NATURE, NURTURE, GOOD AND EVIL.

In the UK recently we have unfortunately been reintroduced to a crime which repulsed the nation back in 1993. The crime was the abduction, torture and murder of a young innocent named James Bulger. The perpetrators of this crime were two 10 year old boys called Robert Thompson and Jon Venables.

Thompson and Venables were brought to trial and convicted of Murder in November 1993. This made them both the youngest convicted murderers in modern British history. They were sentenced to custody until they reached adulthood. (18)

Newspaper reports revealed that the victim’s family had consulted psychiatric experts in order to present a report to the parole board that Thompson was an undiagnosed psychopath citing his lack of remorse during arrest and trial. Reports also revealed that during their imprisonment both boys had passed A-Levels, they had also lost all trace of their original Liverpool accents.

In June 2001 after serving 8 years, the two murderers were released as they were now deemed to no longer be a risk to public safety. They were both given new identities and moved to secret locations (Witness protection style) Both would have to live on a “life licence” which would allow for their immediate re-incarceration if they were ever deemed to be a danger to the public. They were also told that they would have to have no contact with each other.

On the 2nd March 2010, the Ministry of Justice revealed Venables had been returned to prison because of “extremely serious allegations” As I type these allegations remain undisclosed because the authorities do want to prejudice any future possible trials.

You can read more details of this horrifying case here:
en.wikipedia.org...

Did these kids do what they did because of nurture? Are they are somehow exonerated of blame? Here is a report that gives some background info:
www.guardian.co.uk...

I know nurture helps but I have a gut feeling that there is a more powerful force at work. Many people have suffered as children but have gone on to better their circumstance not make it worse. How would cavemen of the past have developed into modern mankind if environmental conditions had such a simplistic connection to what we become? Surely we would have wiped ourselves out due to the hostile conditions we lived in. There was no laws, no policing, no guidelines no real security, no help lines… etc, etc I hope you get my point. Let’s leave the Neanderthals in the past and suggest that luck saw the strongest somehow survive the surrounding mayhem. Lets look at 19th Century England as another example, surely if aggression and violence has such a simplistic connection to what we become than someone like Oliver Twist would have gone on to become a mass murderer… ok he is fictional but do you see my point?

I also find myself questioning how we develop as humans? How much do we inherit behavioural traits via our genes. It is common for, lets say, footballers to produce children that inherit a natural talent for that said sport or for soldiers to produce children that are naturals in that field of occupation, intellectuals produce intelligent children… how much is nature and how much is nurture? If it is possible for positive traits to be inherited than surely the same works in reverse? Are genes at fault for what people become? We seem to link positive behavioural traits to inheritance yet evil acts are deemed to be the result of nurture, environment and personal experience.

This leads me to the question of equality, are we born equal? I used to think all humans were to a degree born equal and were born a blank slate awaiting programming? But this seems to be too simplistic to ever be true and it does not explain talent that seems to be inherited be it drawing, sport or aggression. It leaves me thinking that maybe what we deem to be evil could be the result of inheritance, if so what does this mean?

As a side note when I bought my dog I was told by the seller that the dog’s parents had great personalities and were very docile? What would my dog be like if it had aggressive parents? Why does that happen? Are we as humans subject to the same thing?

Another side note was something I heard on a Ted Bundy documentary. It stated that when he was aged 3 he placed all the heavy duty kitchen knifes around his sleeping Aunt. He had the blades pointing in at her. Is this nurture or nature or a game gone wrong? If we had acted upon this information would his victims of ever met him?

wakefieldnews.blogspot.com...

What should be the solution to how will deal with children who display damaged personalities or worse still damaged genes? How much can we really tell from young humans and how many times would we get it wrong if we tried to tidy up mistakes before they happen?

I just feel that there is something there, something we would describe as evil at an early age for those that go on to commit heinous crimes. Are there any solutions? Can evil or bad genes or bad personality traits ever be controlled?

Some of my questions are these: (although I expect more to develop if this thread develops)
1. Did society create these boys or are they evil?
2. If evil exists can we ever expect to control it?
3. Do people commit bad acts because of their DNA/genes or are they programmed by the surrounding environment to commit these acts?
4. Should we have allowed these boys back into society? What should have happened to the 10 year olds that committed this crime?
5. Are all evil acts or crimes just a display of mental problems? If so does that mean there is a way of spotting those prone to committing these crimes before they happen? If there is a way what do we do?

Peace.

(made an error with my question numbers! Thanks to Kyo for pointing that out!)

[edit on 9-3-2010 by Phantasmagoria]

Dang OP...starting off my morning with the tough stuff...nice post

Star for you...so let's get to it

1. Did society create these boys or are they evil? I have a real hard time letting society take the blame for vicious acts such as these. When I hear nature versus nurture I look towards the parents first, especially considering the ages of these young felons. I think anyone who blames a video game or a song is making excuses. You know what they call a murderer who murdered because of Grand Theft Auto? A murderer.

2. If evil exists can we ever expect to control it?

We'll never stop it. In Psychology we try to help ease emotional and social suffering but like medicine we are fighting a losing battle in the grand scheme. We can't ever truly heal the entire world, we can just to to help make individual lives better.

4. Do people commit bad acts because of their DNA/genes or are they programmed by the surrounding environment to commit these acts?

Tough call. It could easily be either or maybe a combination of both. I have seen DNA findings that show homosexual and alchoholic traits so what's to say they don't find the evil gene some day? Sure it is a long stretch but alot is possible. Though a bigger portion of me looks to how they were raised. I preach parenting to the ends of the earth for a reason. If you raises and beat your kids and show them no responsibility or consequence when they are in their formative years then what's going to help them make good valued decisions (say to murder or not to murder?)

5. Should we have allowed these boys back into society? What should have happened to the 10 year olds that committed this crime?

I think a good strong evaluation at age 18 or 19 is important. Perhaps their evaluation wasn't solid. Another tough call without knowing the intimate details of what happened. Some people are antisocial and dangerous and should never be allowed to roam free for the safety of those around them.

6. Are all evil acts or crimes just a display of mental problems? If so does that mean there is a way of spotting those prone to committing these crimes before they happen? If there is a way what do we do?

Another great tough question. Several serial killers showed alot of standard traits at childhood. animal abuse, flattened affect and emotional response (and so on) So we can look for these triggers. The big problems is the exact same problem we have with antibiotics. We see a person sneeze or vomit and bam we put them on Amoxicillin or Augmentin or another antibiotic. We as a society jump way to fast and get tunnel vision. Now if we see a child who is torturing and abusing and killing animals then we may need to open our eyes but we can't just say every child with flattened affect is the next Dahmer.

Case in point is a child I have studied in my Psychology coursework. From ages 8-11 and beyond this child was bullied constantly. Now he is very abusive towards his younger brothers. At one point he wanted to play a video game that his younger sibling was playing with so he took the controller and pushed him by his face and knocked him over. This tunes into your nature argument.

In the end I will have to say that nature and nurture are fairly equal but I think parents and surrounding family can 'innoculate' the child so to speak by attacking problems before they become problems.

-Kyo

Thanks Kyo for taking the time to reply.

Looking at the questions:

1:
I understand the leaning towards placing responsibility on the parents but if the buck does stop there than it would suggest that evil does not exist and that heinous crimes are indeed manufactured by the generation that stood before. If we were to take this statement as green than surely the same applies to acts of good. We have been educated to believe that our actions are acts of freewill, yet if we lay the responsibility at the hands of the previous generation/parents then what becomes of the concept of freewill? I also understand the point you make about the age of the young felons but at what point/age do we transfer responsibility? It also seems that there are tell, tell signs in people at very young ages. If I use the example of Ted Bundy again, what had happened to that child in the first 3 years that triggered him to surround his sleeping Aunt with knifes and have the blades pointing in at her? Most 3 year old kids would surely injure themselves before they had the chance to complete this task, quietly enough not to disturb the sleeping person. There is of course the chance that the Ted Bundy example has been made up.

2:
Again valid points are made about how psychology has eased people’s suffering but if there are to be connections made between emotional and social suffering should we expect a statistical increase in heinous crimes from places that suffer natural disasters? For example if we take the suffering that the youngest generation has suffered recently in Haiti would it be fair to suggest that by the time they reach adulthood we should expect an increase in the number of murderers for that specific generation. With regards to medicine what medicine does the Western world use to combat mental disorders? Are we talking anti-depressants?

3:
Here we can question why it was that mankind didn’t implode before we become aware of the effects of violence and mistreatment in our personal growing environment. Are we to believe that the standard of parenting is worse than ever before, now that society has produced two evil 10 year olds. We read stories of physical abuse in 18th/19th century England where urchins were forced into child labour and beaten by masters, surely we would have seen more cases of child murderers before now… of course, maybe there was but we were blissfully unaware of it due to lack of media and police resources in solving crimes. Again we are willing to accept that good traits are inherited from biological parents but what about bad traits can they just come out? Is it in the DNA? Are we seeing the result of a malfunctioned bloodline? Or can evil just manifest itself without a true defining reason?

4,5 & 6
Looking at the Bulger killers, they were taken out of society and retrained. Were the Government fooling themselves into thinking retraining is a viable option. It does sometimes appear that when something is there it stays and will not go away. Surely if environmental issues can force a “normal” human child to commit crime we should now be able to produce reverse results? It sometimes feels that it is easier to make things go wrong, we find reasons as to why it happened yet we can’t increase the output of good that we expose ourselves to. We can’t seem to produce a blueprint for the likes of (who to use as an example without derailing my own thread…!!) Mother Teresa, Ghandi or Buddha (insert personal hero here!) Did Jesus come from a broken home? What are the examples we have in modern history of complete goodness? Is there a defining character… Is there a template? We have loads of examples of templates which seem to produce evil-like qualities.

Thanks again, for taking the time to reply,

Peace.

reply to post by Phantasmagoria


You know, you just described the premise for A Clockwork Orange. And I think the same answers are relevant, if we take the choice away what's left? A human robot.

'Evil' is far too vague a thing to be defined and systematically eliminated. Of course murder, rape and torture are 'evil' but where is the line drawn? Its like the old paradox of vagueness. So in that respect and judging by past human error removing 'evil' (Spanish Inquisition, the Salem Witch hunts etc. etc.) I don't think it would end well for anyone.

As far as nature vs. nurture goes, it's pretty clear that both are very important and have different effects on people. Some people are just bad to begin with, the Ted Bundy thing could be an example. And a lot of times I think it's stress from their families, past traumas, or other sociological factors.

This is an amazing thread! Thank you !

S&F it for ya.

Now for your questions. I'm not in anyway educated on this and I'll just give my opinion.
I thought you should know that.

1. Did society create these boys or are they evil?

I do not know what makes them commit the crime but I think there are two separate causes.
1. Life has been hard and cruel and they follow what they have learned from it, the need, will or possibility to make a better life for them selves. ( Nurture.)
2. The crime they committed was fun to do they enjoyed it. (Psychopath.Nature. )
Make that...
3.Not having the ability to care or live in to others. A kill is for these people like a picnic. ( Brain disorder. Nature.)


2. If evil exists can we ever expect to control it?

If evil exist we would never control it. I don't think it is a lost battle just an endless one. There has to be a balance between good and evil. One couldn't exist without the other.

3. Do people commit bad acts because of their DNA/genes or are they programmed by the surrounding environment to commit these acts?

Well... You said it yourself. Their are countless others who are raised in the most evil ways possible and they still end up as a nice person. I do know the brain has a few periods while it develops where it must learn the basics because after this period, it can never be learned again.

I saw the story of a girl who was raised by dogs since she was still a baby.
(Russia) The woman that raised her tried everything and she proved to be an intelligent individual. She only never learned how to speak. The basics were never learned and the possibility was lost forever.

I think it's not the same with evil, evil works different I think.


4. Should we have allowed these boys back into society? What should have happened to the 10 year olds that committed this crime?

This a problem of modern day society.
One side says equal rights for everybody and another says 'What if you committed... Equal rights also means equal punishment.
Evil is relative. What one sees as evil another sees a common behaviour or doesn't care.

What would you do with a 10 year old ? Lock him up for life or give him another change. He might kill again and you may have prevented a murder. butt... what if he won't kill again ? Would you consider yourself a murderer ? A lock up for life is IMO worse then death.


5. Are all evil acts or crimes just a display of mental problems? If so does that mean there is a way of spotting those prone to committing these crimes before they happen? If there is a way what do we do?

As I said evil is relative.
And what if you could identify people who are of a higher risk to commit such crimes ? Don't you think someone can only be punished after they commit a crime or do you just lock everybody up for no reason at all ?

Even all the signs for a killer, does not mean they will kill.
Someone who is a good guy, never heart a fly in his life. No markers at all.
Could end up killing some one, whatever the reason may be.

Catch my drift ?

Thank you for this thread !

the thing is, a child is influenced by it's surroundings from the moment it pops out. The wiring starts to beigin and the most important connections in the brain establish themselves within the first 5 years. If you are denied love, attention, discipline, morals,and left to your own devices to watch violence, problems are going to arise.

I dont think any child is born evil, we all have a dark side, but most of us are capable of controling those emotions, through the morals, norms and values of our society.

Imagine if the following people turned bad… lets look into their childhood and search for reasons:

Buddha:

His mother, Mahamaya, is said to have passed away seven days after his birth, and he was raised by his aunt who became the king’s second wife.

he was at the same time bold and fearless.

He happened to see a series of happenings; he saw a lizard dart its tongue licking up and eating the little, harmless ants; a snake then came along and swallowed the lizard; and then an agile hawk swooped down, picked up, killed and devoured the snake. The prince then began to ask himself why all the beautiful creations of life possess something that is not beautiful at the same time.

buddhism.ygoy.com...

Mother Teresa:

When Agnes (Mother Teresa) was eight years old, her father died, because of which, the family faced financial crisis. Drane Bojaxhiu, then, assumed the dual role - of being a mother and a father.

www.thefamouspeople.com...

Jesus:

He didn’t have it all easy. His family had to move because Herod wanted Him killed. He lived in a foreign country for a while, and then in Galilee, in a town called Nazareth. Nazareth wasn’t the favorite place to live. The Jews looked down upon Nazarenes as poor and not “pure” Jews. Jesus’ father was a carpenter. His family was not rich. He had younger brothers and sisters. His cousin later became famous as an odd prophet.

www.ebibleteacher.com...

Ghandi:

Gandhi was discriminated against many times throughout his life. Once in Rajkot when he had to live in the poor part of town. Also when he went to South Africa he could not sit in his seat on the train. Because he was an Indian he had to sit in the baggage car. Gandhi was afraid of the dark when he was a child. He also was afraid of ghosts and snakes. Gandhi was a vegetarian. He was not allowed to eat meat.

www.eiu.edu...

Think of the reasons some criminals or psychologists on the perpetrators behalf, give for the actions that took place and then read the above and consider what it was that gave the people above the inspiration to become what they were. Everything seems to point to neurological differences but what is it that causes these defects? Is there any medical evidence available to suggest what it is? I’ve heard that frontal lobe damage can cause behavioural issues.

The frontal lobes are considered our emotional control center and home to our personality. There is no other part of the brain where lesions can cause such a wide variety of symptoms (Kolb & Wishaw, 1990). The frontal lobes are involved in motor function, problem solving, spontaneity, memory, language, initiation, judgement, impulse control, and social and sexual behavior. (Levin et al., 1987).

www.neuroskills.com...

If we were to look into heinous crimes and their perpetrators, is there any information to suggest they had frontal lobe damage? I will guess that most didn’t.

Peace

reply to post by Sinter Klaas

1.Life has been hard and cruel and they follow what they have learned from it, the need, will or possibility to make a better life for them selves. ( Nurture.)

Couldn’t most people claim this? Again does this mean that people who have been involved in natural disasters are more prone to commit crime?

2.The crime they committed was fun to do they enjoyed it. (Psychopath.Nature. )

Is it a chemical reaction that creates this sense of fun/enjoyment or just a result of their environment/experience?

3.Not having the ability to care or live in to others. A kill is for these people like a picnic. ( Brain disorder. Nature.)

Is this freewill?

If evil exist we would never control it. I don't think it is a lost battle just an endless one. There has to be a balance between good and evil. One couldn't exist without the other.

If that is the case then maybe laws become somewhat redundant in their purpose? If people are prone to commit heinous crimes then laws will not stop it from happening. Our liberties are curtailed on a daily basis yet it seems nothing really changes with regards to the balance? I can’t agree with lawless states as I think more crimes would be committed, yet with that statement I am assuming that evil has greater influence than good on mankind. If good and evil are fundamentally yin and yang in the guise of modern language than they must be of the same value but sit on opposites of the same scale. It would make sense that you are correct with your assumption as it was the only way mankind could evolve from cavemen and survive the lawlessness around them. I hope I’m making sense here.

I think it's not the same with evil, evil works different I think.

I agree but how does it manage to manifest itself. I sometimes think that crimes like the Bulger murder indicate there are other greater forces at work. Then I check myself and despair at the fact two 10 year olds had the ability to do this. I then despair again that years later one of them has done something terrible again. The pain that little boy must have gone through must have been awful. The pain his family went through must be terrible. There has got to be a bigger picture here.

What would you do with a 10 year old ? Lock him up for life or give him another change. He might kill again and you may have prevented a murder. butt... what if he won't kill again ? Would you consider yourself a murderer ? A lock up for life is IMO worse then death.

Great point. Venables has involved himself in something serious since his release. On writing this, in this very moment now, I think I would want them, irrelevant of their age, removed from society for good. I can’t handle what they did. I can’t handle that it is back in the media. It makes me feel repulsed. I would rather consider the fact they are not human or that they are bad seeds, that they are evil and good must prevail. Maybe evil disguises itself as human sometimes?

And what if you could identify people who are of a higher risk to commit such crimes ? Don't you think someone can only be punished after they commit a crime or do you just lock everybody up for no reason at all ?

What if there was a way of proving certain types are prone to evil? Should we ever dare to explore that avenue? If nature decrees that the majority feel repulsion towards certain acts then maybe we should allow nature to take it’s course. I just wonder what would happen if these two perpetrators hadn’t been given new identities would this have been a natural solution? All of a sudden prison wouldn’t seem such a bad idea and neither would isolation.

Thanks for your reply Sin,

Peace.

Originally posted by Phantasmagoria
reply to post by Sinter Klaas

1.Life has been hard and cruel and they follow what they have learned from it, the need, will or possibility to make a better life for them selves. ( Nurture.)

Couldn’t most people claim this? Again does this mean that people who have been involved in natural disasters are more prone to commit crime?
Yes and no.

2.The crime they committed was fun to do they enjoyed it. (Psychopath.Nature. )

Is it a chemical reaction that creates this sense of fun/enjoyment or just a result of their environment/experience?
I believe it's human nature to act like we do. There are still countless more who don't commit crimes which leaves me to say that nurture isn't the cause.

3.Not having the ability to care or live in to others. A kill is for these people like a picnic. ( Brain disorder. Nature.)

Is this freewill?
Not if I could help it. My freewill wants crime to stop. ???

If evil exist we would never control it. I don't think it is a lost battle just an endless one. There has to be a balance between good and evil. One couldn't exist without the other.

If that is the case then maybe laws become somewhat redundant in their purpose? If people are prone to commit heinous crimes then laws will not stop it from happening. Our liberties are curtailed on a daily basis yet it seems nothing really changes with regards to the balance? I can’t agree with lawless states as I think more crimes would be committed, yet with that statement I am assuming that evil has greater influence than good on mankind. If good and evil are fundamentally yin and yang in the guise of modern language than they must be of the same value but sit on opposites of the same scale. It would make sense that you are correct with your assumption as it was the only way mankind could evolve from cavemen and survive the lawlessness around them. I hope I’m making sense here.
Well... have you seen a significant decrease in crime ?
Let me rephrase yin and yang. I think what we call evil, what religion calls the devil and so on, like the 7 sins. They are all just another aspect of ourselves, and yes they helped us survive, they gave an edge.
The edge never left, only the need for. Now that same edge is causing all our sins.

I think it's not the same with evil, evil works different I think.

I agree but how does it manage to manifest itself. I sometimes think that crimes like the Bulger murder indicate there are other greater forces at work. Then I check myself and despair at the fact two 10 year olds had the ability to do this. I then despair again that years later one of them has done something terrible again. The pain that little boy must have gone through must have been awful. The pain his family went through must be terrible. There has got to be a bigger picture here.
I agree but as I mentioned before, divine evil ? Is it not a sin to put your own mind at ease by locking up someone ( for the re of his life ? )

What would you do with a 10 year old ? Lock him up for life or give him another change. He might kill again and you may have prevented a murder. butt... what if he won't kill again ? Would you consider yourself a murderer ? A lock up for life is IMO worse then death.

Great point. Venables has involved himself in something serious since his release. On writing this, in this very moment now, I think I would want them, irrelevant of their age, removed from society for good. I can’t handle what they did. I can’t handle that it is back in the media. It makes me feel repulsed. I would rather consider the fact they are not human or that they are bad seeds, that they are evil and good must prevail. Maybe evil disguises itself as human sometimes?
That is just the point I am making. It is who we are.However I do not deny some evil force or energy capable of making us do so.

And what if you could identify people who are of a higher risk to commit such crimes ? Don't you think someone can only be punished after they commit a crime or do you just lock everybody up for no reason at all ?

What if there was a way of proving certain types are prone to evil? Should we ever dare to explore that avenue? If nature decrees that the majority feel repulsion towards certain acts then maybe we should allow nature to take it’s course. I just wonder what would happen if these two perpetrators hadn’t been given new identities would this have been a natural solution? All of a sudden prison wouldn’t seem such a bad idea and neither would isolation.
Again it is just another human quality to make us want to do the right thing.

Thanks for your reply Sin,

Good and bad are IMO two sides of the same coin.
You are welcome !

Peace.

This link to a piece entitled Childhood trauma makes some extraordinary claims some of which I agree with some of which I feel are a little too forthright in their conclusions. Please read and pass comment on bits you think are relevant.
Here are some bits that jumped out and slapped me in the face:

I quoted in For Your Own Good at length the pedagogical advice given to parents in Germany a century ago, and detailed what I believed to be a connection between the systematic cruelty of these methods and the systematic cruelty of Hitler’s executioners forty years later.

Incredibly the author claims that a book designed to give advice on raising children was partly responsible for the execution of heinous war crimes committed by German soldiers in WW2. As much as it astounds me personally, I think there is an element of truth to the claims.

Today we would call it a systematic instruction in child persecution and maltreatment. One of Schreber’s convictions was that when babies cry they should be made to desist by the use of spanking,

The author claims that because the human brain is not fully developed at birth, experiences in the first 3 years will indeed affect the brains development.

Studies on abandoned and severely maltreated Romanian children, as an example, revealed striking lesions in certain areas of the brain. The repeated traumatization has led to an increased release of stress hormones which have attacked the sensitive tissue of the brain and destroyed the new, already built-up neurons. The areas of their brains responsible for the “management” of their emotions are twenty to thirty percent smaller than in other children of the same age. Obviously, all children (not only Romanian) who suffer such abandonment and maltreatment will be damaged in this way.

Because of the claims made with regards to what can be described as brain damage, the author suggests that these are the reasons that a killer can live without emotional attachment or remorse in the crimes they perpetrate. The interesting quality about this piece is the suggestion that there is indeed the possibility of light at the end of the tunnel:

Repeatedly I was told, “I, too, was a battered child, but that didn’t make me a criminal.” When I asked these people for details about their childhood, I was always told of a person who made the difference, a sibling, a teacher, a neighbor, just somebody who liked or even loved them but, at least in most cases, was unable to protect them. Yet through his presence this person gave the child a notion of trust and love.

I call these persons “helping witnesses.”

So ONE person can make a difference...

In answer to my questions about victims of natural disasters and a tendency towards crime the author suggests the following:

They were able to give him what he most needed in this chaotic situation: empathy, compassion, protection and the feeling of being safe in their arms.

Anyway I found the link a very interesting read and would love for others on ATS to pass comment on what they think towards the validity of the claims made.

www.toddlertime.com...

Peace

Investigation of aggressive behaviour in animals is often motivated by concern about aggressive impulses in man, investigators often become satisfied that aggressiveness is a form of learned behaviour. This leads us to believe it can br prevented in the human by teaching or conditioning.

There is a growing body of knowledge, which has shown that patterns of aggressive behaviour are not learned but are innate in the species.

Eibl-Eibesfeldt observed that all-out fights to the death between animals of the same species seldom occur.

Rattlesnakes, for example can kill each other with a single bite but when male rattlesnakes fight they never bite. Instead the victor is the which can pin the other to the ground momentarily with the weight of his body.

Physiological studies of the neural and hormonal process underlying such behaviour patterns in animals confirm that aggressiveness is a basic biological phenomenon.

Fighting behaviour in birds and mammals has even been elicited by electrical stimulation of specific areas of the brain.

Read where I got the body of this information here
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov...

Electrical stimulation… I think I might soon be reaching a conclusion.

Peace.