Murderology Willfully Satiating Sexuality

Free to choose, without neural defect or hereditary predisposition, the hominid pestilence is not hardwired or cursed by ancient fall. Human prefer killing, violence, and consumption. As aliens may or may not observe from afar, perhaps the nature is weary of the intentional devolution of the scavenging species. Why not be a healthy, independent, self-evolving and liberated nonconforming transformation? No, that would require too much individual self-reliance and personal accountability. Most would rather suffer stagnation. Change is cumbersome and demands extraordinary thought.

Instead, rhetorical hyperbole masks as intellectual certainty, as anti-scientific analysis is subordinated to emotional reactivity and fixation on the supernatural. However, for the few, the brave ones who pioneer the rugged individualism of private exceptional differentiation, they are outnumbered by the onslaught of others who practice primal stupidity. Those who willingly struggle the liberation of their transformation, are challenged by the many who deliberately contend against those valiant progressions.

Yet, deep down within the nexus of the psychodynamics resides the primeval energies to urge the motivations to succeed or defeat oneself. The strength of which stems from the innate nature of each person’s evolving, regressing or ascending sexuality. Where amative essence devolves, it might be called the “diabolis sexualis”, or the destructive purposes of selfness for the sake of personal gratification. By intentional maladaptive efforts, to escape the punishing ravages of responsibility, for ethical necessity of accountability, salacious regressions hasten human species extinction.

From bloated consumption, to human trafficking, for the carnality of war, pestilence, famine and collusion of official delusion, the carnal motivations remain the same, as ancient as any other name. Not much has changed for the masses of humanity, who, in their maladaptation, foster all manner of excuse, alibi and mitigation. Socio-economic and political processes, likewise, collude in the perversion of childish escapism. And, when it comes to “murderology”, in contrast to some misguided notion of “killology”, such is an intimate example of sexuality weaponized. As for the “diabolis sexualis”, to kill or not to kill is not the question or the answer; it is human willfulness, which offers excuses by the not so virtuous arrogance of every bloodletting spill.

By contrast, the question posed ought to be when the next killing will take place, with the realization that humans will always kill. Murder, rape, aggravated assault and robbery, the standard “street crimes” of data collection, reflect the hedonistic tendencies of the human species. Taken to a global perspective, one can add warfare, along with exploitation of natural resources, killing the environment, which achieve counterproductive levels of destruction. The human species is good at such ends.

People get pleasure from the essence of the “murdering” experience. In some ways, “murderology” can be viewed at literal, as well as metaphorical. To physically kill someone, due to the aberrations of one’s belief system for instance, is but one aspect of murdering the competition. To blow something up, break a thing open, crack an object in pieces, shoot another person, or decimate a computer network, provides examples of the diversity of social disruption to achieve self-gratifying results.

While the focus here is on killing, diversion of alternatives into other malevolent aspects include a variety of interpersonal inflictions. Humans can be very clever in devising schemes to torture, maim and kill others. In one body of research, the investigators offered the point of view that murder serves a problem-solving purpose. To eliminate the competition, however conceived, enhances the perpetrator’s edge over the opposition. While pseudoscientists from every school of thought wrestle as to cause-effect relationships, the media and the public are captivated by such events.

Traffic jams quickly ensue around horrendous crashes, as drivers sneak a peek at the roadside carnage. News pundits decry the “militarization” of the police, while encouraging military intervention into someone’s civil war. Anti-gun activists call for “disarming” the public, as they portray gun-wielding superheroes in the movies. With exotic weaponry blazing away at fictional bad people, they make huge sums of money in their vicarious violence. Meanwhile, demonstrations quickly devolve into anarchy, as rioters burn down their neighborhoods protesting violence by the police.

Pandering, pillaging and plundering are historic antics carried out by human beings, who passively or sadistically want their selfish gratifications gratified. Killing is willful well-purposed instigation, premeditated from malicious thinking, by the antagonist who desires hedonistic reward for hurting another. It is within the framework of the present consciousness that remains relevant to the perpetrations that transpire.

From the war within, the struggle of one’s quest throughout life is in the purposed instigation to deal with ideations relative to conflict between existence and non-existence. Fear of life and the avoidance of the strife struggle to accept the station by which an individual journey must be engaged. Yet, by rage against the next breath for the reminder of what must be done, willfully entangles each step toward a greater understanding of the complexity of selflessness. Intricately, the unfolding merger of nurture and nature may or may not be directed toward a higher ascendency. The quest is cumbersome.

Regardless of what others might pontificate, or profess to know, as no one knows all things to be known, the multidimensional nature is multifaceted. The depth to which one must delve into the expanse of the personality is limitless. At the same time, the disguises change to promote the deceptions of countermeasures. Deceit is at the core of the resistance to transformation, and by way of the trek, such is the purposeful regression for the satiation of immaturity. Few desire to grow up and liberate the senses.

Intentional mediocrity, acceptance of stupidity, and sustaining status quo devolution, hastens the eventual demise of the species. To remain immature, enslaved and unevolved, relishes in the ignorance of individual differentiation. As some would claim, they are “living the dream”, yet have no concept of what that entails. The inane foolhardiness of a gluttonous culture, more concerned with materiality than higher intelligence, encourages the folly of self-destructiveness. Likewise, increased reliance upon the pseudosciences, with anti-intellectual smugness, evades the necessity of scientific discovery.

Meanwhile, as to the fundamental essence of psycho-bio-sexuality, the very being of individuality and attendant diversity, the many remain intentionally ignorant. In any given collective of social discussion, alleged academic or communal, it is the daring and the brave that risk such issues. Of sexual relevance, the nature of it pervades every aspect of human existence and interactions at every level.

From primal to evolving ascendance, as suggested in historic references, and several works in classic criminology, the asserted construct offers a multiplicity of intricate implications as to human realm of salacious behaviors. From normalcy to defiantly dangerous, the deviance is both personal and societal in terms of reaching higher states of wiser maturity. Consensual conformity pervades but one aspect, while horrific deviations, inflicted with purposeful devastation, stem from the same ideations.

In a classical view of criminology, the willfulness of the behavioral implications reflects the multidimensional complexity of personal proclivities and inclinations. Hedonistic satiation is at the core of personal motivations, and yet, the complexity is much more expansive and mysterious. It is the present reality based on personal preferences, willful choices and not a past singularity. No single presumed factor culminates is murderous behaviors. Violence is not a virus. The intricacy of criminality is much more intimately comingled in a purposeful state of amative mindfulness from the viewpoint advocated in this writing. Sexuality diverges to lethality.

Killing or harming others, including humans and animals, is purposeful premeditation. For war, sport or illicit intention, people kill for individual and group reasons. Of these instigations, a multiplicity of factors are connected in the ideation of the people involved, although the carnality of the act is essentially of seductive and sensual purposes. There is no “single bullet theory” that absolutely and unequivocally explains a deterministic justification, or uncontrollable urge, for acts of violence. Damaging others, whether committing warfare, genocide, deprivation or killing a neighbor is an act of willful self-gratification, calculated with malice aforethought.

Everyone is encouraged to think whatever he or she so desires. For every theory pretending a solution, there will be a counter-perspective. Likewise, for each proselyte of an alleged new discovery, the theory is already tainted by the bias and subjective validation of the adherent. From alleged abnormalities of “mental processes”, to uncontrollable urges of “human instinct”, people are good at over-simplification and trouble-free rationalization. Self-deception easily justifies victimization so long as a simplistic explanation will suffice. People are comfortable with excuses.

Meanwhile, anthropologists, criminologists, and sociologists of every persuasion speculate upon the transition from “hunting and gathering”, to crop dusting domestication, to forced industrialization, and eventually the pretentious likelihood that violence is instinctual. The search for the so-called “crime gene”, a DNA basis for evil, or a defect in heredity, adds to the many arrogant notions that all the mysteries can be solved. In the deceptions of human conceit, the simplistic answer usually answers very little, but tugs the emotions for nonscientific perspectives on criminality. In the realm of the pseudosciences, anything is possible because it is all allegory.

Along with the conceptual framework of evolutionary processes transposing motivational inspiration for maladaptive behaviors, according to some, alleged “instinctual” influences are insufficient excuses for murder. Regardless of the mitigating factors, the perpetrator cannot justify by any stretch of the imagination the oversimplification of deterministic externality that negates responsibility. Regardless of contrived conjecture, anecdotal correlations by extraneous reach of pretended definitive explanation do not excuse accountability for egregious acts of unlawful killing.

Acts of homicide, murder and genocide, killing is what humans do, and such is the history of the planet where upon humans reside. As the debate continues on, as it has for centuries, and occupies considerable speculation among the many schools of thought, there is no ultimately complete answer. For the foreseeable future, in spite of best efforts at myriad forms of conjectural conjuring, the complexity remains puzzling. Human thinking and subsequent actions are far too intricate for simplistic explanations. Yet, some will assert the arrogance of their shortcomings with all kinds of seemingly convoluted speculations. Regardless, sexuality remains a commonality.

In a related body of research, reported in a national independent online journal, a team of researchers claim that human killing is six times greater than that of any other mammal. So, if humans are inclined to kill other humans, what is the mystery of the mental mechanism inside the human thinking processes? From thought activity, or inherent individual ideation, plus personal inclination, it appears logical that the eroticization of killing, as in most other human activities, translates into “sexual weaponization”. Whereas some investigators might assert a narrower definition, as in the “lust murder” aspects, here the concept is more general in nature. In other words, the sexuality of the individual crosses many spheres of life-long endeavors.

However, as with theoretical constructs, from one philosophical school of thought to the next, the question arises as to scientific validation. That is to say, beyond any reasonable doubt in the sufficiency of provable evidentiary criteria. Therein resides the age-old challenge in the pseudosciences. There is no absolute answer, yet speculation continues. Nonetheless, the human species “evolving over time” continues a proclivity for killing other people and living things. From various studies, many questions arise and numerous answers are yet to be found. Investigative processes continue.

In pursuing a more open and wide-ranging perspective on the “bio-psychic nature” of human inclination toward crimes of violence, a diverse body of research reexamines previously held notions. In fact, from the perspective of classical criminology and early analysis of human sexual behavior, a more radical view pursues the idea that sexuality is the basis for all human activities. A complex multidimensional matrix of thinking delves to the inner regions of cognitive subjectivity for a theoretical framework that relates to amative motivational factors of bother prosocial and antisocial behaviors.

By contrast and from a multi-discipline approach, some researchers attempt to assess the thinking processes of the perpetrator, and subsequent commissions of violence, from social and cultural standpoint. In so doing, the investigation goes outside what might be considered a purely psychological framework into the precursors of external determinants. While some may follow those schools of thought in that regard, others prefer focusing more on the individuality of the criminal.

As this regards the sexuality of homicidal behavior, to suggest “bio-psychic” is to reference the complexity of the individual as the beginning point. From there, with no “single bullet” theory to substantiate the totality of human motivations, analysis remains open to many possibilities that individual carnality, and the dysfunctions that go along with that, deform to the diabolic state of “sexual weaponization”. In some studies of murderers, the emphasis is placed on the societal context that may influence the erotic implications in the acts of killing as more pervasive. Other points of view will focus on the mix of factors that come into play in the broad scheme of salacious inclinations.

For instance, in a major assessment of killing from a project in the United Kingdom, the investigators suggested sexuality as the primary motivation in the “murder of the object desired”. As all human beings are sexual beings, the “weaponization” of sexuality crosses the boundaries of civility into the realm of interpersonal maladaptive “warfare”. To the juncture, a multiplicity of actions devolve in destructive behaviors.

From a holistic world view, as presented by one U.S. state’s health department, human sexuality is viewed as encompassing emotional, intellectual, physical, mental, and spiritual dimensions in the totality of the person. In so stating that, it follows with additional parameters by stating that “sexually healthy” people tend to be healthier individuals who interact in more positive ways with other people.

Such is the totality of the dimensional spectrum encompassing the entire human being, not simply a portion of that person, but a complex whole entity. Anything less than that a multifaceted intricacy of “mind-body” integration, potentially falls short of gaining limited perspective on the totality of a particular persona. Reaching the minor viewpoint, by focusing on a restricted aspect, stifles the creativity of an open minded approach. All too often, an investigative progression is constrained by unwarranted bias. One philosophy versus another typically contrast a variety of opinions.

Not only does the mainstream societal connection regress to simplistic and specious notions of behavior, naïve and immature points of view perpetrated states of debasing ignorance. Personal fantasies, for instance and from at least one perspective in the field of psychiatry, formulate purposely to express the desired manifestations of bio-sexuality. In a conceptualization of spirituality, intertwined through neural passages of cerebral frameworks, the integration of sexuality into actuality is a process that occurs over a lifetime. During which, one person may desire the kill another.

The brevity of this context suggests that murderology, as a query into behavioral deviations, ought to consider the underlying sexual forces within the mindset of individuality. According to a report in one science news resource, investigators drew a tentative conclusion that humans are six times more prone to kill other humans than other mammal species. From this particular anthropological study, further commentary claimed that murder was a strategic matter dependent upon issues related to sexuality.

In this regard, theoretical assessment of Homo sapiens, ancient past to present, expressed amative inclinations toward reproductive competition, successful mating, and by intimate connection, status and material gain, by way of killing off other human threats. Indirectly, but nonetheless linked to carnality, various expressions of materiality were within this sensual scheme of human seduction to criminality. With regard to violence within the human species, the primary element is sexuality.

While some conclude that violence among humans is a matter of genetic predisposition, others contend evolutionary processes bias such outcomes. To each who has interest in such notions there are opinions from various schools of thought. Discussion and disagreement continues, and there remains no “single-bullet theory” to suffice every viewpoint. But, satiating sexuality by killing is a compelling standpoint.

Source by Randy Gonzalez