Re: Optimal Defence of Inherent and Constitutional Rights

Tony Hollick (
Sat, 27 Dec 97 06:06 GMT0

Lee Daniel Crocker writes in response to my post:

>> Swiss psychotherapist Alice Miller's horrifying book on the subject
>> of 'poisonous pedagogy' -- "'For Your Own Good': The Roots of
>> Violence in Child-Rearing" (Virago, [1987] -- is an inclusive and
>> comprehensive descriptive and explanatory account, which answers the
>> basic question: "How would you have to bring up a child, for him or
>> her to be a violent adult?"

> Anyone who claims to come anywhere close to answering a question
> like that can be immediately dismissed as a crackpot. There are
> so many completely unstudied and misunderstood aspects of learning,
> socialization, genetic predisposition, and blind chance involved
> in child-rearing that any claim of any "scientific" result in it
> is utterly specious.

An extreme aprioristic response... This person dismisses an
argument without understanding what it says, or evaluating its
accuracy. Try studying Alice Miller's hypothesis first. Then make
some testable deductions from it, and check them out against the
factual and statistical bases.

In the UK, around 80% of people in prison are from State childrens'
homes. Additionally: virtually everone convicted of violent
offences has had an appallingly violent childhood -- physical and/or
sexual and/or gross emotional abuse.

Alice Miller's thesis seems to fit the facts very well.

We are not presented with a choice of 'explanation' _or_ 'too
complex to understand.' We are presented with alternative
hypotheses. Alice Miller's hypotheses describe, explain and predict
violent behaviour very well.

So, what alternative hypotheses do you offer?

/ /\ \

Tony Hollick, LightSmith (LA-Agora Conference) (Agora Home Page, Rainbow Bridge Foundation) (NorthWest Coalition Against Malicious Harrassment)