Terrorism Genes
July 8, 2005 by Lei
Filed under General Genetics and Health
If anything is a public health concern, terrorism is. It affects everyone psychologically and many others physically, both directly and indirectly. The explosions in London yesterday (July 7, 2005) were not the first nor will they be the last acts of terrorism we experience. What kind of depraved sicko would commit such a heinous crime?
I’d like to think that I have nothing in common with terrorists and criminals. Still, they have DNA just like the rest of us. If there are risk-taking genes and genes for psycho-social behavior, then they must have a disproportionately high number of genes coding for deviant behavior. I know it’s a human rights violation to conduct biological research on unwilling study participants, but maybe that could be part of their sentence. Convicted terrorists should donate their DNA for scientific research so we know what makes them tick.
Of course, I’m talking out of anger and the desire for retribution. There’s no doubt that upbringing, culture, religious inculcation, and a slew of other circumstances train terrorists to kill people in heinous ways. But I don’t believe that I am equally capable of of doing the same in a similar environment (at least I hope so). What makes me different from them? Is it my genes?
Some people think that we’d all get along better if, using DNA tests, we knew exactly how many ancestors we have in common. Somehow, I don’t think terrorists would accept such reasoning. Even hard evidence can be misinterpreted by our own biased perceptions. Where equal rights activists would revel in our similarities, racists and bigots would revel in the smallest differences. In the end, it still boils down to what we believe in our hearts.
I believe in peace and harmony. What about you?
NB: This entry was written in response to Anne’s invitation at The Golden Pencil to write for peace.
Good blog entry! Well done.
Thanks, Shai. Terrorism affects every sphere if life in the most disturbing way.
I’m doing some research on terrorism and kids now and will write something up for the Children’s Books, Toys and Things Blog soon.
An interesting take on why terrorists are like they are.
Great one, Lei!
Hsien, I love the idea that we shouldn’t hurt criminals by studying their DNA. Because it’s such an invasive procedure, right?
Still, it’s such a slippery slope. The whole idea of preventative policing freaks me out.
Do you know what I mean?
Good article.
eve if it can be tracked to the molecular level, wouldn’t the "terrorism gene" something where the environment play a great deal in its expression? hm…
Thanks, Melissa. I’ve written before that genes have become the scapegoats of public health. Maybe we can start blaming genes instead of each other for all the horror in the world (Said tongue in cheek, of course.)
Thanks, Krissy. I knew you’d get what I was driving at with the DNA analysis of criminals bit. Not like that isn’t already happening anyway considering we have national DNA databases in many countries already.
Thanks for the comment, Ruth. I totally agree with you. The fact that environment and our own free will determines our life to a much greater degree than our genes is a point I make again and again in this blog.
re: ruth’s comment
the nature vs nurture thing?
Melissa (and Ruth), The nature vs. nurture debate is is often brought up when discussing the various causes of disease. But, the interesting thing is that it usually isn’t either/or.
While there are some genes that when present always cause severe disease, as I’m sure you already know, some genes may not ever cause disease except when certain environmental factors are present, e.g., PKU. Sometimes neither genes nor environment are sufficient on their own to cause disease, but both may be necessary.
Personally, I think talking about nature vs nurture isn’t as relevant anymore. Everything feeds off one another and none is a lone cuprit. There are always accomplices, both genetic and environmental factors.
My own hope for peace includes the idea that we humans are actually at the point where we can influence our own evolution. I also believe that everyone, including the bombers want some pretty basic things: freedom, peace, security, home, family.
It’s terribly difficult for me to really see how a suicide bomber is working for those things, but my gut says they are, somewhere deep down.
I don’t understand how it gets all twisted… and I haven’t a clue where genetics fits into this… but as you said, we all have almost the same dna… could it be we have more in common than we currently recognize?
Anne
http://www.whengrandmothers...
http://www.aboutweblogs.com...
"It’s terribly difficult for me to really see how a suicide bomber is working for those things, but my gut says they are, somewhere deep down."
Anne, my gut says that the bombers are totally not working for these things. I believe there are people in this world who are not looking for security and freedom, home and family. I believe that there are people in this world who look for power and are incapable of conceiving that force and death are not acceptable ways to get it.
I don’t believe that if you showed, say, Hitler, a picturesque future of a home and freedom and food and a dog by the hearth that he would have chosen that future over the future of power he sought for himself.
I think that it’s possible to place too much faith in the human race.
Too much faith is possible, but also we can have too little. (and here’s where this entry comes in) For example, there are more psychopaths in this world than was oringinally believed. They don’t all turn into killers. Having the inability to recognize other’s feelings and motivations and being intensely adept at manipulation certainly sets someone up to be a good killer. It also sets them up to be a good CEO.
Do we put tags on people with a gene for psychopathy? Do we lock them up before they might cause harm? Do we abort them? What do we do?
It’s a dangerous trait, but not a foregone conclusion, if you see what I mean. Merely because someone is genetically predisposed to violence doesn’t mean that it’s a guarantee. I don’t like the idea of judging someone for something they haven’t actually done.
Just to point out, Stanley Milgram conducted a study to determine if normal people would harm others. Click here, http://www.holah.co.uk, and go to the social psychology section for an overview of the experiment. It shows that even a normal person can harm another person, and that situational factors influence them, supporting a behaviourist view of this, and not providing sufficient evidence to suggest genetic differences. The Nazi’s for example, were ‘only following orders’, it would be unlikely so many people would have significant genetic differences.
Thanks for the comment and links, Steve. You make a very good point. I remember Milgram’s study from Psych 101 and you’ve reminded me of the prison experiment that was conducted at Stanford (http://www.prisonexp.org/). This essay was really just a thought exercise. I definitely agree that genetics is not a good explanation for why some people are terrorists and others are not.