Nature with Nurture.
Crime in inevitable. Society and the world sucks, so people turn to drugs. They make drugs illegal so they can make money off the incarcerations.
Yes, drug use should be considered a health issue, not a criminal issue.
Okay. I thought so.
I mean that crime is caused by both nature and nurture. Crime has its roots in nature. All living beings are criminal, but only human beings are capable of knowing what crime is. Also this human capability has its roots in nature but must be passed on by nurture. You need a brain in order to understand what crime is. If nurture can but does not let you know what crime is, then nurture causes crime. If nurture does let you know what crime is, then nurture does not cause crime, but if you nevertheless become criminal in that case, then nature, namely the nature in you, causes crime, and you yourself are responsible for it, since you can (know what crime is), and therefore you must (know what crime is). You can, so you must (cp. Kant).
You’re leaving out one aspect of “nature” - biochemical environment, “intervention”.
When your computer misbehaves, is it due to the hardware, the software, or the environment?
There is natural environment, and there is cultural environment. The biochemical environment you mentioned is part of the natural environment.
I agree there are probably no specifically crime genes. Nature has rules, if another lion successfully kills the top lion, he then fucks the female, kills the children and fucks the former kings ass. - so more of a strength gene that crime.
Nature doesn’t know what crime or sexuality is, the lion isn’t committing a crime nor is he gay, its purely about power for the lion. In a sense our laws exist simply because some have the power to enforce them, and there is a universal wish to be beneficial to the group. Theft, like all/most crimes, is a ‘crime’ of power.
There was such a time.
The person wasn’t born a criminal, the person was born with certain biological potentials.
A society is not obligated to provide everybody with opportunity or to assimilate anyone.
If there is no crime then civil-society is on its decline.
If there is lots of crime then civil-society is in the process of establishing itself.
A weak society compromised of weak people is not capable of dealing with lots of criminality and so they try to manage by making former crimes increasingly legal.
These two statements ae giving me cognitive dissonance, and yet you state them as absolutes.
Statement1 my response - So if we have a society where everyone is wealthy, happy, and content, and thus no crime, it means that society it is on it’s decline?
Statement 2 my response - So if you have a tyrannical ruler like America, or Kim Jung 2, that has so many laws you cannot even count…It is a sign of strength, and not fear and weakness of allowing the people to have basic rights?
So liberals, are basically tough, and strong, because they want to ban everything and make it illegal?
If “crime doesn’t exist in nature” then that is a case for crime being a product of “Nurturing”.
So, does crime exist in nature, or not? If it is a crime for a human to murder another and cannibalize then why is it not also a crime for animals to do the same in the wild? Is murder a crime, or not?
The cognitive dissonance probably results from the notion that crime is something which is a fixed absolute, which it is not. What is crime and what is not considered crime, what is considered good and what is considered vile is changing. And social change is not necessarily an improvement, in whatever way you define improvement; it could just as well be a way of buying time, a retreat.
ad 1, Yes, if a society is completely happy then I say, such a society can’t exist, unless, their happiness is bought by their own retreat. For example, if you can’t get laid and you are unhappy about it, you retreat from that ambition and voila you are happy again. So enduring happiness is the last man’s plight. He’s the ebb of the mankinds.
ad 2, Is North Korea on the decline as a civil-society? To me it looks like it’s still in a forming stage, whether you like what is being created or not.
As for liberals in America, Yes, they have been tougher, more successful in forming civil-society than conservatives.
Smoke some weed? Conservatives have learned to not be ‘bigoted’ and tolerate that former crime. Their social order is/was crumbling.
Conservatives have been on the retreat, or let’s say, the cuck-incorporated establishment has giddily helped facilitate and enjoyed the demise. They don’t like their voters.
Crime is a social construct.
All social constructs are formed and maintained by a biological organism and thus connected to nature.
A genetically pre-disposed moron does think and act like a genetically pre-disposed moron. He thinks like a moron. He creates laws like a moron. He commits crimes in the way of a moron. That being said, a moron can be disciplined by another person, or lead by another person and be trained to act in less moronic ways for his own benefit and the benefit of his social circle overall. But it does not remove the moron aspect from him genetic composition. And free of social pressures and threats he would slowly but surely, or quickly and most definitely revert back to his moron ways.
“Nature is the sum of all previous nurturing.”
If murder is a crime, and wild animals murder each other, usually out of starvation and hunger, then how were they socially constructed to be criminals?
Killing animals is in most societies not a crime. Not necessarily so anyway.
Even killing a man is not necessarily a crime in most societies - war, death-sentences, euthanasia laws.
Killing is not criminal in itself, nothing is criminal in itself. It might be considered to be a crime by a specific society, in a specific set of circumstances. It is evaluated, judged to be criminal by the law, by someone.
Social constructs are connected to the nature of those men who devise them.
For example, equality is a social construct which is based on a fantasy a lot of men have. I call it in this post the Star Trek faggotry.
Race is a social construct which is based on the observation of differences in ancestral lineage, a biological reality.
The statement race is a social construct, therefore the insinuation being that it’s not based in reality I call here now the Star Trek autism fallacy.
As for crime - The laws in place are devised by men, therefore they are a social construct. What their arguments and reasoning was behind devising them is another story.
The criminal was born with a certain biological potential (nature), into a certain social environment (nurture) and laws (nurture) in place. Those nurture aspects play a role in which kinds of biological potentials are suffocated, which ones are twisted, which ones are nurtured and which kinds of potentials (nature) will continue to go an and in combination with which other genetic qualities (nature). Thus nature + nurture = new nature.
It’s a combination both where it isn’t just a either or type thing.
And entire societies run by authorities commit acts of crime all the time where the only difference is that the actions committed by individuals is deemed criminal whereas the criminal actions consisting of the state is law.
The concept of crime itself is a social construct. It isn’t real in any sense of the word and revolves around faulty narratives of authority or state centralized morality.
So most or all of you presume that ‘Crime’ is a man-made phenomenon completely distinct and separate from wild animals, “Nature”?
If man-made “Crime”, laws, punishment are all man-made then you should vote for the Nurture option, shouldn’t you?
Wut LOL…Because cuck virgins are known for being soooo…happy…xD That’s like saying the joker is happy because his name is the joker and he tells jokes…wut LOL 
I’d say its on the decline, half the people there are starving.
If plucking a random plant from your yard is all that takes to crumble their civilization, they never had a civilization to begin with.
Didn’t they have races in Star Trek. Weren’t Clingon’s a racist depiction of blacks?
LOL
Classic quote, may I frame this?