This is all that I will say about the Virginia Tech horror:

[wolven7]

You are... all asking the wrong questions. Almost every member of the press and the various media are asking "Why didn't we see it sooner? There were so many Warning Signs."

I quote from a comment I just made to a new acquaintance:

'Warning signs. Yes, I suppose that he did show certain behavioural patterns that, in retrospect, [from the vantage of the horrible aftermath,] would seem to point to a certain directional path, for him.

'At the same time, those same signs, interpreted in another context, gets us "tortured [(if not-very-good)] artist." We still don't know what pushed him from "harmless, if intense and clinically abnormal indivdual," to "Mass Murderer."'

What are the situational factors that drive people to murder? What are the causes and effects that take a fouth-year Student at a major technical university snap, and throw it all away? Shut the fuck up, Jack Thompson; it wasn't video games.

We are asking the wrong questions. And some would say that we are 'Beyond Reason' when we deal with this. But I think that's not quite right. I think we're too close, and too used to a certain kind of question and answer.

This person performed these horrible acts. He displayed these supposed 'signs.' So anyone who displays said 'signs' is to be monitored? Disenfranchised? Marginalised, then. No? Then what would you do, once you've discovered these traits? These 'Signs'? If not corral all of these people together and to Fix Them?

You are asking the Wrong Questions. What makes a person behave this way? Some people have a natural tendency toward being alone, more often. Some people have a difficult time integrating rejection in a constructive way. Some people have violent tendencies. Let them be alone. Teach them what picking yourself up and dusting it off has to offer, at a young age. And fucking teach them to channel those vioent urges into something useful, with discipline and restraint.

People have personalities. Different mixtures of preferences and proclivities. We shouldn't seek to lump all of them together, against their will, but to help them define themselves, in a way that makes them a benefit to themselves and others.

In short, ask yourself, not "where did we go wrong?" Not "How did we fail him?" That's a bullshit question, too. Let's ask ourselves "What and How do we need to teach, in the future, to keep this from happening, again?"

Yes, I know that some people are just fucked up. Their wiring is more broken than nurturing can seem to easily repair.

But you try, god damn it.

Comments

[arktoi.livejournal.com]

It's so faint, that very very fine line between harmless creative eccentricity and malevolent madness...after all, anyone who sees things differently from the "norm" has the potential to become dangerous. That's the nature; it's the nurture that often goes wrong.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Any person can be made to see things differently from the norm.

Nature can be broken, by itself or by nurturing effects. It can also be fixed, in the same ways...

[moonandserpent.livejournal.com]

Two of the plays he wrote in that creative writing class. (http://newsbloggers.aol.com/2007/04/17/cho-seung-huis-plays/)

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Signs that the kid needed counseling, for a while, but nothing much worse than I've seen, before. A kid with a very broken idea of what other people are for. I still wonder how it got that broken, and why no one tried to help him fix it.

That's part of the issue, you know? That people are talking about having been able to "catch him" sooner. Not help him, not try to connect with him. Catch him.

Thanks for the link.

[salrushdy.livejournal.com]

IN order to know how do we need to tech are you better to know "where did we go wrong" I agree it seems like
intellectual prostitution of causality freaks generation, yet cannot see any clear alternative

hm bullshit question, doubt that

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Well, perhaps "bullshit" is too harsh. But mis-applied? Definately.

[ratspine6.livejournal.com]

There is no answer to this mindset. It is dysfunctional. The area of focus should not be in preventing the existence of these people, they will always exist. His violence was in reaction to his dislike of his own social situation, which will happen and vary for eternity because there is no such thing as perfect equality. The area of focus should solely be in how quickly we respond in defense against these freaks of law. They are not freaks of nature, violence like this is all over nature. What these people are are freaks of law, they stand outside the boundaries of society and attack it because they are unable or unwilling to fit into the paradigm and do not challenge it any constructive way.

You can't help these people either. Having seen these kinds of kids before, they refuse help. They find all charity to be ingenuine when it is simply awkward. Perhaps I'm a radical for advocating the allowed extermination of people like this (only once they commit a dangerous act, thus I suppose I mean the death penalty), but I find it more radical to advocate that everyone has a place in existence. It goes against nature. The weak are always culled, and by weak I mean the detrimental to the herd and the future of the species.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

If it's awkward, find and or train someone to make it natural. Ask why, like a five-year-old, until they stop and actually think about it. I think everyone needs that, actually, but...

[ratspine6.livejournal.com]

As for the "trying." I disagree. I understand what you want to do, it is admirable on many levels, perhaps even on deeper levels than I'm willing to commit to and so am not as able to understand. But what I think is, is that by trying to help everyone, we waste our resources and draw focus from helping those who will actually harness it, appreciate it, and truly benefit from it. There are lost causes. If all things are possible, then there are lost causes. And if not everything is possible, then not everyone can be helped. I'm using a poor argument here at the end, but I'm in between classes.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Even if all things are possible, we need a place from which to approach all of the possibilities, until we encompass and become them all (including becoming none of them). We embrace the contradictions, because they are the truth of us.

Some people may be "lost causes," but I think it is more worthy to try, that there might be fewer, or at least an evolution in Type. We try because, out of all paths open, it is the better one to us.

You don't, because you think it inefficient, or, perhaps, "against the natural order."

Which is fine, I guess. But don't expect me to agree with your reasoning. Giving up is only an option when we have exhausted all realistically probable efforts, and I don't think we've come anywhere Near that, yet.

[ratspine6.livejournal.com]

I wonder how old you are to judge how much effort those who have preceded you have put into such endeavors. "Worthy" is a word that simply means the person using it respects the idea. It is completely subjective. I never said to give up, I said that we should perhaps focus on other areas of difficulty that our society faces. And if no one should ever give up, then there are no wrong questions to ask, because every question is seeking an answer to help benefit society...or at least the questions you deem to think are wrong. Further, I sort of think your question and the other questions are the same, just convaluted.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

You are free to continue to think that. Good day.

[ratspine6.livejournal.com]

Did I ask permission or condescension? Last time I checked, I didn't. If you think I have treated you with the same disregard, you just can't help but read disagreement with such tone. Good day to you, too.

[wolven.livejournal.com]

Did I seem to give permission or condescend? Perhaps you misread me. I only stated a fact.

You play your supposed Socrates to those you deem as not having the proper level of personal introspection, and you seem to enjoy telling people what they do and don't mean, think, or feel.

Notice that I'm only saying what it seems, because I might be wrong.

I conceed the potential correctness of your initial assesment, but I don't agree with the methodology, as you present it, and I don't feel like being drawn much further into one of your back and forths.

Best of luck, to you.

[ratspine6.livejournal.com]

I get the last word...hehehe