right of men to multiple sexual relationships must be extended to women. The great barrier between man and woman is man’s fear of the depth and intensity of female sensuality. Because power and aggression are neutralized through sensual pleasure, man’s primary defense against a loss of dominance has been the historic denial, repression and control of the sensual pleasure of women. The use of sex to provide mere release from physiological tension (apparent pleasure) should not be confused with a state of sensual pleasure that is incompatible with dominance, power, aggression, violence and pain. It is through the mutual sharing of sensual pleasure that sexual equality between women and men will be realized.
The Psychobiology of Moral Behavior The sensory environment in which an individual grows up has a major influence upon the development and functional organization of the brain. Sensory stimulation is a nutrient that the brain must have to develop and function normally. How the brain functions determines how a person behaves. At birth a human brain is extremely immature and new brain cells develop up to the age of two years. The complexity of brain cell development continues up to about sixteen years of age. Herman Epstein of Brandeis University has evidence that growth spurts in the human brain occur at approximately three, seven, eleven and fifteen years of age. How early deprivations affect these growth spurts has yet to be determined; however, some data suggest that the final growth spurt may be abolished by early deprivations.
W.T. Greenough, a psychologist at the University of Illinois, has demonstrated that an enriched sensory environment produces a more complex brain cell in rats than an ordinary or impoverished sensory environment. His studies show that extreme sensory deprivation is not necessary to induce structural changes in the developing brain. Many other investigators have shown that rearing rats in isolation after they are weaned induces significant changes in the biochemistry of their brain cell functioning. Other investigators have shown abnormal electrical activity of brain cell functioning in monkeys reared in isolation. I have suggested that the cerebellum, a brain structure involved in the regulation of many brain processes, is rendered dysfunctional when an animal is reared in isolation and is implicated in violent-aggressive behaviors due to somatosensory deprivation. It has been shown that cerebellar neurosurgery can change the aggressive behaviors of isolation-reared monkeys to peaceful behavior. Predatory killing behavior in ordinary house cats can be provoked by stimulating the cerebellar fastigial nucleus, one of the deep brain nuclei of the cerebellum.
Abnormally low levels of platelet serotonin have been found in monkeys reared in isolation and also in institutionalized, highly aggressive children. These findings suggest that somatosensory deprivation during the formative periods of development significantly alters an important biochemical system in the body associated with highly aggressive behaviors. A number of other investigators have documented abnormalities in the adrenal cortical response system in rodents who were isolation-reared and who developed hyperactive, hyper-reactive and hyper-aggressive behavior. Thus another important biochemical system associated with aggressiveness is known to be altered by somatosensory deprivation early in life.
Clearly, if we consider violent and aggressive behaviors undesirable then we must provide an enriched somatosensory environment so that the brain can develop and function in a way that results in pleasurable and peaceful behaviors. The solution to physical violence is physical pleasure that is experienced within the context of meaningful human relationships.
Changing the Patterns of Deprivation and Violence A fundamental moral principle is the rejection of creeds, policies and behaviors that inflict pain, suffering and deprivation upon our fellow humans. This principle needs to be extended: we should seek not just an absence of pain and suffering, but also the enhancement of pleasure, the promotion of affectionate human relationships and the enrichment of human experience.
If we strive to increase
the pleasure in our lives, this will also affect the ways we express
aggression and hostility. The reciprocal relationship between pleasure and
violence is such that one inhibits the other; when physical pleasure is high,
physical violence is low. When violence is high, pleasure is low. This basic
premise of the somatosensory pleasure deprivation theory provides us with
the tools necessary to fashion a world of peaceful, affectionate,
co-operative individuals. The world, however, has limited time to correct the conditions that propel us to violent confrontations. Modern technologies of warfare have made it possible for an individual or nation to bring total destruction to large segments of our population. And the greatest threat comes from those nations which have the most depriving environments for their children and which are most repressive of sexual affection and female sexuality. We will have the most to fear when these nations acquire the weapons of modern warfare. Tragically, this has already begun. |
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
