This will be broken up I will repost to other posts later.
I apologize if there was a misunderstanding in regards to Genetic as Im afraid you misunderstood me I would like to be clear that belief held is that it is in genetics on a historical evidence down the line to antiquity sort of thing in regards to the human animal. This is not outdated but rather following the trail of proof. Pursue animalistic urges like anything else, however tht being said environment plays a key role into many of these urges. No one mentioned this (at least I think not) this is a trigger or key to the way we are how we are. Genetics contains everything scientifical about us as humans in our makeup behaviors perclivities ect. However we activate them based on reaction to environment. If you do not know war you do not activate said perclivitie. If you are confronted with fight or flight you choose one or the other if you are a soldier you are conditioned to use the “soldier” gene whatever that is or means to react in said manner (which is usually against human nature of preservation) onto the topic
Zeitgeist (German pronunciation:[ˈtsaɪtɡaɪst]is “the spirit of the times” or “the spirit of the age.” [1] Zeitgeist is the general cultural, intellectual, ethical, spiritual, and/or political climate within a nation or even specific groups, along with the general ambiance, morals, sociocultural direction, and mood associated with an era.
Not humanity as a whole and this is cyclical like the earth.
Here is the main man himself who is holding your argument.
http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/11/14/this-is-your-brain-on-metaphors/
RS: Your Brain cannot tell the difference between bad things but that it is bad and it further plays on or perclivities that we “naturally” have.
But we aren’t born with these on a base level? This is essentially the same.
http://www.ted.com/talks/lang/eng/robert_sapolsky_the_uniqueness_of_humans.html
RS: "…At the end of the day it’s really impossible for one person to make a difference and thus the more clearly absolutely utterly irrevocably unchangeably clear it is that it is impossible for you to make a difference and make the world better, the more you must."
Strive for the impossible because you must not because you will make a change.
http://www.barclayagency.com/sapolsky.html
Why Zebras Don’t Get Ulcers, RS:is that our bodies’ stress response evolved to help us get out of short-term physical emergencies—if a lion is chasing you, you run. But such reactions, he points out, compromise long-term physical health in favor of immediate self-preservation. Unfortunately, when confronted with purely psychological stressors, such as troubleshooting the fax machine, modern humans turn on the same stress response. “If you turn it on for too long,” notes Sapolsky, “you get sick.” Sapolsky regards this sobering news with characteristic good humor, finding hope in “our own capacity to**prevent some of these problems…in the small steps with which we live our everyday lives.”
It evolved so then it is a necessary and needed trait otherwise we wouldn’t be BORN with it. Evolution is not a quick process these traits evolved into us. Tabula Rasa unto this.
http://www.nytimes.com/2004/04/13/science/no-time-for-bullies-baboons-retool-their-culture.html?pagewanted=4&src=pm
RS:“But in the baboon study, the culture being conveyed is less a specific behavior or skill than a global code of conduct. ‘‘You can more accurately describe it as the social ethos of group,’’ said Dr. Andrew Whiten, a professor of evolutionary and developmental psychology at the University of St. Andrews in Scotland who has studied chimpanzee culture. ‘‘It’s an attitude that’s being transmitted.’’”
Dominance is lost with youth this is genetic with timing factors and testosterone loss. Something animals are born with. A plague wiped out the aggressive monkeys. Survival instincts kicked in so it is not pacificm it is banding together to circumnavigate the danger. Civil war South no able bodied men to fight ad distraut land= survival mode not war mode. Initial tendencies are in tact with new males despite living example.
RS:’‘All it would take is two or three jerky adolescent males entering at the same time to tilt the balance and destroy the culture.’’
Invasion of nature through evolved behavior I.E. born the new behavior is purely troop not societal in nature.
http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/course_detail.aspx?cid=1585
RS:“Why? Because, for humans, the stress response is triggered not so much by life-or-death situations as by psychological reasons it wasn’t designed to combat, such as
· traffic tie-ups that double the time it takes for you to get to work;
· complicated home repairs you haven’t gotten around to making;
· troublesome thoughts and recurring memories; and
· worries about the economy, the environment, and international events.”
List goes on and on problem for elimination lies in confrontation we add unnecessarily to stress but it must be confronted. We are born with the triggers and the only way to universally get rid of human stress is to universally agree upon fighting it however fear plays a prominent role in this and survival instincts make us react to fear. I.E. evolved this way.
http://www.thegreatcourses.com/tgc/courses/course_detail.aspx?cid=1597
RS:“…you will investigate how the human brain is sculpted by evolution, constrained or freed by genes, shaped by early experience, modulated by hormones, and otherwise influenced to produce a wide range of behaviors, some of them abnormal. You will see that little can be explained by thinking about any one of these factors alone because some combination of influences is almost always at work.”
Evolved human nature evolved implies immense time involved. Or what humans are born with.
http://www.stanford.edu/group/howiwrite/Transcripts/Sapolsky_transcript.html
RS:“He takes his writing very seriously – but above all it is a pleasure, something that he enjoys doing, and he allows us to visit the source of that fun.”
It is for entertainment primarily otherwise you would not bother, this is true for most things but do not take the mans word as primariy value or gospel for the religious people reading. It is embellished remember what I warned against? He can prosper by getting you to agree with him. He is a learned man however he also needs you to be interested or else he gets no money. This is also what you are born with because it is nature at work. Clever, faster stronger. I don’t discredit that the man is smart in his field of neuroscience and behavioral studies with animals (we are an animal and it isn’t a stretch to be able to project lesser animals behavior onto a more complex animal but some of it is projection.)
[FONT=Times New Roman] [/FONT]RS: “I was much more of the social science type, so I actually never took any chemistry or physics in college and don’t have a very good fundamental grounding. So I am easily panicked in my science and I think thus I can easily imagine more readily than most people in my position how somebody else can be.”
He uses rhetoric to access people better and observes certain things from certain animals and sees that their behavior is similar to ours but to say it is, is not the case. Social Science is his major grasp. What is social science?
RS: Yeah, and, you know, really some of you do this for a living and, like, you probably, like doing neurochemistry would be a great hobby on the side. You know, the science stuff is incredibly slow, and it never works, and if screw up people, like, lose their jobs in your lab and things like that; and this is just, you read some quirky article and you can just call up people and find what neato stuff they’re doing and you just package it, and, like, you get it done and it’s gone and you never think about it again. And your pushing back the edges of science don’t depend on it. And it is just so much more relaxed than the science stuff. Yeah, so I have to actively discipline myself from not doing too much.
RS:“I’ve got this whole cranky obsession with disliking genetic explanations for behavior, and think that that’s really dangerous stuff and has had some sort of disastrous historical consequences. So I sort of get on my high-horse about that, so there’s some angles with that. Or other pieces that I kind of quite disturbing, but it’s fun to just sort of simmer in that for a while.”
Actively tries to shirk the idea of genetics doesn’t make it less valid it just means he has a general bias against it. It isn’t discredited.
RS:“…my life science also my subdiscipline of science and in particular the version we were working on last Tuesday afternoon in my lab is going to solve the following list of world problems. Because we all do that sort of thing, especially when we’re trying to get funded.”
Scientists in his department or all scientists in general will propose something in order to get money again qui bono? You may agree with it but that does not make it so. It means he is trying to do this for money for a corporation that these movements are allegedly fighting against. Schools are corporations.
Many of his works outside of hard neural science is found in self help you can just as easily find Jesus and his friend Buddha there as well or the newest Dr, Phil. This is not hard science this is not fact it is sensationalized conjecture aimed at making a buck by carefully placed suggestion.
He does make use of the stance that we are genetically predisposed to certain behavior however it is on a simplistic stance and that we learn everything else I agree but we have the capacity to aquire traits from others which means in some regards in evolution we aquire this behavior and then learn it. Unless we reincarnate we cannot genetically have this as we would literally pull past exp. From another life. But we do have inert proclivities.
When it comes to his own science he admits that society his own circle that he dwells in academia ostracizes him in regards to his practices, because he has a leftist stance towards things, his own judgment gets clouded by the smoke he kicks up. No Cigar he is talking to you exclusively and benefitting from it be wary of this. Who benefits?
Stress is what he tries to explicitly examine, the human animal and stress. Watch for the red herrings.
http://killerstress.stanford.edu/about-robert-sapolsky
He then tries to relate this to others and your non partisan author is or would be considered quite partisan towards liberal tendencies because they pay his bills. He gives them what they want he gets money he ropes you the reader in and he benefits Not so noble is it? Realistic but not noble. He also lends belief to high feminism ideals or a slant even if he doesn’t come directly out and say it not (testosterone is the problem) problem is it isn’t realistic at all and thus not applicable.
He also saganizes himself and projects humanity onto the apes or his research and the circularily does the same to Humans, I understand both are animals but it isn’t the same. He would be to put a derogatory spin on it, a fur if he was growing up nowish (thankyou Disney and Sonic the Hedgehog)
He also believes that he is better than others by rationalizing away his colleagues achievements in science by the denigration that they were “trained” that way sound familiar No Cigar? This man has obviously piqued your favor and while I admit he is interesting search him all of the way out and look at his compatriots then look to see what is rationale not sensational. The man has placed himself in a place of osctrasization and has acknowledged much of what he does is frindge. (Not neuroscience) societal yes)It may speak to you but it is not wholly applicable. Base ingrediants of apes and humans are the same societal evolution is something different we are born with things evolved into us or else humanity would be the proverbial Dodo bird.
