This seems like a pretty big generalization, just look at SBF as a counter example. There are plenty of educated young people that do stupid things, and depending on the stage of brain development there could be lots of other things at play: household dynamics being a prominent one, having the proper role models, plain ole human nature, etc...
Probably GP meant that nurture, not nature, is what creates bad people. That includes education, but also upbringing, household, etc.
Which I tend to agree with. Sociopaths due to genetic differences are, IMO, extremely rare as to be a non-factor. But childhood abuse and/or trauma is the biggest reason for people becoming violent, unsociable or generally evil.
SBF just seems like the stereotypical kid born in a very rich, connected family, that got every material need fulfilled, but lacked something crucial to develop a mature and critical understanding of how the world works. This is often seen in children of ultra millionaires, growing up completely divorced from reality and how other people live. I imagine people like him thinking "oh, fuck, so sorry I lost you a million dollars. My bad. You still have a few mil in stocks to tide you over until I get you your money back, right? Right? What do you mean your parents are also broke?"
Ultimately it is very hard, if not impossible, to know what is going on in households and what ultimately leads up to that outburst of rebellion or evil-doing. Looking back on my education up to college, I believe kids can be absolutely brutal to their peers(and often are), and when you're spending 8 hours a day in a pressure cooker for 10+ years, I can see how negative outcomes follow.
There is a lot of chaos in nature too though, and I think even with great childhood backgrounds there are some individuals that just want to go a different path, for better or for worse.
