It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

James holms, research, the problem with going native.

page: 1
8

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 10:52 AM
link   
There is no inherent thing in a person that prevents them from carrying out acts of killing, or mass destruction. The thing that restrains a person is their upbringing. The morality and ethics that they are taught when they are growing up.

That fact becomes all the more important when they enter a field of study where they are dealing with the very perception of reality that those morals are based on.

There has been a long standing problem in research. That is the tendency for the researcher to go native. A researcher has to study the interaction from an independent third person perspective. To stay independent, he has to have a solid psychological/moral grounding to prevent his mind from getting caught up in what he is researching.

If he was not taught the importance of maintaining that moral/ethical/psychological grounding by people he trust, and people that educate him, then he can very easily get caught up in his own research.

His parents may be religious, but if he actively rejected their world view and embraced the moral relativism that his mentors, and classmates embraced, then he lost his mental foundation that allowed him to observe his research from a stable view point.

He is the modern equivalent of the researcher that went to the jungle to study head hunters. The one that started socially interacting with his research subjects. The one that started smoking the same mind altering substances as his research subjects. The one that started hunting heads along side his research subjects. The one that helped his research subjects kill the rescue team that was sent in to try to find out what happened to him.

He was studying how people perceive reality. To figure out how people that are classified as “insane” or “evil” think.

The irony is that he succeeded in his research. He figured out how those people view the world. But the problem is he did not have enough of a psychological foundation to prevent that way of viewing the world from taking over how he himself viewed the world. It made more sense than his own world view.

He went native.




posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 12:22 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Very interesting perspective on the issue and for that I will SnF as it seems very probable. However where does the lack of memory of committing his crime come from? The inability to understand why he is even in jail? Is that an act? If so how does that fall in line with a "going native" thought process?

If he is acting out his loss of memory he is doing so to avoid punishment for something he KNOWS was wrong...If he didn't know it was wrong he would need to try and avoid punishment as he wouldn't be expecting it.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:02 PM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Probably the most well thought out theory on why he did what he did.

Great read actually.

I had hinted at something like this in a previous thread....although my take was different I think I like yours a bit better...

I was thinking that since he was studying markers in dna maybe he used his own blood sample and found that he could discover the crazy gene....and that he himself had this gene and so the scientific proof was right in front of him that he was crazy and that since it was 100% proof he just embraced it because science was everything in terms of proof for him.

I think there is more going on than either of us have hinted at but I really like you outlook on this. It's better to try and find out why, then to just except it happened and hope it doesn't happen again.



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by Sly1one
If he is acting out his loss of memory he is doing so to avoid punishment for something he KNOWS was wrong...If he didn't know it was wrong he would need to try and avoid punishment as he wouldn't be expecting it.


He is just gaming the system. To imply that he knows it’s wrong, is projecting. He knows that society thinks it’s wrong, and based on that knowledge, he knows how society will react. To him, he knows that society’s moral idea of killing is relative. He no longer has such inhibitions against such anti social stuff. The truth has set him free.

To him, the world is just one big Petri dish and his experiment has became his life..



posted on Aug, 2 2012 @ 03:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Tranny

Originally posted by Sly1one
If he is acting out his loss of memory he is doing so to avoid punishment for something he KNOWS was wrong...If he didn't know it was wrong he would need to try and avoid punishment as he wouldn't be expecting it.


He is just gaming the system. To imply that he knows it’s wrong, is projecting. He knows that society thinks it’s wrong, and based on that knowledge, he knows how society will react. To him, he knows that society’s moral idea of killing is relative. He no longer has such inhibitions against such anti social stuff. The truth has set him free.

To him, the world is just one big Petri dish and his experiment has became his life..


wow...good points...definitely a very interesting, practical and believable sense to it all...

kudos to you, and I forgot to Sn F you earlier after I posted but i did now...

Wish this post was more popular as its would create some interesting discussion I think...



posted on Aug, 3 2012 @ 02:55 AM
link   
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Interesting theory, but he wasn't studying evil, he was studying perceptions of time



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by squirelnutz
reply to post by Mr Tranny
 


Interesting theory, but he wasn't studying evil, he was studying perceptions of time
Unless we gain accsess to his papers writtings ect we dont know what he was into..Just because his course or thesis was such an such .Doesnt mean he was soley studying that subject alone..Recently in the UK we had a serial killer the self profesed Crossbow Canibal Killer whom was doing a doctrate on serial killers at University now wether his intrest inspired his killings or as the OP suggests maybe he also went native ..A kind of Stockholm Syndrome of The Mind?..Great post by the way s an f from me.....I will see if I can find a link to post on the Cross Bow Serial Killer..



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:28 PM
link   
reply to post by ecossiepossie
 


O K here is a link to the crossbow killer since his imprisonment he has made numerous half hearted attempts at fax suiside his latest being a hunger strike..... He is most likely working his ticket to get transferred to a mental hospital www.crimeandinvestigation.co.uk...



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 09:34 PM
link   
The mind is everything. What you think you become.
Buddha



posted on Aug, 4 2012 @ 10:03 PM
link   

Originally posted by XxRagingxPandaxX
The mind is everything. What you think you become.
Buddha
Or your not what you think you are..You are what you think...My Mum...



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:25 PM
link   
reply to post by ecossiepossie
 


That guy had a history of violence, though

He was destined to kill



As a teenager, Stephen regularly shoplifts. When a supermarket manager tries to stop him, Stephen attacks with a knife. Aged just 17, he’s sentenced to three years’ youth custody. He tells probation officers he fantasises about serial killing.


Very interesting, nonetheless



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 05:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by Mr Tranny
There is no inherent thing in a person that prevents them from carrying out acts of killing, or mass destruction. The thing that restrains a person is their upbringing. The morality and ethics that they are taught when they are growing up.

That fact becomes all the more important when they enter a field of study where they are dealing with the very perception of reality that those morals are based on.

There has been a long standing problem in research. That is the tendency for the researcher to go native. A researcher has to study the interaction from an independent third person perspective. To stay independent, he has to have a solid psychological/moral grounding to prevent his mind from getting caught up in what he is researching.

If he was not taught the importance of maintaining that moral/ethical/psychological grounding by people he trust, and people that educate him, then he can very easily get caught up in his own research.

His parents may be religious, but if he actively rejected their world view and embraced the moral relativism that his mentors, and classmates embraced, then he lost his mental foundation that allowed him to observe his research from a stable view point.

He is the modern equivalent of the researcher that went to the jungle to study head hunters. The one that started socially interacting with his research subjects. The one that started smoking the same mind altering substances as his research subjects. The one that started hunting heads along side his research subjects. The one that helped his research subjects kill the rescue team that was sent in to try to find out what happened to him.

He was studying how people perceive reality. To figure out how people that are classified as “insane” or “evil” think.

The irony is that he succeeded in his research. He figured out how those people view the world. But the problem is he did not have enough of a psychological foundation to prevent that way of viewing the world from taking over how he himself viewed the world. It made more sense than his own world view.

He went native.


You raise a really good point, very true and very real. I study neuropsychology and have delved pretty deeply into some radical "perspective shifting" thought/practice/study. You are correct on all accounts, if it wasn't for what we might call previous social/ethical/moral conditioning, it is very possible to lose all touch with what is considered to be socially acceptable perspectives of reality. Although I don't think ethics have to be grounded in religious belief, but that is another topic.

I also am not sure that this explains it all, there most likely is a number of factors that led to this tragedy, but that was an awesome analysis, and I usually don't like "long-distance analysis's", but this really was good.

edit on 6-8-2012 by openlocks because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 6 2012 @ 06:01 PM
link   
 


off-topic post removed to prevent thread-drift


 



new topics

top topics



 
8

log in

join