Thursday, April 19, 2007

Evil and Personal Responsibility


Much is being said today about coming up with a psychological profile of Virginia Tech gunman Cho Seung-Hui but in all of the discussion we are missing a very fundamental point, to explain a behavior does not justify that behavior. We can look at all the various factors that led up to the gunman’s maniacal rampage but all that does not make it any less heinous or evil.

We have an odd tendency in our culture to want to humanize villains and make them more understandable. Somehow this allows us to continue functioning in our society. What is shocking to me is that it should do quite the opposite. If we really begin to understand that these people were like us in many ways what does that say about our own capacity to do evil?

Beyond that there are some other considerations I would like to address. It is more foundational than what I presented in my previous post. Namely that we need to stop trying to explain away evil behavior under an avalanche of psychological babble and call it for what it is. This slaughter was an evil, premeditated mass killing by a wicked individual who was warped and twisted at his core. The personal responsibility for his actions rests with him, not with his circumstances.

Let me explain where I am coming from. We can look at his background such as his being an immigrant that moved here from South Korea with his parents at age 8. We can evaluate his socio-economic situation to see that perhaps he was “under privileged.” We can scrutinize the verbal, mental and perhaps even physical abuse that he endured growing up (although physical or sexual abuse hasn’t been mentioned yet I am sure if they look hard enough they will find someone who will say he was skipped in the lunch line or pushed at recess). We can dissect his psychological condition looking for depression or other indicators.

Again, all of these are factors that may explain his behavior but we are missing one key element in the whole discussion, that of personal responsibility. All of these are external factors to one degree or another. What we are missing is the reality that as human beings we have a will that governs our decisions and because of which we are ultimately individually responsible.

Cho chose not to talk to others growing up. Cho chose not to take the mental health when it was offered to him. Cho chose to take pictures of girls in his literature class and get kicked out. Cho chose to buy two handguns. Cho chose to plan a homicidal attack on his fellow students. Cho chose to make a 23 page manifesto and add video and still shots of his planned rampage. All of this flowed from his heart which was evil and which he freely chose to do. He may have been influenced by these other factors but the bottom line is that the evil choices reside with him.

We have what philosophers or theologians refer to as “will,” “volition,” “choice,” or “personal responsibility.” These decisions flow from our heart or the seat of who we are as a human being. Cho was neither mentally incompetent nor was he coerced into his behavior. This means that he is personally and fully responsible for his actions.

We are looking for people to blame for this tragedy. It is fine for us to consider these other factors in society that shape a person’s heart towards deeper levels of evil or the influences that inform a person’s actions. Each of us has a propensity towards evil that the Bible calls our “sin nature.” However, God in His mercy has also given common grace to us so that we are not as evil as we could be. Yet there are influences that we consciously or unconsciously allow to shape our heart and ultimately we become the people we have chosen to be.

My mention of violence in our culture is one of those influences that has and does shape who we are as people. A steady diet of violence has a small but steady incremental impact on us individually and as a society. But we must recognize that we have chosen for it to be so. Again, identifying a factor or factors that influenced a behavior may explain it but does not justify it. For that we must stand alone in judgment of our behavior. As a society it would do us much better to call evil for what it is rather than dismissing it based on its factors.

Wednesday, April 18, 2007

Virgina Tech and Our Culture of Violence


Have we become an increasingly violent culture? The evening of the Virginia Tech massacre my wife Jenn and I were discussing this and I mused, would this have happened 50 or 60 years ago? We know at least once it happened in the 60’s, which was over 40 years ago, so it is not unheard of. But I was thinking a bit further back than that. I was thinking back to the 50’s, 40’s and before. My main question is how has our culture changed where school shootings and other mass homicides are becoming increasingly commonplace?

In part I think that there is a copycat syndrome that occurs. One mentally unstable guy (sorry ladies for being sexist but it is always guys), get the thought in his head to do harm and recalls the level of media attention that the last crazed gunman received when he killed 5, 10 or more people in a maniacal blaze of glory. This then becomes the outline or script for his rampage. I think this in part explains what happens. However, I think that there are underlying issues as well.

We have become a nation saturated with violence. We see violent images on television, movies, video games and hear the messages in our music. Before any of you react to what I am saying let me make one think clear. Do I think that violence in media CAUSES violence in our culture? The answer to that is NO. Violent content in these mediums does not MAKE people violent nor does it MAKE them commit violent acts. However, I believe there is a persistent and undeniable INFLUENCE of these mediums in our culture. This is a fine but important distinction.

Let’s take violence in movies and on television. It has been widely reported that the average person sees 40,000 murders and 200,000 acts of violence on television and movies by the time he is 18. Although that may seem like a lot on first blush, consider movies where there is a body count of 50 or 100 in just the opening scene. Or consider movies like Braveheart, Saving Private Ryan, or the recent movie “300” and the number seems very believable. Watch TV for a night and get a count from all the cop and forensics shows and keep adding up the numbers. Maybe that count is actually too low.

These movies and television shows do not cause violence, so what does a steady diet of violence then do?

1. A steady diet of violence desensitizes us to violence and violent acts. The first time we see something we are shocked and disgusted. The second time we are mildly ill. The third time we are slightly irritated. The tenth or fiftieth or thousandth time it barely has an effect. Doctors, soldiers, and police deal with these things as a matter of necessity but they do not do so for entertainment. Further, their intention is to help others or make things better. Even so, as one police officer said to me recently, “you can’t help but be affected by seeing this stuff every day.”

2. A steady diet of violence gives us a script to follow in real life. People see their favorite actors shooting up the place, pulverizing the bad guy’s face in or punching another guy’s lights out when provokes. When we find ourselves in similar situations these same reactions now become acceptable responses in a situation. They become a script for us to follow. We “act out” the things we see on TV or the movies. We view ourselves in the “roles” we see. How many times have you repeated a line you saw in a movie? How often do you compare something you are going through to something you saw on TV? I find myself repeating lines I’ve seen on movies without even realizing it.

3. A steady diet of violence exposes us to new types of violence and torture. I recently talked to a friend who had gone to see the movie Hostel. Even though he wasn’t a Christian or wouldn’t claim any strong moral convictions, he told me he was shocked and sickened by what he saw. He thought the only reason for the film was to freak people out with gratuitous violence. He said it really made him consider how twisted and evil people can be. All this just to be entertained.

4. A steady diet of violence gives us vicarious emotional experiences of violent acts. With a good movie you are caught up with the characters and events of the story. You begin to sympathize with the hero in whatever plight he or she might be in. You feel for the character and identify with him. If something bad happens you feel bad. If something good happens you feel happy. In the best movies you are lost in the story and don’t even think about things as they are going on. You become lost in the moment. Having to consciously think about what is going on takes you out of the experience and is annoying.

The point is, you vicariously identify with the character. When he feels you feel, when he acts you act. Have you ever jumped when something startles you in a movie? Why? It is only a picture on a screen. It is because “you are there.” In a sense, when the good guy kills the bad guy you are there too and emotionally you identify with the hero and you are vicariously killing the bad guy. If you’ve never thought about it before you might think I’m totally off but just think about it the next time you watch an action movie.

5. A steady diet of violence encourages those already on the edge to step over the edge. In other words they become “precipitating events” that spur the deranged person to action. Just because I’m not going to go out and go “postal” after seeing a violent movie most people say “it doesn’t affect me.” Fortunately the vast majority will never go out and commit a gruesome violent act. However, there are those who have mental problems and what they see is just enough to influence them to action. That is why we often hear of the serial killers or mass murders having violent videos or video games at their residence. Something triggers them to act. The movies may not have been the CAUSE but they are often an influencing FACTOR.

6. Violence in movies and television are emotional not cognitive. We have already discussed this before but let me make a further point. Rarely do you hit the pause button while watching a DVD to discuss the morals and ethics of the main character’s actions. Perhaps you might talk about it afterwards but most people are reluctant to do that because it ruins the experience. When you dissect a movie it often diminishes or changes your emotions about the movie. We want to remember those emotions and not have them soiled by critical evaluation. In fact, when we think about if we liked a movie or not we usually think about our emotional reaction to the movie not its intellectual assets. Even when we say, that movie really made me think we often mean it made me FEEL deeply about an issue.

Since I am already stepping on toes let me throw in another related issue of violent video games. What do these do to our thinking?

1. They give repetitive training on how to effectively kill. The military realizes this and actually has found in this high tech 21st century military it can be an asset. That’s great if you are in the military fighting a mortal enemy. But getting in “mortal combat” in our schools or neighborhoods is not a good thing. The military found that the “kill rate” increases dramatically if you can train a person to become desensitized to the idea of killing another person through repetitive training in real-life situations. Guess what, that is exactly what we are doing through the repetition of video games.

2. Unlike movies, video games are played 1st person so you are directly doing the “killing.” I mentioned the vicarious nature of movies already but it is magnified through video games. Unlike movies where there is a step involved in “becoming” the main character, in video games you ARE the main character. You ARE the shooter. You ARE the driver. Video games have moved away from you watching the action as an observer to seeing the action through the eyes of the character. This is happening to “you.” People are shooting at “you.” “You” are the one doing the action. Again, we need to consider the repetitive and emotional nature of this.

3. Again they teach us strategies on how to kill effectively and amass a higher body count. As you play a game you learn what does and doesn’t work in a situation. You find out what will get you caught or killed quickly and you don’t do that next time. You have the opportunity to have a dry run, hit the reset button and try again until you get it right.

4. Often the killing is realistic and not necessarily in a military type setting. The more controversial of these games involves the gamer to “kill” innocent bystanders or even to make that the point of the game. There are differing levels of violence. Some violence is more cartoonish. Other violence is sci-fi violence. Some violence is in a military setting. And other violence is against innocents or civilians. The most controversial of these is where you play the bad guy and you have to rape, rob and murder innocent bystanders. Other than money why would people create games like this? Also, what motivates a person to play these most egregious types of games? What does that say about us as a society?

Much of what I have said could equally be apply to violence in music so I won’t rehash my arguments here about those. But I can’t count the times I’ve been walking in a parking lot or down the street and hear about body counts and killing cops. As the people mindlessly sing along, what is going on in their minds? If nothing is, why not?

Well, what are some of the effects of violence in these mediums?

We all know that we are affected and shaped by what we see, hear and experience. If this wasn’t the case advertisers wouldn’t spend millions of dollars showing you products, stirring your emotions and trying to motivate you to act (buy my product!). If I could put it in poetic and biblical terms, everything we do shapes our heart. And from our heart spring our motivations, actions, reactions and decisions.

A steady diet of violence on television, movies, video games and in music has had a subtle but consistent shaping affect on our thoughts, responses and interactions. No one movie or video games is going to go out and “make you” act violently. It is much more subtle than that. But each experience shapes us in small, almost imperceptible ways. It is only when you stand back and see the cumulative effects can you even notice how it works. It is the repetition that makes it effective (and insidious).

Beyond that, as a culture it raises the acceptable level of violence in a given situation. In movies the “hero” never walks away from a fight. No, he strikes first and strikes hard. So if some jerk comes up to me on the street what do I do? I do exactly what I am “expected” to do or what I expect myself to do. Violence becomes an acceptable response in a situation. In some subcultures it is a given.

Our culture has become so desensitized to violence it doesn’t even get the same reaction out of us. Much like drugs where the person has to continue to increase the dose to have the same experience, so too in our culture movie makers have to come up with even more graphic ways to shock and entertain the audiences.

Granted most people are not living on the edge. These mediums won’t “push us over the edge” because we are not on the edge. Parents often can’t or won’t tell their kids no or stop them from buying these games or videos because they can’t come up with a good reason not to. One game won’t make a difference. Perhaps not. But a steady diet of them over the course of years most definitely will. This is why we need to keep our kids from them and keep ourselves from them as well.

Has our culture changed? To me the obvious answer is yes. I don’t blame it solely on the mediums I’ve mentioned but I think that these have been a persistent and driving force in the shape of our culture and the direction it will continue to go in the future. Virginia Tech won’t be the last mass murder we see. Of course we’ll start a crusade and go after the wrong issue. In the days ahead we will hear scores of people wanting to ban guns. However, you will hear few people discussing the factors that are truly influencing us to be an increasingly violent society.

Tuesday, April 10, 2007

Crossing the Threshold-So far, so good!

Dear Friends,

I just wanted to give you a brief update on Alexander Jonathan as we are now entering the 21st week of the pregnancy.

So far everything looks excellent and there are no indications of heart block developing which occurred with Grace at week 19.

When Jenn was pregnant with Grace we found out that Jenn carries an antibody for a disease she does not have. There are very few known side effects from this antibody. However, one known side effect is that it causes heart block (usually 3rd degree or complete heart block) during pregnancy and almost always between weeks 18-20.

They say that there is a one in twenty chance of this occurring with a child but it increases to a one in six chance if you already have a child with heart block. We fall into that category.

The further we move away from week 20 without any heart blockage problems the likelihood reduces drastically. If we can get through the next month without a problem we should be fine. They will not guarantee it but doctors never do.

By the way, here are some fresh pictures of Grace at Old Town State Park in downtown San Diego yesterday. As you can tell we’ve been having some bad weather. It was only in the upper 60’s!

By the way, she is past the walking stage and moving into the running stage just in time for the last half of Jenn's pregnancy! Yea!

She is doing great and has absolutely no problems with the pacemaker. In fact, I may not have mentioned that they took her off the betablocker medicine because the other underlying problem she had (long QT interval) is gone! It hasn't shown up at the 12 or 18 month tests! We praise the Lord for that.

Thanks for all your prayers and words of encouragement,

Love,

Dave, Jenn, Grace and Alexander