Are we more drive by nature, or nurture??? From the Neurology Departments, from the Front Page Sections, translated…
We’d known, that environment has an effect on people’s behaviors, but, until recently, did we learn, that it’s, using the unconscious, to change us, without our own knowing.
There was a very famous marshmallow study conducted at Stanford University, the researchers told eighty children in preschool: you can eat one marshmallow right now, but if you wait for fifteen minutes when I get back, you will have two. Then, the study found, that some children were able to control their urges, some couldn’t. Those kids who’d, waited, ten years later, showed better performances academically, and they were, all better interpersonally compared to those who’d not waited.
This study was used by the experts for fifty years generally, until recently, the University of California-Irvine did this experiment again, and they’d discovered, that the explanations given by the original researchers, may have been wrong.
The new experiment called in a total of nine hundred children from various backgrounds, socioeconomic statuses and races, and, after the researchers selected the parents from a specific level of education, statuses in the society, and methods of childrearing, they’d found, that the primary determinant of whether or not the children take the marshmallow lies in the environment, and the assets assigned to them in life.
Turned out, those children who could not take the marshmallows, were all from economically better families, marshmallow is a cheap kind of sweets, which were often used at barbecues or campfires. For children from richer backgrounds, they may not care too much for these candies, so, it didn’t affect them not having the treats right away. But for the children from poorer backgrounds, having candy is a gift, especially when in their past experiences, if they have it now, it would be theirs, but as they’d, waited, the candy may be taken by someone else. These children understood, that the bird in their hands, beats the two birds, up in the trees, and so, these children would, eat the marshmallows first. The experimenters observations, may have NOTHING to do with how well a child can control her/himself, but more to do with the lessons that s/he had been learning from her/his life.
There are these examples in the animal kingdom too. The chimpanzee and the bonobos from the primates only separated some two million years ago. The experimenters put two bonobos into separate cages, with a window connecting them. The experimenter gave one five nuts, but didn’t crack the nuts open for it, or provided it with any tools to crack open the nuts; the other animal had the tools, but not the nuts. As a result, the bonobo with the nuts gave some of its nuts to the bonobo without the nuts, but, the bonobo with the tool, it didn’t, share its tool with the one that’s, given it the nuts.
a video of the marshmallow study, from Youtube…
When they’d tested this on the chimpanzees, it was different. The chimpanzees wouldn’t share their foods, but were, willing, to share the tools given to them.
If we only examine this from the surfaces, we may reach the wrong conclusions, but if we’d understood how they were living in the plains of Africa, we would, understand why.
The bonobos live in an environment where there’s ample of food source, it doesn’t care that it had one, to two less nuts, so it’d, shared it with another, but because they’d not needed the tools and they can eat it, it’d naturally, didn’t know what those tools, were for, and naturally, ignored the tools; the chimps were living in an environment, where there’s limited resources to be shared by all, they’d needed to look hard for sustenance, and so, the test chimpanzee wouldn’t share the food, but, it would use the branches, to pick out the ants, use the rocks to crack open the nuts, so they’d, shared their tools. Although these two primates had similar genes, but because their living environment, the various pressures of where they live, it’d made the evolve differently, in ways that they’d, behaved. And so, we must, take into considerations, the environments, in order, to reach a correct conclusion about someone’s behaviors.
People are byproducts of genes and environment, the environment has a greater influence now, more so than ever, people can’t select their own parents, so we weren’t, born equals, but, we can use what we get in life, to share our resources, because only when we start competing, with roughly equal amounts of assets available, then, the competition would be, fair, and that, is the true meaning of being a member of a civilized society.
And so, in this, the writer believes, that in order for there to be less conflicts, less competitions, we must, have roughly, equal amounts of assets (money, jobs, etc., etc., etc.), but, she’d failed to mention how humans may not be so selfless, yeah sure, we may feel bad when we watch someone suffers, but, are we, willing to take away the individuals’ sufferings, and place it on ourselves? I think not, so, humans aren’t as altruistic as we all imagine, because when it comes down to life and death, I’m sure, that almost ALL of us would choose to save our own asses, and then, if we’re capable, we go, and look after someone else…
Life, the Obstacle Course 