To what extent is belief in hell necessary in resolving problems raised by the existence of God

To what extent is belief in hell necessary in resolving problems raised by the existence of God

Belief in the afterlife is necessary for two main reasons. The first is that it resolves the seemingly absent conception of divine justice in the world and the second is that through this divine justice, free will is established. In essence, divine justice is only meaningful if carried out. If we choose to reject God, then justice demands God rejects them. A Christian expects that their long-lasting faith will be rewarded in “his father’s [God’s] house”, and that Hitler, for example, will be punished in hell. Moreover, the problem of evil in general would be resolved with the belief of an afterlife. Suffering is justified if all is truly good in heaven.

An afterlife in hell is necessary to conserve free will. “God predestines no one to go to hell, for this to happen, a wilful turning away from God is necessary and persistence in it till the end”. Swinburne argues for much the same principle. That life after death is needed for free will, demanding the possibility to be able to choose corruption, or else it “would be like a jilted lover pestering the beloved on and on, not recognising her right to say a final no”. Free will demands this “final right”. Hell is also in place to ensure that humans perform their duties and act morally.  Hans Kung is also a supporter of the view that life after death promotes moral living; people bettering their finite lives to achieve a better infinite outcome. However, as he was referencing his support of reincarnation, Swinburne would argue that 'If there is always a second chance there is no risk’. However, hell seems to act as a threat throughout the Bible, shocking followers with tales of perpetual physical pain into not committing sin- whereas heaven is often described as something spiritually pleasurable. Hell would therefore been a bigger incentive to follow God for those who have limited understanding of spirituality i.e the poor and uneducated. Marx also picked up on this, hell is a social mechanism to keep the masses in check; an “opium” administered by those in power to retain their authority. In this way, hell as an afterlife has become, not the answer to the problem of free will and lack of justice on earth, but a Marxist construct to prevent free will and impose order. Moreover, the argument that the afterlife dictates moral living is disproven by the humanist movement, who maintain no belief in the afterlife or divine creator and have a moral code. Morality is not dependent on a belief in the afterlife.

Despite this, hell is a comforting thought for knowing that the wicked would be punished eternally. Jimmy Saville, for example, has escaped from the law and caused suffering to hundreds of people. Divine justice should prove more just, not only for the sake of it but for the consolation of the whole nation- “do not fear those who kill the body but cannot kill the soul. But rather fear Him who is able to destroy both soul and body in hell”.

However, although an afterlife in hell can be considered incompatible with the concept of an omnibenevolent God. Hick states that Hell is “scientifically fantastic, morally revolting and self-contradictory”- and that is exactly what it seems. An eternity in “the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone: which is the second death” seems horrendously unfair and surely not a fate a creator would want on his children whom he “does not want any to perish, but all to come to repentance”. Perhaps he is bound by his nature, that, in part of the Euthyphro dilemma, God is bound by a goodness that comes from a source above him? This questions him omnipotence, being a slave to the quality of goodness which makes him forsake his creation. Aquinas counters that an infinite God can only punish finite sins infinitely. This again, although explaining the necessity of such an evil, is portraying God’s omnipotence as redundant- if he is all-powerful surely, as Descartes says, he can do the logically impossible and provide finite sins for finite beings?

Belief in hell is incompatible with an omnibenevolent God, is a self-contradictory mode of divine justice and seems an archaic construction and fable. Hell should be considered a symbol for the personal losses of lack of belief in God ensues, and not a solution to the moral questions we have on earth. Belief in hell is not a prerequisite for morality on earth, adopting and accepting hell as a divine punishment seems lazy, and hell acting as the answer for free will is limited. Free will is a mockery if there are only two choices laid out before us. 

Outline and evluate one socio-psychological explantion of aggression

One socio-psychological theory of aggression is Social learning theory. The social learning theory of aggression suggests that through vicarious learning, we observe and imitate an aggressive act that is rewarded. Normally, people would imitate an aggressive act if a role model was the one doing the action or if they are similar to us in some way (Duck). Imitation also needs the person to have the motivation, self-efficacy and positive or nor retention of past aggressive acts. The environment is also important in determining whether or not imitation will occur. In a darkened, aggressive, loud and confusing nightclub in which people have had much to drink, someone may be more prone to copying aggression. Or differently, a fearful person may be too afraid of retaliation to copy an aggressive act in an unfamiliar setting.
In Bandura’s Bobo doll study, children watched an adult act aggressively towards the Bobo doll. They then either saw the adult get rewarded, punished, or neither. The children were then let out to play with the Bobo doll. The condition in which the children watched the adult get rewarded displayed the greatest aggressive acts. However the other two conditions displayed no aggressive acts. This shows that imitation only occurs when children have a positive, rewarded mental representation of aggressive behaviour. A weakness with the Bobo doll study is that it does not could for individual differences. Children may have naturally been more aggressive in one condition rather than the other. Being children, social learning theory is hard pushed to then generalise to adults who have a much more developed and experienced representation of aggressive behaviour.

However, the study does have real life applications. The Jamie Bugler case, in which two young boys horrifically murdered a toddler, apparently supported this explanation. The boys admitted to watching Chucky and imitating the violence they saw. Although this seems to be shocking vicarious learning and was the explanation given, one psychologist found no link between SLT and the crime. Moreover, the perpetrators were deeply disturbed and therefore such a simple and natural demonstration of SLT cannot be attributed. Phillips also found that SLT has real world applications in America. After a wrestling match, homicides increased, perhaps showing imitation of the violence shown on the media. However this is merely correlational data and therefore other factors may influence homicide rates such as: team rivalry, hostile environments and Deindividuation.

Altgough championed for its universalised and cultural variations, SLT can be seen as an imposed ethic on non Western cultures. Wolfgang’s “culture of violence” study showed that according to different cultures, aggressive and non-aggressive behaviour models varied. He gave the example of the !Kung Sang men who are completely non-violent and look down upon aggressive behaviour whereas in Western society, aggressive behaviour is a sign of manliness. Therefore in some cultures, the imitation of violence is simply not there no matter the reward.

Studies into SLT are also limited, meaning that further experimentation is required to gain more detailed information. This poses an ethical problem, imitation of aggressive behaviour is not something to encourage, especially in children, and is not protecting participants from harm.

Moreover, the study is incredibly deterministic, suggesting that people will copy rewarded behaviours without giving any explanation as to how or why. In this sense, it is also reductionist, reducing complex psychological and biological behaviour into imitation. Runciman claimed an alternative to SLT, that deprivation caused aggression, as did Dollard- environmental factors were the reason for aggressive behaviour. 

Frank critical essay notes

Frankenstein critical essay notes

Monster is not ‘Adam’ but an Eve. In whose image is Eve/the monster made of? Man or God? Like Eve looks into a transparent pool in the garden of Eden (in Milton) and is transfixed by her reflection (link to Narcissus) , the Monster is instead “terrified when I viewed myself in a transparent pool”.

The Monster could be seen as a “woman seeking to escape the feminine condition into recognition by fraternity (an organised society of men)”.

The monster is an object to look at and seeks to escape this

The woman’s body is the key to forbidden knowledge (life and where you came from), and this is shown all throughout Frankenstein.

Freud: The Monster “grinning” through the window during his parent’s wedding night- viewing the forbidden moment of origin wherein the observer is punished.

Frame narrative: narcissism. Each character as a doppelgänger of each other, looking inwards at the transparent pool because they love themselves. That’s also why it’s a bit gay.

Interesting point- the Monster actually “eludes gender definition”= we just assume he’s male although no willy is seen… Freudian castration= theory is that a child has a fear of damage being done to their genitalia by the parent of the same sex (i.e. a son being afraid of his father) as punishment for sexual feelings toward the parent of the opposite sex (i.e. a son toward his mother= “portrait of a most lovely woman…I gazed with delight on her dark eyes, fringed by deep lashes, and her lovely lips; I remembered that I was forever deprived of the delights that such beautiful creatures could bestow”)

The portrait of Frankenstein’s mother acts as a curse= Justine and William both die. Miniaturised role of women. Both the miniature portrait of the mother and of Mrs Saville= “unrepresented presence that haunts the novel” (link to Mary Wollstonecraft)

The Monster’s eloquence: “The godlike science of language is a cultural compensation for a deficient nature; it offers the possibility of escape from ‘monsterism’”

Frame narrative/nested structure: “monsterism” is passed down

  “my own vampire, my own spirit set loose from the grave and forced to destroy all that was dear to me”- the monster is a symptom

Importance of Mrs Saville= as a “dead letter office” with no characterisation makes her simply the receiver of messages. She also represents the private, female corruptible women who were the main readers of Gothic texts.

In Frankenstein, “authorial presence has an ambiguous status”

What is a monster?

• Horror, during the 18^th century, was a “response to things not neoclassical…an aesthetic deformity which equated moral laxity”. He is a “transgression of aesthetic limits”.
• -Monsters are supposed to represent vice in stories and novels and act as a warning and evoke horror. However, in Mary Shelley’s novel, the Monster’s “vices ARE visible, but so too are his virtues”
• He “blurred boundaries, crossed lines that distinguished virtue from vice, rendering readers who had yet to develop proper powers of discrimination [often young women] susceptible to corruption”
• The monster shows “Literature’s refusal to be subordinated to moral uses and categories, a diabolical power that cannot be made to secure a master”
• “Monsters reveal the will of God”- Augustine
• “Transgressed the bounds of nature as to become a moral advertisement”

The monster is a “terrible literary abortion”

• -          The “product of Frankenstein’s paternal labours delivers, no the dutiful offspring he imagined- but a rebellious satanic force whose demands for love turn into violent energy
• 
  
•  Monster definitions and usage in the 18th century often encompassed “vices of ingratitude, rebellion and disobedience towards parents…break natural bonds of obligation towards friends and blood relations” and “implied rebellion and turning against one’s benefactor” (*cough* monster is Shelley *cough* ?)

Shelley reverses the patriarchal systems in Romanticism:

·         Beauty to death

·         Benevolence to destructive

·         Eternal life to death

·         Paradise of light to ice-bound

·         Authority to sufferance

The introduction of Frankenstein “duplicates her position as Frankenstein” (being the creator of her own offspring- the novel) but also “differentiates her position from Frankenstein”.

Link to Burke and the French revolution

Parisian mob is the monster

-          Burke: “out of the tomb of the murdered monarchy in France has arisen a vast, tremendous, unformed spectre”

-          “Once the state is threatened, it can no longer be identified and the human parts dispersed” (Monster’s body)

Monster could symbolise the “replacement of the King with the parliament” (Monster’s multitude of body parts= lots of different people/the majority/the oppressed)

Plato on the soul

Plato: Dualist

• -          Soul existed before we were born
• -          Soul is simple
• -          Soul contains knowledge of the Forms. Learning is remembering this knowledge
• -          Soul restricted by body and longs for the world of the Forms
• -          Soul lives on after the death of the body
• -          Soul has 3 different components: Reason, spirit and desire (Triparti)
• -          Harmony within these= healthy and happy.

Chariot analogy- reason drives spirit and desire

Myth of Er?

First tries to communicate that the soul must be immortal. His argument for this is that the mind cannot be destroyed by a physical illness that affects the stomach, for example. Is this true now??

Plato then introduces concept of reward and punishment in the afterlife

In Plato’s Republic:

1.       Man called Er dies. Er sees immoral people going supposedly towards hell for punishment for bad deeds. Moral people going supposedly to heaven for good deeds.

2.       Also saw that people were coming down from heaven with clean souls and saying how wondrous heaven was. People were also coming up from hell and were dirty and despairing at how awful hell was.

3.       Then they were all before Lady Necessity and chose their next life.

4.       The man that had been in heaven and knew only of reward and not of hell= foolishly chose a powerful dictatorship. He then committed terrible sins= and ended up in Hell for the next life

5.       The man that had been in hell and knew of the hardships and terror= chose a good life.

6.       All drank from the River of Neglect and forgot everything.

Where can we see the existence/ point towards the existence of the soul?

-          Can be shown through our knowledge of opposites= Forms

-          Our acknowledgement of beauty= Forms

-          Déjà vu= Forms

QUOTE:

“The body is the source of endless trouble to us”

Weaknesses:

-          Peter Geach= can a supernatural soul even experience the physical?

-          Is learning as simple as really remembering?

-          It relies on theory of the forms

Discuss research into factors influencing attitudes to food and/or eating behaviour. (24 marks)

Discuss research into factors influencing attitudes to food and/or eating behaviour. (24 marks)

Mood is one factor influencing eating behaviour. Garcia conducted a study in which 38 participants were assigned to two conditions. In the first, they watched an upbeat, comic film and in the second they watched a sad film. In both conditions, grapes and popcorn were provided as snacks. It was observed that in the sad film condition, 31% more popcorn was consumed than in the upbeat film- opting for grapes. Garcia concluded that the calorific, sweet food jolted the person into a state of euphoria, whilst those already in a good mood chose healthy snacks to prolong their good mood. There are some methodological issues surrounding this study. Firstly, popcorn is a typical cinema food which may have meant that higher quantities of it were consumed due to that association. Moreover, individual differences are likely to pose a problem- some may simply prefer popcorn. To combat this, perhaps a repeated measures design would have been more appropriate, as participants are likely not to ascertain the study because the dependent variable is not particularly out of the ordinary. Moreover, other factors may have influenced eating behaviour in the study- for example what time of day it was and people’s eating habits and timings. This may reduce the internal validity of the study. 

However, it is shown that by levelling out mood through medication, comfort eating is reduced. This has real world applications in patients suffering from bipolar- a mood disorder- who are likely to be overweight and are prescribed mood altering drugs such as lithium. Although this does support that mood does influence eating behaviour, perhaps it could only be prescribed to major mood changes and not ones we experience perhaps dozens of times a day (and we know this doesn’t influence our food behaviour). Moreover, it is culturally biased. Mood cannot be afforded to influence eating behaviour in places such as Sub Saharan Africa. Therefore it could be said to be a factor only in affluent, Western societies and not a universal attributer.

Another factor influencing attitudes to food is culture. Ball and Kennedy followed (not literally!) 14000 women in Australia and found that the more time the women spent in Australia, the more their eating habits coincided with those women who had been born there. This shows that eating attitudes and behaviours are influenced by the culture we live in and we adapt to the environment- acculturation. This research perhaps highlights but does not explain that there could be an evolutionary explanation for acculturation, it would aid the survival of those women to begin to display the same eating attitudes and behaviours and aid social cohesion. We have still retained this ability to adapt to our environment and food availability/culture. However, it is endocentric, and therefore this study cannot be generalised to men. There may be social factors involved which determines whether different genders respond to acculturation differently or whether it is universal. Moreover, in all cultures, food is subject to availability and our preferences depend on this and could be shaped by this.

Social Learning Theory in terms of eating behaviour and attitudes states that these are observed and imitated from our parents. Brown and Odgen found a correlation between the child’s motivation to eat, body dissatisfaction and snack intake and the mother’s motivation, dissatisfaction and intake. This suggests that the child has observed and imitated the mother. Birch and Fish also found that the best predictor for a child’s eating habits is the mother’s food constraint and anxiety about the child being overweight. However this is reductionist. The correlation may be down to many other things such as genetics. We know that anorexia is more likely to manifest in children with a parent who previously suffered. It also doesn’t measure or mention the father’s eating habits and what influence this has on the child’s development (especially if a family consists of a single dad and his child, for example). Therefore it has a gender bias. The media, however, is an active example of SLT and proves that it is an influencing factor - people’s attitudes on food are known to be effected by observing and copying adverts, for example, and celebrities following specific diets. 

Discuss Explanations for the Failure and success of dieting

Discuss Explanations for the Failure and success of dieting

People diet in order to achieve cultural ideals on body weight and respond to body dissatisfaction. K    found that over 89% of the female population had reduced their intake at some point in their lives to lose weight. A successful diet is supposed to constitute as losing 10% of body weight and maintaining weight loss for at least a year. One way of ensuring success in dieting is to focus on the detail of the food rather than the numbers/nutritional value and the boredom surrounding dieting foods. Reddens conducted an experiment wherein 130 people were directed into two conditions. In one conditions, they tasted jelly beans named with numbers and in the other they tasted jelly beans with a flavour as a name i.e. ‘cherry’. They then filled out a questionnaire about the task’s enjoyability. The group who were given a flavour were less bored with the task than the group given a number. This suggests that group one had focused more on the details and flavours of the food and had enjoyed it more. This can be reflected into dieting, with detail of the restricted/repetitive foods alleviating boredom that leads to the failure of dieting. This study was very reliable, variables being easily controlled in a laboratory study. A weakness with this study is that jelly beans are usually a more enjoyable food and so perhaps a longitudinal study with diet food and calorie numbers may be a more realistic, natural study away from the laboratory, controlled nature of Redden’s study. Another component for the success of dieting is support and, again, enjoyability. This has wider world implications in weight loss groups such as weightwatchers. Compared to self-help, weightwatchers was more useful and successful than self-help and also maintained a stable weight for linger, suggesting that a community-like, encouraging environment is important (Miller).

The boundary model starts to explain the failure of dieting. Herman and Polivy showed that a diets range between hunger (the drive to eat) and satiety (feeling of fullness) is much wider than those not dieting and takes more food to reach satiety. Dieters, when they often breach the satiety boundary eat until they feel full and then continue, the “what the hell” phenomenon. In dieters, essentially, they take longer to feel hungry and it takes more food to satisfy. Wardle and Beats conducted a 7 week longitudinal study in which 29 overweight women were subject to one of three conditions; a dieting condition, exercise condition or no treatment. They filled out a questionnaire on eating habits and appetite at 4 weeks and 6 weeks. Wardle and Beats found that the dieters ate more, showing that in dieting conditions, the satiety boundary is likely to be overstepped by overeating to compensate. This may mean that for those overweight, exercise is a better option than dieting. This may also be true psychologically, with the continual failure of dieting manifesting into depression in obese individuals. This study does face issues with social desirability, being about weight and eating behaviours- things many women feel ashamed or embarrassed about and may not be honest in their questionnaire. Moreover, its small sample size of obese individuals cannot be generalised to the public. This may be because, for example, they suffer from eating disorders such as binge eating which may affect their intake.

The restraint theory suggests the more you deny yourself the food you wish, it leads to dis-inhibition which makes you overeat (Herman and Mack). Soetens supported this theory, when dieters suppress foods it almost had a rebound effect and led them to think more about food. Food became more attractive. Odgken questions the theory of restraint and the overeating consequences. He uses the example of anorexia, which the restraint theory does not explain this. Those suffering from the disease continually restrict to a dangerous level and do not eat. A response to this criticism is that it is a mental illness and the anorexics have no choice but to starve. Moreover,  this is shown in the role of denial in dieting, another influencer of failure. This model shows that the more you deny yourself something, the more you think about it- called Wegner’s ironic process of mental control. Wegner asked participants to either think of a white bear or not to think of a white bear. Those who were told NOT to think of a white bear rang a bell more often, showing that being denied to think about something led to inevitable over-thinking of it. Anorexics tend to become obsessed with food whilst during continual denial, supporting this. Keys fed his participants, male Korean conscientious objectors, half of their daily intake for 12 weeks. Although they lost 25% of their body weight (more than successful for dieting), they became obsessed with food and many became binge eaters. This shows that restriction led to obsession and overeating and changed the behaviour and attitudes of an individual. However, this study is extremely unethical-being conducted 60 years ago- and cannot be replicated; at least with humans. It was also an ethnic group of Koreans, which have cultural differences to us in terms of food. Another study even found that Asians were more prone to obesity, and that Asian girls are the group most likely to suffer from bulimia (an eating disorder constituting of consuming a large amount of food and then purging). This could indicate a tendency towards lowered food control and impulsivity or a cultural tendency. This study, however, does explore eating behaviour in males, lacking in other studies surrounding failure/success of dieting and affecting generalisability.

Success or failure of dieting could have an alternative biological explanation. LPL is a calorie storing enzyme which, if you are genetically inclined to have more of, may make it easier to regain lost weight. If weight loss is occurring, the gene becomes active and starts producing more as a response.

23/24 Outline and evaluate the role of genetic factors in aggressive behaviour (24 marks)

Outline and evaluate the role of genetic factors in aggressive behaviour (24 marks)

The claim that aggression can be inherited through genes has been studied by a large number of psychologists. Twin studies have been particularly useful for exploring this biological explanation, and has allowed psychologists to look chiefly at genes; especially in monozygotic twins. Rutter found a higher concordance in aggression for MZ twins than DZ twins, suggesting that the more similar the genes are, the more likely they share genetic behaviour such as aggression. Coccaro found that nearly 50 % of the variance in direct aggressive behaviour in adults was attributed to genes and 70% of verbal aggression. However, this research also contradicts the role of genetics in aggression, as it gives equal weighting to environmental factors, which the other 50% of the variance is attributed to. This briefly outlines the gene-environment interaction approach, with a genetic predisposition reacting with the environment to influence aggressive behaviour. Adoption studies have also helped to differentiate between the complicated contributions of environment and heredity in aggression. If the adopted child and their biological parents display aggressive behaviour, it is likely that genetics play a stronger role than upbringing in a different environment Hutchings and Mednick studies 1400 adoptions in Denmark and found that a significant number of adopted boys with criminal convictions had biological parents (usually fathers) with criminal convictions. This supports that genetics influence aggression, as there is evidently a correlation even when separated from biological parents and the same environment. There is a problem that the only aggression measured was criminal convictions however, as it may not have picked up on antisocial behaviour not caught. In fact, with only studying criminal convictions, the psychologists could have ignored those who are arguably more intelligent and aggression- not having been caught and getting away with the crime.

There are some problems with twin studies. The first being that although MZ twins have a higher concordance rate for aggression in comparison with DZ twins, the concordance rate is never 100%. This suggests that genetic factors are not the only factors for aggression and environment does play a part. A predisposition for violence, but a disciplined and supportive home environment may stop this behaviour being a problem. Another problem is that MZ twins look exactly the same, and share the same biological makeup. This would affect how society treats the twins, perhaps the same way. In this instance, DZ twins would be treated more like individuals, and would therefore show more variance in their behaviour.

With both methodologies, criminality may be studies more than aggression, which affects internal validity. This means that the study fails to differentiate between violent and non-violent crime; an individual may have a conviction for fraud and placed in the same category as an individual in prison for manslaughter. Another issue is that habitual violence may be a better indicator for aggression, but again is placed in the same category as a one-off crime (a person who became aggressive once after consuming alcohol and bumping into someone they both had a mutual hatred for each other). Mednick et al found the biggest effect in their study was for non-violent crime. Brennan, however, compared the criminal history of adopted males and their biological and adoptive parents. They found that genetic influences were significant in cases of property but not violent crime. This piece of research shows that a crime personality may be inherited rather than aggressive behaviour. Being in a demonstratively moral and supportive environment teaches children not to be aggressive instead of becoming desensitised to it in a genetically likely household with many convictions.

Gender bias has also been criticised in the study of the role of genetics in aggression. Button et al found that the genetic heritability of aggressive anti-social behaviour was much higher for girls than boys (this was not the case for non-aggressive anti-social behaviour such as truancy). Button’s research indicates that heritability is stronger in women than men when it comes to aggression, and that more research would need to be taken for females. This may also explain the lower concordance in same sex DZ twins.

Other psychologists have explained the genetic link to aggression with a single gene- the MAOA. This warrior gene is linked with aggression, with lower levels increasing aggression. This may be dues to the role it has on regulating the metabolism of serotonin on the brain, with lower levels increasing aggression.  Brunner studied a Dutch family with the males showing high levels of violence (convictions and high antisocial behaviour levels). The study found abnormally low levels of MAOA, showing that deficiencies cause aggression. This study is culturally bound, and may not be demonstrative of the link between aggression and genes around the rest of the world. However, a gene-environment explanation may carry more weight. Caspi conducted a meta-analysis with 500 male children. He found that low levels of MAOA in the children did concord with antisocial behaviour, supportive of this explanation, however only if maltreated as a child. This shows that social environment plus genes influences behaviour, rather than just one or the other. Moffat found a similar conclusion. By examining abuse, convictions, violence and antisocial behaviour in 422 males from New Zealand, low levels of MAOA correlated with the risk of being convicted but again, only if they had suffered abuse. All of these studies are based on male aggression, with no incidences of female aggression. This is a weakness, which means that genes can only be shown to influence aggression on men.

Research into MAOA on aggression, like twin and adoption studies, focuses on individuals who have been convicted of violent crimes. This means that the studies only involve aggressive individuals who have been caught- who may tend to be low-intelligence individuals. This may explain why many studies fail to find evidence of genetic influences on aggression. They also fail to explain cultural differences which suggests that genetics are not the only factors in aggression, otherwise it would be universally correlated. In this way, the MAOA gene’s studies are ethnocentric, unable to be generalised to other countries.

However, research into this gene may be useful for society and the individual. Morley and Hall suggest that information from genetic screenings could be used to devise new treatments for personality disorders that have been identified as risk factors for criminal behaviours. The treatment would be able to lower the risk of the person being put in prison, and create a safer society. However, there are ethical weaknesses with this. This is rather deterministic, stating that the person will be aggressive after being labelled with MAMO deficiencies and is not pleasant for the person. Because it is their genetic makeup, this may seem like their personality is being altered when there is really only 50% variance linked to aggression. It could be useful when environmental factors pose a risk for those also with low levels of MAOA.

Many studies of genetic influences on aggressive behaviour rely on self-reports and these studies tend to show that there is a genetic link for aggression. However, observational studies have not been consistent. Miles and Carey found less genetic influence on aggression through observation than with self-reports in a meta-analysis. A replication of Bandura’s Bobo study using twins found no difference in MZ and DZ twins, suggesting that individual differences in aggression were more of a product of environmental influences than genetics (Plomin). This research suggests that many studies into MAOA are inconsistent, and the link found is unpredictable. Morley and Hall argue that genes associated with aggression only poorly predict the likelihood that an individual will display aggressive behaviour. The presence or absence of environmental factors can’t be identified in a genetic text, making the prediction of aggression even less likely. Perhaps a gene-environment interaction is a better explanation, with those who are predisposed genetically and brought up in a low socio-economic background more prone than those predisposed and brought up in a higher socio-economic environment in an area with low crime rates. If both genes and environment are not good predictor, then used in synchronisation will increase the accuracy.

The role of genetics is reductionist, as is states that aggression is caused by a single gene to make it easy to test. It ignores complex biological factors as well as psychological and environmental factors. For example, MAOA decreases low serotonin levels. Low serotonin levels are correlated with increased risk for depression. It could be that they are testing depression in males, as aggression and violence are symptoms of male depression (especially if they had suffered mistreatment as a child).  It is also determinist, showing that aggression is determined by our genes and that we can treat people with “faulty” genes. The biological approach ignores free will and this reduces individual responsibility for aggression, a significant problem when addressing an issue which is frequently dealt with in court and is harmful to society.