The humanistic perspective in psychology says that we are responsible for our actions when it comes to violence. I believe that the humanistic perspective is the best way to describe the actions of violence. There are many examples of this that have been studied that support this perspective. Some examples of violence that support this perspective include Joel Rifkin, the two kids thrill kill.
Humanistic psychology is the constructive view of human self-determination. It is the interpretation of the behavior of someone is intentional. This means someone’s actions with violence are their choice and they are conscious of what they are doing. The humanistic perspective believes the person who is acting violence is responsible for their actions. Violence in my opinion can be best explained in the humanistic theory. People know what they are doing and it is their choice if they want to do it. When it comes to violence people are capable of knowing what is right and what is wrong.
In the case of Joel Rifkin, he was a serial killer who murdered prostitutes in the early 1990’s in New York City. He was fully aware of what he was doing and his actions were intended. In an interview after he was convicted Rifkin told investigators the reasoning behind why he continued to kill. He said that there was a thrill to killing and it gave him a rush of adrenaline. This is an exact example of the humanistic perspective because he realized what he was doing and the consequences that may come along with his actions and he continued with his violence outbursts.
A thrill killing is premeditated murder committed by a person who is not necessarily suffering from mental instability, and does not have anything against them, but is instead motivated by the sheer excitement of the act. In the case where the two young boys acted out and killed one of their classmates for the “thrill” of it is a perfect example of the humanistic theory. Although they...