A
NEW FOUNDATION FOR CIVILIZATION, by Arthur M. Jackson: Promotes Science of Ethics
CHAPTER IV
NURTURING TOUCH AND A SFLIHM
By
Arthur M. Jackson
Copyright
2001, 2006
My
assumption is that nurturing touch -- cuddling, holding, fondling -- is
essential
for a SFLIHM ( a Sustainable Feeling that one's LIfe Has Meaning).
Human
beings must have physical affection if they are to exist in their most
healthy
state. The following article provides some support for this idea. It also
presents other ideas important for the Enlightened Person and Enlightened
Community.
However,
nurturing touch is not only important because it helps a person live
at
their highest level of fulfillment. It is also important to help them avoid
living
at their lowest level of development. Psychopaths are about as bad as
human
life gets. It seems almost certain to me that most psychopaths are actually
persons who lacked nurturing, physical affection as infants. If they are
to be helped to become Enlightened Persons they must somehow build those neural circuits
that normally develop in a loving home. Because the human brain is so
complex
and flexible it must be assumed that this change can be produced if only the
right things are done. Society has a moral responsibility to develop the knowledge
to do this.
See below, or here
is a link to material that is a key component of the cement that provides
the foundation for a NEW FOUNDATION FOR CIVILIZATION:
PLEASURE
AND THE ORIGINS OF VIOLENCE, by Dr.
James W. Prescott [1]
I
first met Dr. Prescott at a conference in the late 50s or early 60s. I had read
the report of the Harlow experiments with infant monkeys deprived of mothering
in the SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN shortly before and was mentally, psychologically,
and philosophically prepared to recognize the value of this material.
It was one of those breakthrough experiences that leaves one forever
transformed,
a true epiphany.
Although
that was a long time ago, unfortunately, U.S. society still remains almost
totally unaware of this aspect of human development. This understanding is
essential for any who would desire to become an Enlightened Person (in my opinion). Unfortunately, part of what contributes to this difficulty is elements of our cultural traditions. The Christian Bible models the patterns of violence which were accepted at the time it was written, and many individuals are strongly influenced by this model. For some references see [2]
Below is an edited version of an article
originally published in THE FUTURIST, April 1975 by the World Futurist Society
P. O. Box 30369 (Bethesda), Washington. D.C. 20014. It is reprinted with permission of the author.
Human
violence is fast becoming a global epidemic. All over the world, police face
angry mobs, terrorists disrupt the Olympics, hijackers seize airplanes, and
bombs wreck buildings. During the past year wars raged in the Mideast, Cyprus,
and Southeast Asia, and
guerilla fighting continued to escalate in Ireland. Meanwhile crime in the
United States grew even faster than inflation. Figures from the Federal Bureau
of Investigation show that serious crimes rose 16% in the first six months 1974
– one of the largest crime increases since FBI record-keeping began.
Unless
the causes of violence are isolated and treated we will continue to live in a
world or fear and apprehension. Unfortunately violence is often offered as a
solution to violence. Many law enforcement officials advocate “get tough”
policies as the best method to reduce crime. Imprisoning people, our usual way
or dealing with crime, will not solve the problem, because the causes of
violence lie in our basic values and the way in which we bring up our children
and youth. Physical punishment and violent films and TV programs teach our
children that physical violence is normal. But these early life experiences are
not the only or even the main sources of violent behavior. Recent research supports
the point of view that the deprivation of physical pleasure is a major
ingredient in the expression of physical violence. The common association of
sex with violence provides a clue to understanding physical violence in terms
of deprivation of physical pleasure.
Unlike
violence, pleasure seems to be something the world can't get enough of. People
are constantly in search of new forms of pleasure, yet most of our
“pleasure" activities appear to be substitutes for the natural sensory
pleasures of touching. We touch for pleasure or for pain or we don't touch at
all. Although physical pleasure and physical violence seem worlds apart, there
seems to be a subtle and intimate connection between the two. Until the
relationship between pleasure and violence is understood, violence will
continue to escalate.
As
a developmental neuropsychologist I have devoted a great deal of study to the
peculiar relationship between violence and pleasure. I am now convinced that
the deprivation of physical sensory pleasure is the principal root cause
ofviolence. Laboratory experiments
with animals show that pleasure and violence have a reciprocal relationship,
that is, the presence of one inhibits the other. A raging violent animal will
abruptly calm down when electrodes stimulate the pleasure centers of its brain.
Likewise, stimulating the violence centers in the brain can terminate the
animal’s sensual pleasure and peaceful behavior. When the brain's pleasure
circuits are "on," the violence circuits are "off,” and vice
versa. Among human beings, a pleasure-prone personality rarely displays
violence or aggressive behaviors, and, a violent personality has little ability
to tolerate, experience, or enjoy sensuously pleasing activities. As either
violence or pleasure goes up the other goes down.
The
reciprocal relationship of pleasure and violence is highly significant, because
certain sensory experiences during the formative periods of development will
create a neuropsychological predisposition for either violence-seeking or pleasure-seeking
behavior later in life. I am convinced that various abnormal social and
emotional behaviors resulting from what psychologists call
"maternal-social" deprivation, that is, a lack of tender, loving
care, are caused by a unique type of sensory deprivation, somatosensory
deprivation. Derived from the Greek word for "body," the term refers
to the sensations of touch and body movement which differ from the senses of
sight, hearing, smell, and taste. I
believe that the deprivation of body touch, contact, and movement are the basic
causes of a number of emotional disturbances which include depressive and
autistic behaviors, hyperactivity, sexual aberration, drug abuse, violence, and
aggression.
These
insights were derived chiefly from the controlled laboratory studies of Harry
F. and Margaret K. Harlow at the University of Wisconsin. The Harlows and their
students separated infant monkeys from their mothers at birth. The monkeys were
raised in single cages in an animal colony room, where they could develop
social relationships with the other animals through seeing, hearing, and
smelling, but not through touching or movement. These and other studies
indicate that it is the deprivation of body contact and body movement -- not
deprivation of the other senses -- that produces the wide variety of abnormal
emotional behaviors in those isolation-reared animals. It is well known that
human infants and children who are hospitalized or institutionalized for
extended periods with little physical touching and holding develop almost
identical abnormal behaviors, such as rocking and head banging.
Although
the pathological violence observed in isolation-reared monkeys is well
documented, the linking of early somatosensory deprivation with physical
violence in humans is less well established. Numerous studies of juvenile
delinquents and adult criminals have shown a family background of broken homes
and/or physically abusive parents. These studies have rarely mentioned, let
alone measured the degree of deprivation of physical affection, although this
is often inferred from the degree of neglect and abuse. One exceptional study
in this respect is that of Brandt F. Steele and C.B. Pollock, psychiatrists at
the University or Colorado, who studied child abuse in three generations of
families who physically abused their children. They found that parents who
abused their children were invariably deprived of physical affection themselves
during childhood and that their adult sex life was extremely poor. Steele noted
that almost without exception the women who abused their children had never
experienced orgasm. The degree of sexual pleasure experienced by the men who
abused their children was not ascertained, but their sex life, in general, was
unsatisfactory. The hypothesis that physical pleasure actively inhibits
physical violence can be appreciated from our own sexual experiences. How many
of us feel like assaulting someone after we have just experienced orgasm?
The
contributions of Freud to the effects of early experiences upon later behaviors
and the consequences of repressed sexuality have been well established.
Unfortunately time and space do not permit a discussion of his differences with
Wilhelm Reich and this writer concerning his "Beyond the Pleasure
Principle."
The
hypothesis that deprivation of physical pleasure results in physical violence
requires a formal systematic evaluation. We can test this hypothesis by
examining cross-cultural studies of child-rearing practices, sexual behavior,
and physical violence. We would expect to find that human societies which
provide their infants and children with a great deal of physical affection
(touching, holding, carrying) would be less physically violent than human
societies which give very little physical affection to their infants and
children. Similarly, human societies which tolerate and accept premarital and
extra-marital sex would be less physically violent than societies which
prohibit and punish pre-marital and extramarital sex.
Cross-Cultural
Studies of Physical Violence:
Cultural
anthropologists have gathered exactly the data required to examine this
hypothesis for human societies – and their findings are conveniently arranged
in R.B. Textor’s A CROSS-CULTURAL SUMMARY (HRAF Press, 1967). Textor’s book is
basically a research tool for cross-cultural statistical inquiry. The survey
provides some 20,000 statistically significant correlations from 400 culture
samples of primitive societies.
Infant
Neglect and Adult Violence:
Certain
variables which reflect physical affection (such as fondling, caressing, and
playing with infants) were related to other variables which measured crime and
violence (frequency of theft killing, etc.). The important relationships are
displayed in the tables accompanying this article. The percent figures reflect
the relationships among the variables, e.g. high affection/low violence plus
low affection/high violence. This procedure is followed for all tables.
Societies
ranking high or low on the Infant Physical Affection Scale were examined for
degree of violence. The results (Table 1) clearly indicted that those societies
which give their infants the greatest amount of physical affection were
characterized by low theft, low infant physical pain, low religious activity,
and negligible or absent killings, mutilating, or torturing of the enemy. These
data directly confirm that the deprivation of body pleasure during infancy is
significantly linked to a high rate or crime and violence.
Some societies physically punish their
infants as a matter or discipline while others do not. We can determine whether
this punishment reflects a general concern for the infant’s welfare by matching
it against child nurturant care. The results (Table 2) indicate that societies
which inflict pain and discomfort upon their infants tend to neglect them as
well.
Adult
physical violence was accurately predicted in 36 of 49 cultures (73%) from the
infant physical affection variable. The probability that a 73% rate of accuracy
could occur by chance is only four times out of a thousand.
Sexual
Repression and Adult Violence:
Thirteen of the 49 societies studied seemed
to be exceptions to the theory that a lack of somatosensory pleasure makes
people physically violent. It was expected that cultures which placed a high
value upon physical pleasure during infancy and childhood would maintain such
values into adulthood. This is not the case. Child rearing practices do not
predict patterns of later sexual behavior. This initial surprise and presumed
discrepancy, however, becomes advantageous for further prediction. Two
variables that are highly correlated are not as useful for predicting a third
variable as two variables that are uncorrelated. Consequently, it is meaningful
to examine the sexual behaviors of the 13 cultures whose adult violence was not
predictable from physical pleasure during infancy. Apparently, the social
customs which influence and
determine
the behaviors of sexual affection are different from those which underlie the
expression of physical affection toward infants.
When
the six societies characterized by both high infant affection and high violence
are compared in terms of their premarital sexual behavior, it is surprising to
find that five of them exhibit premarital sexual repression, where virginity is
a high value of these cultures. It appears that the beneficial effects of
infant physical affection can be negated by the repression of physical pleasure
(premarital sex) later in life.
The
seven societies characterized by both low infant physical affection and low
adult physical violence were all found to be characterized by permissive
premarital sexual behaviors. Thus, the detrimental effects of infant physical
affection deprivation seem to be compensated for later in life by sexual body
pleasure experiences during adolescence. These findings have led to a revision
of the somatosensory pleasure deprivation theory from a one-stage to a
two-stage developmental theory where the physical violence in 48 of 49 cultures
could be accurately classified. In short, violence may stem from depravation of
somatosensory pleasure either in infancy or in adolescence. The only true
exception in this culture sample is the headhunting Jivaro tribe or South
America. Clearly this society requires detailed study to determine the causes
of its violence. The Jivaro belief system may play an important role, for as
anthropologist Michael Harner notes in Jivaro Souls these Indians have a
"deep-seated belief that killing leads to the acquisition of souls which
provide a supernatural power conferring immunity from death."
================================================
RESPONSE
OF AJ: And in my mind this clue is the place to begin the study. It seems to me
this issue has great relevance to the linking of somatosensory deprivation and
violence. My working hypothesis is that our beliefs especially those strongly
held by our culture can overcome some of the effects of physical nurturing.
When our culture promotes a belief like
“killing confers immunity to death,” this can overcome the beneficial effects
of infant/adolescent nurturing. However, I would still expect that when the
Jivaro kill they do it matter-of-factly, not with torture and unnecessary
cruelty.
The
Long-Term Consequences of Infant Pleasure and Pain
Human
societies differ greatly in their treatment of infants. In some cultures,
parents lavish physical affection on infants, while in others, the parents
physically punish their infants. The author, neuropsychologist James W.
Prescott of the U.S. Government’s National Institute of Child Health and Human
Development, believes that the pleasure-receiving infants grow into peaceable
adults while the pleasure-deprived infants are likely to become violent when
they reach adulthood.
Prescott
made a study of anthropological data and found that those societies which give
their infants the greatest amount of physical affection have less theft and
violence among adults, thus supporting the theory that deprivation of bodily
pleasure during infancy is significantly linked to a high rate of crime and
violence.
The
tables below show how the physical affection – or punishment – given infants
correlates with other variables. For example, cultures which inflict pain on
infants appear to be more likely to practice slavery, polygamy, etc. In the
tables “N” refers to the number of cultures in the comparison while “P” is the
probability that the observed relationship could occur by chance and was
calculated by the Fisher Exact Probability Test.
Invidious
display of wealth is low………66……….50……….. .06 Incidence
of theft is low…………………72……….36……….. .02 Overall
infant indulgence high………….80……….66………. .0000 Infant
physical pain low………………...65……….63……… .. .03 Negligible
killing, torturing, or mutilating the enemy……………….73……….49…………
.004 Lowreligious activity…………………81……….27………… .003
The
coded scales on infancy were developed by cultural anthropologists Barry,
Bacon, and Child; on sexual behavior by Westbrook, Ford, and Beach; and on
physical violence by Slater.
TABLE
2
Pain Inflicted on Infant by Parent or
Nurturing Agent
Societies
that provide infants with a great deal of physical affection (“tender loving
care”) are later characterized by relatively non-violent adults, Prescott says.
In 36 of the 49 cultures he studied, a high degree of infant physical affection
was associated with a low degree of adult physical violence – and vice versa.
When Prescott investigated the 13 exceptions he found that all but one (the
Jivaro tribe of South American) provide adolescents with a great deal of sexual
freedom, thus allowing them to compensate for the lack of physical affection
that they experienced in infancy.
Derived
from: R.B. Textor.A CROSS-CULTURAL
SUMMARY. HRAF PRESS, New Haven, Connecticut, 1967. INFANT BEHAVIOR RATINGS from
Barry, Bacon & Child. ADULT VIOLENCE RATINGS from P.E. Slater.
The
strength of the two-stage deprivation theory of violence is most vividly
illustrated when we contrast the societies showing high rates of physical
affection during infancy and adolescence against those societies which are
consistently low in physical affection for both developmental periods. The
statistics associated with this relationship are extraordinary: The percent
likelihood of a society being physically violent if it is physically
affectionate toward its infants and tolerant of premarital sexual behavior is
2% (48/49). The probability of this relationship occurring by chance is 125,000
to one. I am not aware of any other developmental variable that has such a high
degree of predictive validity. Thus, we seem to have a firmly based principle:
Physically affectionate human societies are highly unlikely to be physically
violent.
Accordingly,
when physical affection and pleasure during adolescence as well as in fancy are
related to measures of violence, we find direct evidence of a significant
relationship between the punishment of premarital sex behaviors and various
measures of crime and violence. As Table 4 shows additional clusters of
relationships link the punishment and repression of premarital sex to large
community size, high social complexity and class stratification, small extended
families, purchase of wives, practice of slavery, and a high god present in
human morality. The relationship between small extended families and punitive
premarital sex attitudes deserves emphasis, for it suggests that the nuclear
family structure in contemporary Western cultures may be a contributing factor
to our repressive attitudes toward sexual expression. The same can be suggested
for community size, social complexity, and class stratification.
Not
surprisingly, when high self-needs are combined with the deprivation of
physical affection, the result is self-interest and high rates of narcissism.
Likewise, exhibitionistic dancing and pornography may be interpreted as a
substitute for normal sexual expression. Some nations which are most repressive
of female sexuality have rich pornographic art forms.
Acceptance
of Extramarital Sex May Reduce Violence:
I
also examined the influence of extramarital sex taboos upon crime and violence.
The data clearly indicate that punitive-repressive attitudes toward
extramarital sex are also linked with physical violence, personal crime, and
the practice of slavery. Societies which value monogamy also emphasize military
glory and worship aggressive gods.
These
cross-cultural data support the view of psychologists and sociologists who feel
that sexual and psychological needs not being fulfilled within a marriage
should be met outside of it, without destroying the primacy of the marriage
relationship.
These
findings overwhelmingly support the thesis that deprivation of body pleasure
throughout – but particularly during the formative periods of infancy,
childhood, and adolescence – are very closely related to amount of warfare and
interpersonal violence. These insights should be applied to large and
complicated industrial and post-industrial societies.
Sexual
Pleasure vs. Sexual Violence:
Crime
and physical violence have substantially increased over the past decade in the
United States. According to FBI statistics, both murder and aggravated assault
increased 53% between 1967 and 1972, while forcible rape rose 70%.
These
figures again raise the question of the special relationship between sexuality
and violence. In addition to our rape statistics, there is other evidence that
points to America’s preference for sexual violence over sexual pleasure. This
is reflected in our acceptance of sexually explicit films that involve violence
and rape, and our rejection of sexually explicit films for pleasure only
(pornography). Neighborhood movie theaters show such sexually violent films as
“Straw Dogs,” “Clockwork Orange,” and “The Klansman,” While banning films which
portray sexual pleasure (“Deep Throat,” “The Devil in Miss Jones”). Attempts to
close down massage parlors are another example given of our anti-pleasure
attitudes. Apparently, sex with pleasure is immoral and unacceptable, but sex
with violence and pain is moral and acceptable.
A
questionnaire I developed to explore this question was administered to 96
college students whose average age was 19 years. The results of the
questionnaire support the connection between rejection of physical pleasure
(and particularly of premarital and extramarital sex) with expression of
physical violence. Respondents who reject abortion, responsible premarital sex,
and nudity within the family were likely to approve of harsh physical
punishment for children and to believe that pain helps build strong moral character.
These respondents were likely to find alcohol and drugs more satisfying than
sex. The data obtained from the
questionnaire provided strong statistical support for the basic inverse
relationship between physical violence and physical pleasure. If violence is
high, pleasure is low, and conversely, if pleasure is high, violence is low.
The questionnaire bears out the theory that the pleasure–violence relationship
found in primitive cultures also holds true for a modern industrial nation.
Drugs,
Sex, and Violence: The Unholy Trinity:
Another
way of looking at the reciprocal relationship between violence and pleasure is
to examine a society’s choice of drugs. A society will support behaviors that
are consistent with its values and social mores. U.S. society is a competitive,
aggressive, and violent society. Consequently, it supports drugs that
facilitate competitive, aggressive, and violent behaviors and opposes drugs
that counteract such behaviors. Alcohol is well known to facilitate the
expression of violent behaviors, and, although addicting and very harmful to
chronic users, it is acceptable to American society. Marijuana, on the other
hand, is an active pleasure-inducing drug which enhances the pleasures of touch
and actively inhibits violent-aggressive behaviors. It is for these reasons, I
believe that marijuana is rejected in American society. For similar reasons
heroin is rejected and methadone (an addicting drug minus the pleasure) is
accepted.
The
data from my questionnaire support this view. As Table 5 shows, very high
correlations between alcohol use and parental punishment indicate that people
who received little affection from their mothers and had physically punitive
fathers are likely to become hostile and aggressive when they drink. Such
people find alcohol more satisfying than sex. There is an even stronger
relationship between parental physical punishment and drug usage. Respondents
who were physically punished as children showed alcohol-induced hostility and aggression
and were likely to find alcohol and drugs more satisfying than sex. The
questionnaire also reveals high correlations between sexual repression and drug
usage. Those who describe premarital sex as “not agreeable” are likely to
become aggressive when drinking and to prefer drugs and alcohol to sexual
pleasures. This is additional evidence for the hypothesis that drug “pleasures”
are a substitute for somatosensory pleasures.
Community
size is larger………..73…………....80….... .0003 Slavery
is present……………….59…….…..….176…… .005 Societal
complexity is high……..87……………15…….. .01 Personal
crime is high……….….71………..….28….….. .05 Class
stratification is high………60…………...111….… .01 High
incidence of theft……...…..68………..…31……... .07 Small
extended family………..…70…………..63….….. .008 Extramarital
sex is punished….....71………….58…..….. .005 Wives
are purchased………….…54………….114…...… .02 Castration
anxiety is high……..…65………….37….…... .009 Longer
post-partum sex taboo…...62………….50…..….. .03 Bellicosity
is extreme……..……..68………….37…..….. .04 Sex
disability is high………….…83………….23…..….. .004 Killing,
torturing and mutilating the enemy is high………….…..69………….35………. .07 Narcissism
is high……………….66………….38………. .04 Exhibitionistic
dancing is emphasized…………..…….….65………….66……….. .04 High
god in human morality……81……….…27……….. .01
Premarital sexual freedom for young people can help
reduce violence in a society, Prescott says. His study indicates that the
physical pleasure that youth obtain from sex can offset a lack of physical
affection during infancy. Other research also indicates that societies which
punish premarital sex are likely to engage in wife purchasing, to worship a
high god in human morality, and to practice slavery. Other results are show in
the table above.
Violence
and Pleasure: The Attitudes of College Students
The
reciprocal relationship of violence and pleasure holds true in modern industrial
nations as well as primitive societies. neuropsychologist Prescott believes. He
tested his theory by means of a questionnaire given to 96 college students
(average age: 19). The results showed that students who have relatively
negative attitudes toward sexual pleasure tend to favor harsh punishment for
children and to believe that violence is necessary to solve problems.
In
Prescott’s experiment, students rated a series of statements on a scale of 1 to
6, where 1 indicated strong agreement and 6 strong disagreement. Through a
statistical technique (factor analysis), Prescott developed a personality
profile of the violent person.
Table
5 shows the degree of relationship among the various statements which reflect
social and moral values. The figures at left known as “loadings,” are treated
like correlations coefficients. They indicate the strength with which each
variable contributes to the overall personality description of the respondent
as defined by this specific profile.
Table
6 shows how students’ attitudes toward premarital and extramarital sex
correlated with their attitudes toward alcohol and drugs. The number in the “r”
(correlation coefficient) column reflects the strength of the relationship
between attitudes toward drugs and attitudes toward premarital and extramarital
sex. A perfect relationship would be 1.0, indicating that one variable can be
perfectly predicted from the other. Correlations in the .50 to .70 range are
regarded as highly significant. The results indicate that people who reject
premarital sex are likely to prefer alcohol and drugs to sex and to become
hostile and aggressive when they drink alcohol.
Somatosensory
Index of Human Affection -- Factor 1:66.6%
Violence
Approved .85
Hard physical punishment is good for children who disobey a lot. .81
Physical punishment and pain help build a strong moral character. .76
Capital punishment should be permitted by society. .75
Violence is necessary to really solve our problems. .74
Physical punishment should be allowed in the schools. .69
I enjoy sadistic pornography. .54
I often feel like hitting someone. .43
I can tolerate pain very well.
…………
Physical
Pleasure Condemned
.84
Prostitution should be punished by society. .80
Abortion should be punished by society. .80
Responsible premarital sex is not agreeable to me. .78
Nudity within the family has a harmful influence upon children. .73
Sexual pleasures help build a weak moral character. .72
Society should interfere with private sexual behavior between adults. .69
Responsible extramarital sex is not agreeable to me. .61
Natural fresh body odors are often offensive. .47
I do not enjoy affectional pornography.
…………
Alcohol
and Drugs Rated Higher than Sex
.70
Alcohol is more satisfying than sex. .65
Drugs are more satisfying than sex. .60
I get hostile and aggressive when I drink alcohol. .49
I would rather drink alcohol than smoke marijuana. .45
I drink alcohol more often than I experience organism.
…………
.
Political
Conservatism
.82
I tend to be conservative in my political points of view. .77
Age (Older) .51
I often dream of either floating, flying, falling, or climbing. .45
My mother is often indifferent toward me. .42
I often get “uptight” about being touched. .40
I remember when my father physically punished me a lot.
TABLE
6
Drug
Relationships………………………..……Premarital Sex…….…Extramarital Sex
drugs quite often………….……4.8…………..…
.52…………………. .18 I
smoke marijuana quite often.….4.0……….……. .27………………….. .05 I
drink alcoholic beverages quite often……………….……..3.8…….………. .32………….………
.11 I
get hostile and aggressive when I drink alcohol………….5.1………..…….
.68………..…….…. .30 I
would rather drink alcohol than smoke marijuana…………3.4……………...35…….……….…. .32 Alcohol
is more satisfying than sex………………..……...5.3………………. .70………..……….
.34 Drugs
are more satisfying
than sex……………………….5.4…………..….. .73………..………..
.34 I
take drugs more often than I experience orgasm…….4.8………..…….47…………..……... .13 I
drink alcohol more often than I experience orgasm………4.8……………
.44……………………. .17
Philosophical
and Religious Roots: The Mind/Body Problem:
The
origins of the fundamental reciprocal relationship between physical violence
and physical pleasure can be traced to philosophical dualism and to the
theology of body/soul relationships. In Western philosophical thought human
beings were not unitary beings but were divided into two parts, body and soul.
Aristotle’s philosophical conception of the relationship between body and soul
was quite different from the Judeo-Christian concept which posited a state of
war between the body and soul. Within Judeo-Christian thought the purpose of
human life was to save the soul, and the body was seen as an impediment to
achieving this objective. Consequently, the body must be punished and deprived.
In St. Paul’s words, “Put to death the
base pursuits of the body – for if you live according to the flesh, you shall
die, but if by the spirit you mortify the deeds of the flesh you shall live”
(Romans 9:13). St. Paul clearly advocated somatosensory pleasure deprivation
and enhancement of painful somatosensory stimulation as essential prerequisites
for saving the soul.
Aristotle
did not view a state of war between the body and soul, but rather envisioned a
complimentary relationship in which the state of the soul or mind was dependent
on the state of the body. In fact he stated that “…the care of the body ought
to precede that of the soul” (POLITICA).
Aristotle
also appreciated the reciprocal relationship between pleasure and pain, and
recognized that a compulsive search for bodily pleasure originates from a state
of bodily discomfort and pain. This idea is cleary shown in the below quote:
NICHOMACHEAN ETHICS, BOOK 7.
“Now,
excess is possible in the case of the goods of the body, and it is the pursuit
of excess, but not the pursuit of necessary pleasures, that makes a person bad.
For all persons get some kind of enjoyment from good food, wine, and sexual
relations, but not everyone enjoys these things in the proper way. The reverse
is true of pain: a bad person does not avoid an excess of it, but they avoid it
altogether. For the opposite of an excess is pain only for the person who
pursues the excess….
“Accordingly,
we must now explain why the pleasures of the body appear to be more desirable.
The first reason, then, is that pleasure drives out pain. When men experience
an excess of pain, they pursue excessive pleasure and bodily pleasure in
general, in the belief that it will remedy the pain. These remedial (pleasures)
become very intense – and that is the very reason why they are pursued because
they are experienced in contrast with their opposite.”
In
his discussion of the highest good, Aristotle was quite explicit: “Therefore,
the highest good is some sort of pleasure, despite the fact that most pleasures
are bad, and, if you like, bad in the unqualified sense of the word.”
(NICHOMACHEAN ETHICS, BOOK 7)
It
is evident that the Judeo-Christian concept of body pleasure is quite the
opposite of that outlined by Aristotle, particularly, the relief of body pain
and discomfort through somatosensory pleasure. This denial of somatosensory
pleasure in Pauline Christian doctrine has led to alternate forms of “relief”
through such painful stimulations as hairshirts, self-scourgings,
self-mutilations, physical violence against others, and in the non-sensory
pleasures of drugs.
Experimental
animal studies have documented counterparts to these phenomena. For example, animals
deprived of somatosensory stimulation will engage in mutilations of their own
bodies. Animals deprived of touching early in life develop impaired pain
perception and an aversion to being touched by others. They are thus blocked
from experiencing the body-pleasure therapy that they need for rehabilitation.
In this condition, they have few alternatives but physical violence, where
pain-oriented touching and body contact is facilitated by their impaired
ability to experience pain. Thus, physical violence and physical pain become
remedies of choice for those deprived of physical pleasure.
Biblical Origins of the Immorality of Pleasure
The
question arises as to how Christian philosophy and theology, which borrowed
heavily from Aristotle, managed to avoid, if not outright reject, his teachings
regarding the morality of pleasure. The roots to this question can be found
throughout the Old Testament, beginning with the account in Genesis of the
expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden. The first consequence of
Eve’s transgression was that nudity became shameful. This event may well be the
beginning of man’s hostility toward women and the equating of woman with evil,
particularly the evils of the body. This is vividly portrayed in Zechariah
(5:5-8) in an angel’s description of the flying bushel: “’This is a bushel
container coming. This is their [women’s] guilt in all the land.’ Then a leaden
cover was lifted and there was a woman sitting inside the bushel. ‘This is
wickedness,’ he said, and he thrust her inside the bushel, pushing the leaden
cover into the opening.”
Violence
against sexuality and the use of sexuality for violence, particularly against
women, has very deep roots in Biblical tradition, and is spelled out very early
on. The nineteenth chapter of Genesis, the first book of the Old Testament,
holds that the rape of woman is acceptable but the rape of man is “a wicked
thing.” This chapter about the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah describes
Lot’s hospitality to two male travelers (actually two angels) who were staying
with him. In the evening the townsmen of Sodom came to Lot’s house and said to
him:
“Where
are the men who came to your house tonight? Bring them out to us that we may
have intimacies with them.” Lot went out to meet them at the entrance. When he
had shut the door behind him, he said, “I beg you, my brothers, not to do this
wicked thing. I have two daughters who have never had intercourse with men. Let
me bring them out to you, and you may do to them as you please. But don’t do
anything to these men, for you know they have come under the shelter of my
roof.” They replied, “Stand back! This fellow,” they sneered, “came here as an
immigrant, and now he dares to give orders! We’ll treat you worse than them!”
With that, they pressed hard against Lot, moving in closer to break down the
door. But his guests put out their hand, pulling Lot inside with them, and
closed the door, at the same time they struck the men at the entrance of the
house, one and all, with such blinding light that they were utterly unable to
reach the doorway.
"As
the story continues, the two angels escort Lot and his family to safety and
then destroy Sodom and Gomorrah for their great sinfulness. Yet not a word of
reproach is given to Lot for his willingness to hand over his two virgin
daughters to be gang raped. This same story is repeated in the books of Ezekiel
(23:1-49) and Judges (19:22-30)."
Given
such a tradition, it is understandable that during the inquisition only women
were charged with having intercourse with the devil and put to death for this
crime of pleasure. What man has died at the stake for having slept with Satan?
This tradition is maintained in modern cultures where women are punished for
prostitution but their male customers are not.
The
historical and Biblical acceptance of rape down through the ages has brutalized
the psyche of males brought up in this tradition. This is well illustrated in
the account of Michael McCusker, a Marine sergeant who witnessed a gang rape in
Vietnam. McCusker tells of a rifle squad of nine men who entered a small
village.
“They
were supposed to go after what they called a Viet Cong whore. They went into
the village and instead of capturing her, they raped her – every man raped her.
As a matter of fact, one man said to me later that it was the first time he had
ever made love to a woman with his boots on. The man who led the platoon, or
the squad, was actually a private. The squad leader was a sergeant but he was a
useless person and he let the private take over his squad. Later he said he
took no part in the raid. It was against his morals. So instead of telling his
squad not to do it, because they wouldn’t listen to him anyway, the sergeant
went into another side of the village and just sat and stared bleakly at the
ground, feeling sorry for himself. But at any rate, they raped the girl, and
then, the last man to make love to her, shot her in the head.” (The Winter
Soldier Investigation: An Inquiry into American War Crimes)
What
is it in the American psyche that permits the use of the word “love” to
describe rape? And where the act of love is completed with a bullet in the
head!
Modern
Origins of Sexual Violence:
Why
do men rape women? Researchers report that most rapists have a family
background of paternal punishment and hostility and loss of maternal affection.
I interpret rape as man’s revenge against woman for the early loss of physical
affection. A man can express his hostility toward his mother for not giving him
enough physical attention by sexually violating another woman.
Another
explanation may be that the increasing sexual freedom of women is threatening
to man’s position of power and dominance over women which he often maintains
through sexual aggression. Rape destroys sensual pleasure in woman and enhances
sadistic pleasure in man. Through rape, man defends himself from the sensual
pleasures of women which threaten his position of power and dominance.
It
is my belief that rape has its origins in the deprivation of physical affection
in parent-child relationships and adult sexual relationships; and in a
religious value system that considers pain and body deprivation moral and
physical pleasure immoral. Rape maintains man’s dominance over woman and
supports the perpetuation of patriarchal values in our society.
New
Values for a Peaceful World:
It
is clear that the world has only limited time to change its custom of resolving
conflicts violently. It is uncertain whether we have the time to undo the
damage done by countless previous generations, nor to we know how many future
generations it will take to transform our psychobiology of violence into one of
peace.
If
we accept the theory that the lack of sufficient somatosensory pleasure is a
principal cause of violence, we can work toward promoting pleasure and
encouraging affectionate interpersonal relationships as a means of combating
aggression. We should give high priority to body pleasure in the context of
meaningful human relationships. Such body pleasure is very different from
promiscuity, which reflects a basic inability to experience pleasure. If a
sexual relationship is not pleasurable, the individual looks for another
partner. A continuing failure to find sexual satisfaction leads to a continuing
search for new partners, that is, to promiscuous behavior. Affectionately
shared physical pleasure, on the other hand, tends to stabilize a relationship
and eliminate the search. However, a variety of sexual experiences seems to be
normal in cultures which permit its expression, and this may be important for
optimizing pleasure and affection in sexual relationships.
Available
data clearly indicate that the rigid values of monogamy, chastity, and
virginity help produce physical violence. The denial of female sexuality must
give way to an acceptance and respect for it, and men must share with women the
responsibility for giving affection and care to infants and children. As the
father assumes a more equal role with the mother in child-rearing and becomes
more affectionate toward his children, certain changes must follow in our
socioeconomic system. A corporate structure which tends to separate either
parent from the family by travel, extended meetings, or overtime work weakens
the parent-child relationship and harms family stability. To develop a peaceful
society, we must put more emphasis on human relationships.
Family
planning is essential. Children must be properly spaced so that each can
receive optimal affection and care. The needs of the infant should be
immediately met. Cross-cultural evidence does not support the view that such
practices will “spoil” the infant. Contrary to Dr. Benjamin Spock, it is
harmful for a baby to cry itself to sleep. By not answering an infant’s needs
immediately and consistently, we not only teach a child distrust at the very
basic emotional level, but also establish patterns of neglect which harm the
child’s social and emotional health. The discouragement of breast feeding in
favor of bottle feeding and the separation of healthy newborns from their
mothers in our “modern” hospitals are other examples of harmful child rearing
practices.
About
25% of marriages in the U.S. now end in divorce, [That of course was in 1975.
It’s more like 50% today] and an even higher percentage of couples have
experienced extra-marital affairs. This suggest that something is basically
wrong with the traditional concept of universal monogamy. When viewed in
connection with the cross-cultural evidence of the physical deprivations, violence,
and warfare associated with monogamy, the need to create a more pluralistic
system of marriage becomes clear. Contemporary experiments with communal living
and group marriage are attempting to meet basic needs that remain unfulfilled
in the isolation of a nuclear marriage. We must seriously consider new options,
such as extended families comprised of two or three couples who share values
and lifestyles. By sharing the benefits and responsibilities of child rearing,
such families could provide an affectionate and varied environment for children
as well as adults, and thereby reduce the incidence of child abuse and
runaways.
The
communal family – like the extended family group – can provide a more
stimulating and supportive environment for both children and adults than can
the average nuclear family. Communal living should not, of course, be equated
with group sex, which is not a sharing, but more often an escape from intimacy
and emotional vulnerability.
Openness
about the Body:
No
matter what type of family structure is chosen, it will be important to
encourage openness about the body and its functions. From this standpoint, we
could benefit from redesigning our homes along the Japanese format, separating
the toilet from the bathing facilities. The family bath should be used for
socialization and relaxation, and should provide a natural situation for
children to learn about male-female differences. Nudity, like sex, can be
misused and abused, and this fear often prevents us from accepting the honesty
of our own bodies.
The
beneficial stimulation of whirlpool baths should not be limited to hospitals or
health club spas, but brought into the home. The family bath should be large
enough to accommodate parents and children, and be equipped with a whirlpool to
maximize relaxation and pleasure. Nudity, openness, and affection within the
family can teach children and adults that the body is not shameful and
inferior, but rather is a source of beauty and sensuality through which we emotionally
relate to one another. Physical affection involving touching, holding, and
caressing should not be equated with sexual stimulation, which is a special
type of physical affection.
Teaching
Children to Love, not Compete:
The
competitive ethic, which teaches children that they must advance at the expense
of others, should be replaced by values of cooperation and a pursuit of
excellence for its own sake. We must raise children to be emotionally capable
of giving love and affection, rather than to exploit others. We should
recognize that sexuality in teenagers is not only natural, but desirable, and
accept premarital sexuality as a positive moral goal. Parents should help
teenagers realize their own sexual selfhood by allowing them to use the family
home for sexual fulfillment. Such honesty would encourage a more mature
attitude toward sexual relationships and provide a private supportive
environment that is far better for their development than the back seat of a
car or other undesirable locations outside the home. Early sexual experiences
are too often an attempt to prove one’s adulthood and maleness or femaleness
rather than a joyful sharing of affection and pleasure.
Sexual
Equality of Women:
Above
all, male sexuality must recognize the equality of female sexuality. The
relational right of men to multiple sexual relationships must be extended to
women. The great barrier between man and woman is man’s fear of the depth and
intensity of female sensuality. Because power and aggression are neutralized
through sensual pleasure, man’s primary defense against a loss of dominance has
been the historic denial, repression, and control of the sensual pleasure of
women. The use of sex to provide mere release from physiological tension
(apparent pleasure) should not be confused with a state of sensual pleasure
which is incompatible with dominance, power, aggression, violence, and pain. It
is through the mutual sharing of sensual pleasure that sexual equality between
women and men will be realized.
The
Psychobiology of Moral Behavior:
The
sensory environment in which an individual grows up has a major influence upon
the development and functional organization of the brain. Sensory stimulation
is a nutrient that the brain must have to develop and function normally. How
the brain functions determines how a person behaves. At birth a human brain is
extremely immature and new brain cells develop up to the age of two years. The
complexity of brain cell development continues up to about 16 years of age.
Herman Epstein of Brandeis University has evidence that growth spurts in the
human brain occur at approximately three, seven, 11, and 15 years of age. How
early deprivations affect these growth spurts has yet to be determined;
however, some data suggest that the final growth spurt may be abolished by
early deprivations.
W.T.
Greenough, a psychologist at the University of Illinois, has demonstrated that
an enriched sensory environment produces a more complex brain cell in rats than
an ordinary or impoverished sensory environment. His studies show that extreme
sensory deprivation is not necessary to induce structural changes in the
developing brain. Many other investigators have shown that rearing rats in
isolation after they are weaned induces significant changes in the biochemistry
of their brain cell functioning. Other investigators have shown abnormal
electrical activity of brain cell functioning in monkeys reared in isolation. I
have suggested that the cerebellum, a brain structure involved in the
regulation of many brain processes, is rendered dysfunctional when an animal is
reared in isolation and is implicated in violent-aggressive behaviors due to
somatosensory deprivation. It has been shown that cerebellar neurosurgery can
change the aggressive behaviors of isolation-reared monkeys to peaceful
behavior. Predatory killing behavior in ordinary house cats can be provoked by
stimulating the cerebellar fastigial nucleus, one of the deep brain nuclei of
the cerebellum.
Abnormally
low levels of platelet serotonin have been found in monkeys reared in isolation
and also in institutionalized, highly aggressive children. These findings
suggest that somatosensory deprivation during the formative periods of
development significantly alters an important biochemical system in the body
associated with highly aggressive behaviors. A number of other investigators
have documented abnormalities in the adrenal cortical response system in
rodents who were isolation-reared and who developed hyperactive hyper-reactive,
and hyper-aggressive behavior. Thus another important biochemical system
associated with aggressive needs is known to be altered by somatosensory
deprivation early in life.
Clearly,
if we consider violent and aggressive behaviors undesirable then we must
provide an enriched somatosensory environment so that the brain can develop and
function in a way that results in pleasurable and peaceful behaviors. The
solution to physical violence is physical pleasure that is experienced within
the context of meaningful human relationships.
Changing
the Patterns of Deprivation and Violence:
For
many people, a fundamental moral principle is the rejection of creeds,
policies, and behaviors that inflict pain, suffering, and deprivation upon our
fellow humans. This principle needs to be extended. We should seek not just an
absence of pain and suffering, but also the enhancement of pleasure, the
promotion of affectionate human relationships and the enrichment of human
experience.
If
we strive to increase the pleasure in our lives this will also affect the ways
we express aggression and hostility. The reciprocal relationship between
pleasure and violence is such that one inhibits the other, when physical
pleasure is high, physical violence is low. When violence is high, pleasure is
low. This basic premise of the somatosensory pleasure deprivation theory
provides us with the tools necessary to fashion a world of peaceful,
affectionate, cooperative individuals.
The
world, however, has limited time to correct the conditions that propel us to
violent confrontations. Modern technologies of warfare have made it possible
for an individual or nation to bring total destruction to large segments of our
population. And the greatest threat comes from those nations which have the
most depriving environments for their children and which are most repressive of
sexual affection and female sexuality. We will have the most to fear when these
nations acquire the weapons of modern warfare. Tragically, this has already
begun.
