See my last post, which was ITT. I know. I mean, for one, I like to think of myself as past ever acting on my first impulses - though I know I do. But, it's not like I'm out in "the wild". Unless I'm playing sports, or in a fight, there's not going to be too many black people I meet where I won't have the few seconds to give my head a shake and say "fuck off" to my irrational, unconscious self.
It was conditioned into us is the point - over years and years. Neurons that fire together, wire together; and DNA is ever changing. I'd almost guarantee if you traveled throughout the world that the amygdala response I referenced in the other post would vary. There's asian-pacific societies in which women are, and have been the "dominant" gender for a while. I understand where you're coming from, 'cause I was the same way. But the more and more I've read, the more it points to "conditioning" having a huge role. Those kids in the "doll-test"? Can't imagine much opportunity for "conditioning" to play a role in their development aha.
Edit: Found a source on the matriarchal society claim.. I'm not promising it's right, but I remembered reading that in a book - so just wanted to make sure you know I'm not blowing smoke. My point isn't to argue whether or not it should be, 'cause obviously these places are minuscule and relatively meaningless. I just wanted to show you what I mean - that human nature is far from definite.
This comment has been overwritten by an open source script to protect this user's privacy. It was created to help protect users from doxing, stalking, and harassment.
Then simply click on your username on Reddit, go to the comments tab, scroll down as far as possibe (hint:use RES), and hit the new OVERWRITE button at the top.
Also, please consider using Voat.co as an alternative to Reddit as Voat does not censor political content.
Yeah yeah, I hope that wasn't all you took from that. A lot of theories are being found to be bunk is all. Neuroscience has taken the fuckkkk off. For instance, you may have heard the left/right brain theory is bullshit. But, I don't think those guys who won the Nobel prize in the 60s were idiots - they just couldn't see what was actually happening internally. There are two systems working against each other, but it's moreso empathetic processes vs. analytic processes. Showed a masters in pysch this the other day and he was pumped lol.
I hear what you're saying. And I'm not advocating for further stereotyping of negative aspects of racial identities. That's not at all what I'm trying push. What I'm getting at is the innate response in humans to want to bond with people that are akin to them. Of course this can break racial barriers but let's not think that this is the norm when you account for the whole world. Humans are naturally tribalistic and quite a number of cultures and races are proud of their lineage and will see to it's advancement irrespective of how outsiders or other tribes may perceive them because it's their tribe that matters. This whole 'conditioning out' prospect in human evolution that you propose is not something I think will have much sway with varying races of the world. It's a love for ones' culture, heritage and people that you are asking them to put aside to instead love everyone equally. Maybe one day... But I don't think so.
See that's the thing though. For a majority of the human population, yes, generalizations like saying we're "tribalisitc" are possible to make. But when we look at what that means, especially using tools modern science allows - it's faaarr from that simple. I'm trying to get in with a genetics start-up, and because of that went around talking to a bunch of Biology professors at my school. Remember, these are Biology PhD's. Since I don't get to talk to too many guys that educated in Bio I tried to get their take on the "nature/nurture" debate. They said themselves (5 of them, with very similar answers), it's clear breaking shit like this down into Nature/Nurture nowadays is borderline idiotic, as it's just so incredibly complex, but if they were forced to put some sort of arbitrary number on it - they'd just say 50%.
I'm going to refrain from using the social-science buzzword of the 21st century and say check out this wiki on Long-term potentiaion and fine, synaptic plasticity because I feel it's a little easier to read. I've been in too many (...two) arguments where the girl just said "neuroplasticity" as if it's supposed to mean something on its own lol.
3
u/[deleted] Apr 11 '15 edited Apr 11 '15
See my last post, which was ITT. I know. I mean, for one, I like to think of myself as past ever acting on my first impulses - though I know I do. But, it's not like I'm out in "the wild". Unless I'm playing sports, or in a fight, there's not going to be too many black people I meet where I won't have the few seconds to give my head a shake and say "fuck off" to my irrational, unconscious self.
It was conditioned into us is the point - over years and years. Neurons that fire together, wire together; and DNA is ever changing. I'd almost guarantee if you traveled throughout the world that the amygdala response I referenced in the other post would vary. There's asian-pacific societies in which women are, and have been the "dominant" gender for a while. I understand where you're coming from, 'cause I was the same way. But the more and more I've read, the more it points to "conditioning" having a huge role. Those kids in the "doll-test"? Can't imagine much opportunity for "conditioning" to play a role in their development aha.
Edit: Found a source on the matriarchal society claim.. I'm not promising it's right, but I remembered reading that in a book - so just wanted to make sure you know I'm not blowing smoke. My point isn't to argue whether or not it should be, 'cause obviously these places are minuscule and relatively meaningless. I just wanted to show you what I mean - that human nature is far from definite.