The aggression has always been one of the main objects of interest of social psychology. Despite great attention devoted to this subject, and despite a wide range of work on this topic, the world of scientific research has not yet managed to find a definition of aggressive behaviour that is accepted unanimously. Social psychologists have preferred to analyse only certain aspects of this concept, precisely because of its irreducibility to a definition and a discussion covering all the various aspects of which consists of or all its manifestations. It is these diverse human aggressiveness, namely the specific conduct aggressive implemented by man, and the search for reasons for the implementation of such pipelines, to be the main interest of this analysis. It is first important to highlight the subtle difference in meaning between the concept of aggressiveness and that of aggressive behavior: speaking specifically of aggressiveness, distinguishing this concept from that of aggression, it highlights the specific intention to analyse especially the drive, the instinct. The predisposition or a particular state intra-psychic of a subject, which therefore has the potential, if circumstances allow him, to translate these 'pushed' internal behaviour objective and visible. It's easy to understand, then, such as aggression constitutes a concept or easily measurable or easily analysed in a valid and clear. Sull'aggressività of a certain person, and any consequences of such aggression, therefore you can only make assumptions very general, while on aggressive behaviour, that is conducted on a clearly visible and observable, is much easier to make observations and research more precise. The hydraulic model of Lorenz and Freud are a good example to clarify the matter: in their theories is highlighted in a very clear distinction between the accumulation of aggressiveness within an individual and aggressive behaviour consequently put in place by that individual to decrease the tension generated by a similar accumulation. It is therefore clear that the word 'aggression' highlights in particular a latent possibility, a 'office' inherent within and therefore hardly observable. Speaking specifically of "aggressive behaviour" means instead focus mainly sull'atto in itself, objective, factual, and therefore easily observable. It should be stressed that "[w] orld bodies […] have forever struggled with the definition of aggression" (Crabb & Rosnow, 1988, pag.105); Crabb, based on a study carried out together with Rosnow, says that "perceived aggressiveness of an action depended on the relative context in which the action is judged, rather than on shared, objective criteria of evaluation "and that" the relativity of perceived aggressiveness poses serious problems for the maintenance of peaceful relations among nations "(Crabb, 1989, pag.345). Even within the field of social psychology different theoretical approaches have produced definitions of the concept of aggressive behaviour quite discordant with each other. To define conduct as aggressive, you must first it has been put in place intentionally, and not so accidental: "Accidental harm is not aggressive because it is not intended. Harm that is an incidental by-product of helpful actions is also not aggressive, because the harm-doer believes that the target is not motivated to avoid action "(Anderson & Bushman, 2002, p.29). Martin argues that "[t] 'intentional feature appears indispensable to define an action as violent" (Martino, 1999, pag.183). However, despite the majority of scholars consider the 'intent' as a prerequisite for defining conduct as aggressive, it should be noted that some scholar sees as aggressive behaviour also put in place not intentionally: "Aggression has been defined in two ways in The Literature. The definition used by Dollard [...] involved intentional infliction of harm on some targets. However, Buss [...] intention excluded from his definition of aggression by suggesting that the term aggression be used to refer to any response delivering noxious stimulation "(Manning & Taylor DA, 1975, pag.180). The definitions of the concept of aggressive behaviour also often bring in relief the consequences suffered by the victims of such behaviour. Ursin and Olff argue that "[a] ggression may be defined as behavior which threatens or actually results in injury to the psysical, psychological, sociological or integrity of a person" (Ursin & Olff, 1995, p.13). According to Eibl-Eibensfeldt, you can "define aggressive forms of behaviour with which men […] argue its interests despite the resistance of other individuals" (Eibl-Eibensfeldt, 1993, pag.244). Saul Rosenzweig argues instead that "[t] 'aggression in general terms is basically self" (Rosenzweig, 1985, pag.377). The concept of self undoubtedly good outlines an important aspect of aggressive behaviour: the desire to subjugate others and to dominate its Self, profiting from what is often an increase in their self-esteem. The subjugation of another human being can be not so much the end of aggression, namely the submission in itself and the 'defeat' of the other, as the means to be able to derive from that improvements in the assessment of their identity. The aggressive behaviour generates therefore an attempt at self at the expense of other human beings, which consequently seek to enforce a valid resistance to aggression suffered. Most approaches to the issue of aggressive behaviour focused sull'aggressione a person against another person; aggressive behavior is often analyzed and interpreted as a hostile relationship between two or more people. "Aggredire ', a word derived from the Latin adgredior, entails the act of approaching towards someone. It is therefore clear how the phenomenon of aggression involves a relationship between people, that is a relationship between a person who acts and attacks, and a person who is the target of such a behaviour, a person that suffers and that is attacked. The concept of aggression, therefore, will be considered implied a relational structure. Some scholars, however, have given the aggressive behavior not only focusing on relational, but focusing its attention on reflexive, that is on self-aggression, the attack was in these cases that is designed not as an act exercised by a person against another person, but as an act directed against its Self. Among these scholars should especially mention Freud, who envisaged as part of its second theory of drives, that the aggressiveness of a man could turn not only to the outside world, but also to the person. Freud thus assuming a specific drive to death, thought all'aggressività not only as a report, but also as a self-aggression, that is, as aggression that could lead the subject all'autodistruzione. The human aggressiveness may have different developments and especially can reach very high levels of intensity, such as to generate behaviors that go far beyond the relatively innocuous conduct aggressive that we see in everyday life, such as those put in place by of young boys who azzuffano for trivial reasons. The aggressiveness can also have tragic developments, which can become extreme violence and willingness of destruction. You must therefore emphasize that the mere aggression, violence and human destructiveness are phenomena that are all along the same continuum imaginary. Anderson and Huesmann fact define violence by position that it occupies on this continuum: "Violence is physical aggression at the extremely high end of the continuum aggression" (Anderson & Huesmann, 2003, pag.298). According to Hacker, human aggression has in itself the potential to become cruelty, consequently causing damage even more serious. Hacker has defined aggression "that provision and that energy own, which originally expressed in active and subsequently in the most varied forms individual and collective, socially acquired and transmitted, self, forms that can reach up to cruelty" (Hacker, 1977, pag.66), and did not fail to highlight the wide range of phenomena that the concept of aggression can understand. Hacker The definition of the concept of violence is one of those that makes more comprehensible the relationship between the concept of aggression and the concept of violence. The aggressive behaviour in fact, according to circumstances where an individual, can easily increase in intensity, until you reach the extreme levels of destructiveness. Compared to the latter point, it is important to highlight what they contend Emiliani and Zani: "Violence is consequent all'aggressività, which in turn is a process that may have several developments as the different contexts in which occurs: then the social conditions that affect more or less strongly aggressive manifestations of mankind "(Emiliani & Zani, 1998, pag.313). The concept of violent and destructive behavior must therefore be understood and interpreted with a radicalisation of extreme consequences related to aggressive behaviour. The violence then it can also be defined as a "[c] omportamento aggressive directed against persons or property, to injure or kill, harm or destroy, in order to impose a domain" (Marquis, Mancini, Greek & Assini, 1993, pag.437). Anderson outlines in a very clear the special relationship between the events weakest human aggressiveness, such as a simple aggression, and events that instead of generating consequences far more extreme, much to be denominated conducted destructive; he argues that "[V] iolence is a subtype of aggression, generally used to denote extreme forms of aggression such as murder, rape, and assault" and that "[a] ll violence is aggression, but many forms of aggression are not violent" (Anderson , 2000, pag.163).
Dr. David Evangelisti
Bachelor’s degree in Political science (Università degli Studi di Pisa), mark 110/110 cum laude. Final dissertation (19/10/2005): “Good people make bad things: dal comportamento aggressivo alla psicologia del male” [Good people make bad things: from the aggressive behaviour to the psychology of evil]. ○ In 13/2/2006 he has been invited by the University of Pisa to a conveign about “The social costruction of good and evil”: he has taken a lesson about The psychology of evil (See more at http://www.sp.unipi.it/sp/files/2605-Seminario_Bene_e_male.pdf).○ Main subjects: Social psychology, sociology, education, communications.
BIBLIOGRAPHY -- Anderson C.A., 2000, Violence and aggression. In Kazdin AE (Ed.), Encyclopedia of psychology, Vol.8, The American Psychological Association, Washington, DC. -- Anderson C.A. BJ & Bushman, 2002, Human aggression, Annual Review of Psychology. - Anderson C.A. & LR Huesmann, 2003, Human Aggression: A Social Cognitive-View, Hogg MA Cooper & J. (Eds.), The Sage Handbook of Social Psychology, Sage Pubblications, Thousand Oaks, CA. -- Caprara G.V. Pastorelli & C., 1988, addresses research on the conduct aggressive. In G.V. Caprara & M. Laeng (ed.), Indicators and precursors of aggressive conduct, Bulzoni, Rome. -- Caprara G.V., Barbaranelli C., Pastorelli C. & M. Perugini, Individual Differences in the Study of Human Aggression, Aggressive Behavior, Vol.20. -- DB Crabb, 1989, When Aggression Seems Justified: Judging Intergroup Conflict From a Distance, Aggressive Behavior, Vol.15. -- Crabb P.B. & Rosnow R.L., 1988, What Is Aggressive? Some Contextual Factors in International Judging Behavior, Aggressive Behavior, Vol.14. -- Eibl-Eibesfeldt I., 1993, human ethology, Bollati Boringhieri, Torino [ed.orig.1989]. -- Emiliani F. Zani & B., 1998, Elements of social psychology, Il Mulino, Bologna. - F. Hacker, 1977, Aggressività and violence in the modern world, The Formichiere, Milan [ed.orig.1972]. -- Manning S.A. DA & Taylor, 1975, Effects of Violence and Aggression Viewed: Stimulation and Catharsis, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, Vol.31, No.1. -- Marquis R., B. Mancini, Greek D. Assini & L., 1993, State and Society, La Nuova Italia, Florence. -- Martin A., 1999, Small thesaurus political, SEU, Pisa. -- S. Rosenzweig, 1985, definition and classification of aggression with particular reference to Picture-Frustration Study scale as idiodinamica personality. In G.V. Caprara & P. Renzi (ed.), The Human Aggressività, Bulzoni, Rome. -- Ursin H. Olff & M., 1995, Aggression, Defense, and Coping in Humans, Aggressive Behavior, Vol.21.
David Evangelisti
evangelisti@hotmail.it
evangelisti@hotmail.it
