A mind of a Terrorist

Terrorists and suicide bombers are also humans but what makes them so brutal that pushes them towards killing hundreds that too without guilt is a question of amazement.

Even hurting yourself it pains but hurting someone else is a matter that lights the self conscious mind that neglects the moral values and human existence. These people are beyond the thinking of possibilities as anything is possible for them. 

I call these people abnormal brain function who on their cost don’t feel liable to others. For a normal mind the pros and cons of any action is calculated which direct in the modality of action, but for a abnormal mind that functions with high testosterone and adrenaline it’s a matter of what can be done rather than what can be saved.

The  major core values like learning, pain, action storage and thinking are place in different segment of minds. Out of all these process it works under basic fundamental values of ethics and morals. For any human to hurt another person it has to be overwritten manually to discharge the possible thinking for action of destruction of others.     Just like every equal action has an alternative reaction the brains also function with a basic function of alternative theory.

Holonomic brain theory says the cognitive function as being guided by a matrix of neurological wave interference patterns situated temporally between holographic Gestalt perception and discrete, effective, quantum vectors derived from reward anticipation potentials.

Anything that exceeds normal human brain is abnormal function that search and values action in terms of time and situation. For any action to be diverted towards a wrong action it takes huge need of will, motivation and inspiration. These three action in combination result in anything that is possible to overshadowing the motive of cognitive process and values.

The Criminal Brain: Understanding Biological Theories of Crime (review) by Randy Roth states, “

 Criminologists in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries turned to phrenology, criminal anthropology, evolutionary theory, intelligence tests, and analyses of body types to understand crime in a manner that reified the differences between criminals and non-criminals. Adopting a "medical model" of crime, they focused on the physical traits that they believed distinguished criminals and largely ignored the circumstances in which criminals lived. Most early biocriminologists tried to reduce "the complexities of criminal behavior to a single biological factor," such as the size of the frontal lobes of the brain, the shape of the skull, or the capacity to learn (243). Most of them were also convinced that biology was destiny. They believed that interactions between biology and the environment played little, if any, role in shaping the behavior of criminals. Given their assumptions, it is not surprising that many biocriminologists embraced eugenics, since they believed that criminals represented a lower, atavistic state of human evolution. Nor is it surprising that behavioral scientists lost interest in biological explanations of crime once they had witnessed the atrocities committed by the Nazis and other eugenicists in the name of biocriminology.”