Serial Killers DBQ

Showcased by the branding of serial killers as inherently mentally unstable and dangerous, it can be seen that the majority of the population believes that individuals are affected more by internal forces. However, in reality, this is not the case. While human decisions seem to be dictated by their will because emotion is shown while completing actions, these emotions are dictated by the situation, or in other words, environmental factors. As a result, Dr. Zimbardo’s statement that “Human behavior is more influenced by the things outside of us than inside,” is true.

While a person can be disposed to perform certain types of actions, whether or not these actions are performed is still ultimately decided by the environment that they are in. For

example, Dr. Zimbardo began the Stanford Prison Experiment with two dozen students, students he deemed “the most normal, the most healthy” (Source E).

Because the experiment was meant to find out what would happen if good people were put into an evil place, the designation of “the most normal, the most healthy,” was given to the students who were naturally disposed to behave in a way that is traditionally good - helping others and adverse to violence. However, despite these traits, all of the students who participated in the experiment experienced drastic changes in their personalities and actions. After the experiment began, half of the students, who became guards, dehumanized the other half of the students, who became prisoners. In fact, the level at which the prisoners were mistreated was so high that “The stress reaction was so extreme that normal kids [Dr. Zimbardo’ team] picked because they were healthy had breakdowns within 36 hours” (Source E). The kids that had emotional breakdowns were all prisoners. While the context suggests that the emotional breakdown was caused by lack of willpower, the real cause of the emotional breakdown was that the guards, who were previously normal kids with the same traits as

them, began depriving the prisoners of their humanity. The reason for this sudden change from pacifism to sadism cannot lie within the individual, as it is extremely unlikely that all of the students acting as guards hid a sadistic disposition, so it lies in the environment.“Good” students had suddenly been placed in an unfamiliar situation and given or deprived of power and individuality, allowing certain people to rise up and others to be forced down. “Good” morals such as sympathy and kindness are renounced in favor of power as a result of the change in environment.
Evidence that the environment is a stressor is not just found in modern situations, but in literature as well. For example, in William Golding's Lord of the Flies, readers are presented with a scene of a group of British boys stranded on an island. Initially, the boys set up a council and attempt to make decisions meaningful to their survival, such as building shelters and a signal fire. However, slowly, the freedom the island provides allows their primal instincts to take over. In fact, in one situation, the boys form a circle around a pig and begin chanting “‘Kill the pig! Cut his throat! Kill the pig! Bash him in!’” (Golding 88). Although it seems as if these primal chants are the product of their instincts, the freedom that allowed these traits to manifest is in the environment. Free of any adults, the children revert to a more primal state because they are no longer bound by responsibilities or old relationships. In this case, the children performed certain actions because the environment alleviated them of the burdens of society, allowing their primitive desires to surface. Soldiers stationed in the Abu Ghraib prison faced a similar situation and responded similarly as well. The soldiers deployed to Abu Ghraib were convicted of violating human rights. Soldiers are normally very disciplined. However, in this case they had no discipline. Why was this? It was because of the new environment the soldiers were placed in. Among other environmental factors, the military report indicates that “five key factors: ambiguity, isolation, powerlessness, boredom, and danger ...were at work for the Soldiers based at Abu Ghraib” (Source A). In Abu Ghraib, the prison acted as an “island” where it felt like their actions had no meaning and no consequence, leading to the human rights violations.
However, some people believe that even though different people react differently in the same situations, this variation in action is due to genetic influence, or instinct.

Because genes are hard-coded into a human and cannot be changed, people believe that in certain environments, especially stressful ones, humans will begin acting based on instinct rather than rationality; that people's actions are the product of their own inherent will rather than circumstance. “Instinctive, or hard-wired (i.e., by definition, genetically determined), behavior ...implies that a behavior is performed without thought and cannot be modified by learning.” (Source J). Additionally, people believe that genes not only cause genes to give people a disposition toward certain decisions, but guarantee that those types of decisions will eventually be made. While genes do cause people to have certain personalities and be disposed toward certain things, the rest of the argument is fundamentally false. This is because it ignores one of the core components of genetics: epigenetics. Epigenetics is a part of genetics that determines whether or not a gene is expressed. Even if a person were to have a gene to cause violence, “in order to express this gene, ...you have to be involved in something that is really traumatic -- not a little stress, not being spanked or something, but really seeing violence, or being involved in it, in 3D” (Source D). Essentially, although genetics is hard coded into a person,

whether or not the effect of the gene is actually expressed is dependent on the environment.
Demonstrated by the Stanford Prison Experiment, Abu Ghraib, and Lord of the Flies, it can be seen that human behaviour is more influenced by environmental stressors than internal factors. Despite arguments that genes cause a human’s actions and decisions to become inevitable and pre-determined, this argument ignores the fact that the environment can affect whether or not these genes are expressed. As such, internal factors should not be looked to as the cause of violent events. Rather, external factors, such as stressors and upbringing should be considered instead.