January 2010

Monday, January 18, 2010

Konad Where To Buy New York

"Humans are born to live, live and love as if they were the same thing. Affect is a fundamental need is the need makes us human. Hence, a person who has not been 'humanised' during the first six years of his life suffering from a process of dehumanization that leads them to destructive behaviors, learned in a messy and misguided attempt to adapt to a world too cluttered and provoking tension. Of these disorders arise all the aggressiveness and violent clashes at both individual and collective "
Ashley Montagu (The myth of human violence)

In the year 1986 at a UNESCO meeting in Seville, Spain, to mark the International Year of Peace, 19 scientists from India, Finland, Spain, Mexico, United States, Kuwait, United Kingdom , Germany, Russia, Australia, Poland and Kenya.
Belonging to different branches of science such as neurophysiology, psychology, ethology, social psychology, physical anthropology, psychiatry, biochemistry, psychobiology, animal behavior, biological anthropology, psychology, sociology.

signed the following (1) :

STATEMENT ON VIOLENCE

In the belief that it is our responsibility to speak out from our disciplines on the most dangerous and destructive activities of the species, violence and war, recognizing that science is a cultural product that can not be defined or cover everything, and grateful for the support sevillanas authorities and representatives of the English Committee of UNESCO; we the undersigned, scientists around the world and relevant science specialists have met and reached the following Statement on Violence. It put into question a number of alleged biological findings used even by some in our disciplines, to justify violence and war . Because these alleged findings have contributed to an atmosphere of pessimism in our time, we propose that this rejection abienrto and thought of such errors contribute significantly to the International Year of Peace.

Misuse of scientific theories and data as justification for violence and war is not new , but have occurred since the advent of modern science. For example, the theory of evolution has been used to justify not only war but also genocide, colonialism, and suppression of the weak .

formulate our proposal in the form of five proposals. We are aware that there are many other issues about violence and war which could be applied fruitfully in terms of our disciplines, but we confine ourselves here to what we regard as the first and most important step.

IS SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT to say that we inherited from our animal ancestors tendency to make war . Although the fights are common in all animal species, few cases of destruction among species organized groups are known and none includes the use of tools developed as weapons. The predators that normally feed on other species could not be equated with violence in the species. War is a peculiar human phenomenon and does not occur among the other animals .

The fact that the war has changed so radically over time indicates that it is a product of culture. Its biological connection takes place essentially through language, which allows the coordination of groups, transfer of technology and tools. War is biologically possible, but inevitable, as evidenced by its variations in time and in space. There are cultures that have waged war for hundreds of years and there are others who have engaged in frequent struggles times and not others.

IS SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT to say that war or other violent behavior are genetically programmed into our human nature . While genes affect all levels Nervis system function, providing a potential development that can only be updated jointly by the ecological and social environment. While the individual varies in their predisposition to be affected by his experience, is the interaction between their genetic endowment and rearing conditions which determine their personality . Except for rare pathologies, the genes do not produce individuals necessarily predisposed to violence. Do they determine otherwise. While genes are involved with each other to establish our performance capabilities, do not determine the outcome for themselves.

IS SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT to say that in the course of human evolution has been a selection of aggressive behavior more than other behaviors . In all well-studied species, status within the group is achieved with the ability to cooperate and fulfill social functions relevant to the structure of that group.
The "dominance" implies social ties and affiliations, it is not simply a matter of possession and use of greater physical strength, although it involves aggressive behavior. Where genetic selection for aggressive behavior has been imposed artificially in animals, has quickly produced hyper-aggressive individuals, indicating that the attack was not selected the most natural conditions.
When such hyper-aggressive animals, created experimentally are in a social group, or disrupt its social structure or are thrown out of it. Violence is our evolutionary legacy nor in our genes.

IS SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT to say that humans possess a "violent brain" . While we have the nervous system able to act violently, it is not automatically activated by external or internal stimuli. As higher primates, but unlike other animals, our higher neural processes, filter such stimuli before they are made. There is nothing in our neurophysiology that compels us to react violently .

IS SCIENTIFICALLY INCORRECT to say that war has its origins in the 'instinct' or any other motivation simple. The emergence of modern warfare has been a journey from the primacy of emotional and motivational factors, sometimes called "instincts" - to the primacy of cognitive factors. Modern war involves institutional use of personal caracaterísticas such as obedience, suggestibility or idealism, social skills like language, and rational considerations such as cost estimates, planning and reporting process. technology of modern war has exaggerated traits associated with violence, both in training fighters in the preparation of support for the war among the general population. As a result of this exaggeration, such features often are interpreted as causes and consequences of the process not as .

conclude
saying that biology does not condemn humanity to war, and that humanity can be freed from the bondage of biological pessimism and now equipped with the confidence necessary to perform the processing tasks required in this International Year of Peace and the years come. Although these tasks are mainly institutional and collective, also based in the consciousness of individual participants for whom pessimism and optimism are essential. As "wars begin in the minds of men ', peace also begins in our minds. The same species who invented war is capable of inventing peace. The responsibility lies with each one of us.

Seville, May 16, 1986

LIST Scientists subscribers

David Adams, Psychology, Wesleyan University, Middletown (CT), U.S.. SA Barnett, Ethology. The Australian National University, Canberra, Australia.

NPBETCHEREVA, Neurophysiology, Institute of Experimental Medicine Academy of Medical Sciences of the USSR, Leningrad, USSR.

Bonnie Frank Carter, Psychology, Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia (PA), U.S..

Joseph M. Rodriguez Delgado, Neurophysiology, Center for Neurobiological Studies, Madrid, Spain

Andrzej Eliasz, Single Differences Psychology. Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland. SANTIAGO

GENOVES, Biological Anthropology, Institute of Anthropological Studies, Mexico City, Mexico. JOSE LUIS DIAZ

, Ethology, Mexican Institute of Psychiatry, Mexico City, Mexico.

E. BENSON GINSBURG, Behavioral Genetics, University of Connecticut, Storr (CT), USA. JO

Groebel, Social Psychology, Errziehungswissens-chaftliche Hochschule, Landau, Germany.

-SAMIR KUMAR GHOSH, Sociology, Indian Institute of Human Sciences, Calcutta, India.

Robert Hinde, Animal Behavior, University of Cambridge, UK.
RICHARD E.
LEAKEY, Physical Anthropology, National Museum of Kenya, Nairobi, Kenya. TAH

H. MALAYSIA, Psychiatry, University of Kuwait

MARTIN J. RAMIREZ, Psychobiology, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain.

Federico Mayor Zaragoza, Biochemistry, Universidad Autónoma, Madrid, Spain. DIANA L.

MENDOZA, Etiology, Universidad de Sevilla, Spain.

Ashis Nandy, Political Psychology, Center for the Study of Developing Societies, Delhi, India.

JOHN PAUL SCOTT, Animal Behavior, Bowling Green State University, Bowling Green (OH), USA. Riitta

Walstrom, Psychology, University of Jyväskylä, Finland.

English Original: English Translation of the Commission.

----------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------- Notes
:

(1 ) Retrieving Information from Texts Casilda Rodrigáñez Bustos.