In itself teenagers have probably not changed much over the past 100.000 years (genetically we still live in the stone age). However the factors that predispose a person to act violent might have changed. For instance culture might be more accepting of violence, differences between groups in society leading to friction might have become larger, drug-dealing associated with violence might be more widespread, weapens might be more widely available and finally our perception might have changed as well since it is easier to spread the news of a violent incident in the media.
So my conclusion is that it is not so much the teenager that is innately more violent but the circumstances that predispose to violence and our perception of it.
[2 points]16 hours ago by pollewopReplyEdited 16 hours ago by pollewop
In some cases yes, for instance a war to liberate your country from an occupying force. In many wars however different motives play a role that have nothing to do with moral correctness.
pollewop's Recent Comments See all 1997
Not yet, but almost at least once...
In itself teenagers have probably not changed much over the past 100.000 years (genetically we still live in the stone age). However the factors that predispose a person to act violent might have changed. For instance culture might be more accepting of violence, differences between groups in society leading to friction might have become larger, drug-dealing associated with violence might be more widespread, weapens might be more widely available and finally our perception might have changed as well since it is easier to spread the news of a violent incident in the media.
So my conclusion is that it is not so much the teenager that is innately more violent but the circumstances that predispose to violence and our perception of it.
In some cases yes, for instance a war to liberate your country from an occupying force. In many wars however different motives play a role that have nothing to do with moral correctness.