I don't think so, I haven't really made any claims about how much of their behavior is situational versus dispositional. I'm just saying that disposition plays some role.
We are always biased to overestimate the component of behavior attributable to some intrinsic quality of the person.
The classic example is Nazi Germany\The Holocaust. Everyone started asking how could the Germans commit so many horrible atrocities, it must be something intrinsic and Freudian about their personality maybe they have a strong need for discipline, etc.
Then along comes Milgram and his famous electroshock study http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment , showing that Americans will perform actions even if they directly violate their internal beliefs, returning the primacy of behavior to the situation. It has been reproduced cross-culturally\many different times and variations. Another influential study is the Stanford Prison Experiments.
Personally I still agree with the poster (samd) that everything is physical including brain states, and dualism is bonkers. But if we take that step, there is no longer a metaphysical ego holding personality. There is no distinction between individual and environment and the causality between the two is bidirectional, rendering the question moot.
You could just as well make the argument that such "violating internal beliefs" is actually the exposed core and that such beliefs are the veneer furnished by upbringing.
Ah yes, I see your point metamemetics, thanks. Which is the more leading cause of violent criminal behavior: circumstance or the person themselves? though, the rate of re offending seems to point towards the people themselves somewhat.
Comments
Your making what's known in social psychology as the Fundamental Attribution Error: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fundamental_attribution_error
I don't think so, I haven't really made any claims about how much of their behavior is situational versus dispositional. I'm just saying that disposition plays some role.
Can you enlighten us as to how he is making this error?
We are always biased to overestimate the component of behavior attributable to some intrinsic quality of the person.
The classic example is Nazi Germany\The Holocaust. Everyone started asking how could the Germans commit so many horrible atrocities, it must be something intrinsic and Freudian about their personality maybe they have a strong need for discipline, etc.
Then along comes Milgram and his famous electroshock study http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Milgram_experiment , showing that Americans will perform actions even if they directly violate their internal beliefs, returning the primacy of behavior to the situation. It has been reproduced cross-culturally\many different times and variations. Another influential study is the Stanford Prison Experiments.
Personally I still agree with the poster (samd) that everything is physical including brain states, and dualism is bonkers. But if we take that step, there is no longer a metaphysical ego holding personality. There is no distinction between individual and environment and the causality between the two is bidirectional, rendering the question moot.
There is no distinction between individual and environment and the causality between the two is bidirectional, rendering the question moot.
You are definitely on to something.
You could just as well make the argument that such "violating internal beliefs" is actually the exposed core and that such beliefs are the veneer furnished by upbringing.
See also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_neuroscience
Afaik, adoption studies support that psychopathy is inherited (to a large part) genetically.
Ah yes, I see your point metamemetics, thanks. Which is the more leading cause of violent criminal behavior: circumstance or the person themselves? though, the rate of re offending seems to point towards the people themselves somewhat.