Science And Politics

“Trying to separate out nature and nurture as explanations for behavior, as in classic genetic studies of twins and families, is now said to be both impossible and unproductive” (Levitt, 1). Social scientists have declared the nature-nurture debate to be unnecessary. Similarly, scientists feel that such debate is not only unhelpful, but also outdated. From geneticists’ perspective, nurture and nature interact to influence

The reading begins with an introduction to what the study is about. The study is about trying dismiss the notion that solely your surroundings and experiences (nurture) or your genetics (nature) is solely the cause for you becoming the person you are today. It begins by explaining how the psychological world was very behavioristic during the later parts of the 20th century. Meaning, people assumed that their surroundings had a lot more influence on their lives, than the genes that they had. The reading also states that people are less likely to accept that they made a choice based on their genetics because it feels like a lack of

The Nature versus Nurture debate has been ongoing for centuries. People have tried to gain power through knowledge in determining what causes the human “mind to tick.” For centuries leaders and scientists have performed unethical and immoral studies to determine why two people with similar genetic composition can come from similar backgrounds and turn out so differently. I have witnessed a person raised in a poor home by parents with drug addictions become a thriving contributable member of society. Unfortunately, I have also witnessed a person raised in a Christian home with a Father as a minister who ended up in prison. As we learn about the psychological and biological composition of human beings and the affecting environment, I am

The concept of nature vs nurture is easily one of the oldest and most controversial arguments of modern times. Harvard psychology professor Steven Pinker is notably known in the world of psychology and the social sciences for his book “The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature.” In his book, Pinker addresses this exact argument and reasons that human behavior is mostly and at its roots is formed by evolutionary psychological adaptations. In 2003, Steven Pinker gave a Ted Talk regarding his book and the idea that human behavior is predisposed, rather than formed by socialization, interactions between people and the exposure to culture. Pinker discusses the reasoning behind his stance on nature over nurture using five key discussion points, these points being, human universals, neurology and DNA, political reasoning, the arts and parenting. During his Ted Talk, Pinker begins by stating that there are human universals, concepts, behaviors and traits that are carried and found, with many similarities, throughout every human civilization, he then explains that a common example of this is with twins separated at birth, and can be proven through neurological studies. Another concept that Pinker address to further solidify his stance is the idea that the argument that humans are ‘blank slates’ and human behavior is developed through nurture rather than nature is the political reasoning behind the benefits of everyone being ‘blank slates’. Two critical points he made however

The nature vs nurture issue has been a controversial argument among psychologist for decades. This argument exposes two different views. One of them emphasizes that our personality depends solely on genetics (nature). On the other hand, the second view suggests that humans “develop through experience” (Myers 2013, SG 6) (nurture).

“Do-it-yourself biology” or “DIY biology” is a social movement rooted in the idea of citizen science. Usually called biohacking, emphasizing the relationship with hacker culture, this form of public engagement in science has been the subject of controversy since its inception.

Drew Weston explains how the way the brain works affects we think about, receive and use political information. For example, Weston explains how people react differently when viewing their own party’s candidates as opposed to those from the other party. When people see their party’s candidate, the part of their brain that is activated is the part that has been shown to be active when people see things related to themselves. When viewing images of the opposing party’s candidate, parts of the brain involved in negative reactions are activated. This information can be used to create campaigns that activate particular emotional responses in voters. Weston also describes how Republicans and Democrats tend to appeal to different parts of the brain.

A person’s nature, or genetics, determines aspects of the psychology of a person before they’ve been born. There are many example of how genetics determine characteristics of a person, regardless of the environment, also known as

It has been argued that if genes influence behaviour and character, and we cannot choose our genes, then our behaviour is outside our control and we are not responsible. However, we take the view that genes are not deterministic, and that there is scope for an

The world of Genetics is one that is both fascinating and interesting. When tackling how genetics plays a role in behavior, one must look within the scope of what genetics is before dealing with how it plays a significant role in one’s behavior. Simply put, genetics is the study of genes. It is a biological component within the entire study of biology itself. Scientists who study genetics and perform research do so with the intent to learn more about how genetics affects the overall attitudes, behaviors and dispositions of individuals. It could be said that genetics is somewhat of a psychological-biological science as researchers look at the underlying patterns within the genes that cause

Political science is a broad topic that covers the history, political and geographical aspect of the world. The course started with a revision on the basics of the constitution, types of power and the political scene that happens around us. My first year at the University, one of the compulsory subject that is required for arts taking students is Political Science 1101. After several years of taking social or political course, taking this course opened my knowledge towards politics and the political scene in Canada. It also taught me about how different ways of information taking could lead to one learning differently from others. For example this class gave us the opportunity to use our laptops as a source of note taking, this helped me learn in which whenever a new vocabulary comes up during the class discussions i could search it up. Through “The Road to Patriation” and Kim Campbell “Through the Looking Glass” i would further emphasize my ideas on what i have learnt throughout the course semester.

Controversy arises when nature (inheritance) is combated against nurture (environment). This controversy began with the development of the behavioristic point of view. “Behaviorism arose as a protest against all form of “introspective psychology,” which was concerned with mental states such as consciousness and will”(Plomin 3). It led to an environmentalism that rejected the possibility of genetics influences on behavior. The burden of explaining individual differences fell completely to environmental factors. Genetics involve genes, which are chemical structures that control the production of proteins, thereby indirectly affecting

Scientists still agree that biology does play a part in human behavior, however. Nature and nurture do not oppose each other in every manner. Today, social scientists hesitate to choose one or the other. As humans, life depends solely on the operating of the body. This is seen especially in children. It is obvious that children share their biological traits, such as hair or eye color, with that of their parents. Heredity also plays a part in their intelligence, how artistic they are, and their overall personality. We all have “potential” inheritances, in which their full development depends on how we are all raised. Both sides

Is politics a science in the first place? Numerous scholars believe politics is too normative to be considered a “Science” and that the generalizations made in science cannot be implemented in politics, furthermore, some say it is more of an art than science. Aristotle described politics as the “Master Science” as it relates to all other disciplines such as economy and philosophy. Personally I had my doubts in the beginning of the course of how much science can be in politics and if it is truly a “science”. Looking into the definitions of politics and science, I came to the conclusion that politics is a “science”. Politics simply put by Harold Laswell is the study of “Who gets what, when, and how”. Science on the other hand is

Within the last century scientific discovery has been growing at an exponential rate. Evolution, genetics, physics, and chemistry have all greatly affected the way people view the universe and human role in it. Furthermore, the application of scientific discoveries has physically changed society. For example, humans went from being flightless to eighty years later having transportation in super sonic jets available. Rapid scientific change has caused many issues surrounding morality and science to arise. The idea behind the skepticism is that just because something can be done doesnt mean it should be. Nuclear weapons, biological weapons, and cloning have all fallen under fire due to this concept. People worry that