Topics in the News?
What I would like you to do is to start applying what we are learning in class to real world matters. Some might ask, "What good is learning psychology if we can't apply it to real world matters?" So that is what we are going to do with this topical blog assignment.
What I would like you to do is to either go to NPR (http://www.npr.org/ ), the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/ ) or any news site listed at the bottom of this page (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/ listed in their news sources) and read, watch, or listen to something that is interesting to you and relates to what we have been learning in the class.
Please respond the blog by BRIEFLY telling us in essay format:
What your topic is and what the piece you chose was. Why you picked it (what made it interesting for you) and what did you expect to see. What did you find most interesting about the piece
Next discuss IN DETAIL how it relates to the class using terms, terminology, and concepts that we have learned so far in class. Include definitions.
Please make sure you use the terms, terminology and concepts you have learned so far in the class. It should be apparent from reading your post that you are a college student well underway in a course in psychology.
Make a list of key terms and concepts you used in your post.
Let me know if you have any questions.
--Dr. M
HS Topical Blog #10
I decided to take more interest in the topic of Positivism. The main goal and purpose of positivism is to describe all the experiences and phenomena that we experience in life. The concept of positivism was developed by Auguste Comte around the 19th century. The main idea of positivism is that we need to only rely on the information that we know and can observe and measure. Positivists are seen as extreme empiricists. Positivists feel that the scientific method should replace metaphysic to understanding science and the knowledge we obtain from it. Positivism sort of has five main principles that are associated with it.
1. The use of the scientific method over metaphysics.
2. Their main goal is to explain and predict results of science.
3. They believe that scientific knowledge is testable and that it can only be proved by empirical means. It should be observable with the human senses.
4. Positivist state that scientist need to be careful to not let common sense disrupt there results and bias their research.
5. They feel that science should be value-nuetral and that science should be judged by logic.
B.F. Skinner was a positivist who believed that behavior could be predicted by using positive and negative reinforcement to certain behaviors. He like other positivist felt that this was important and all other things, like thinking, were irrelevant because they could not be measured. Today positivism has evolved into logical positivism and critical realism. Logical positivism is “the idea that observational evidence is indispensable from knowledge of the world, with a version of rationalism, the idea that our knowledge includes a component that is not derived from observation”. Critical realism is believed that there is a reality independent from our thinking that science can study.
Terms: Positivism, Positive and Negative Reinforcement, Empiricism
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism
http://www.marxists.org/reference/subject/philosophy/help/mach1.htm
http://www.socialresearchmethods.net/kb/positvsm.php
The topic I did for this topical blog is on intelligence testing. I found it relevant considering we just learned about Galton, Binet, Goddard, Terman and Yerkes and their various approaches to mental testing. I chose this topic because I have great animosity towards the word "intelligence" and what it is suppose to define, and what society considers intelligence.
The article talks about how we use testing, why we use it, gives an FAQ on intelligence testing, and provides misconceptions about it, something I found very interesting.
I always saw intelligence tests as a limiting factor. When you think of ACT's, SAT's, any other standardized tests, you get your score and that determines your future indirectly. You are unlikely to get into Harvard with low ACT scores. Most IQ and mental testing however is used to determine detriments in a person's functioning or to place them into a special needs program to help them learn in a better environment. This is exactly how I would like to see IQ tests used, as something to benefit society instead of an giving people with high IQ's an elitist mentality. IQ testing is also used to determine if people have suffered brain damage. Basically instead of limiting individuals by administering IQ tests, it used to help them and it rarely if ever used as the sole decision maker in a choice.
Terms: Galton, Binet, Goddard, Yerkes, Terman, intelligence, IQ.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-barry-kaufman/intelligent-testing_b_829620.html
This article discusses further the significance of survival of the fittist and Darwinism, and also the study of goddards feeble mindedness linked through genetics.
This article discussed the choices that parents make for the "best" schools for their children may not alwasy be the best choice. A school in conneticut is closing because of constantly low test scores. The school is revamping and starting fresh with new faculty, and new corriculum, somthing that most parents would be happy to have for their children. But when interviewed many people wanted to school (probly more of the traditions) to stay the same. They thought it was a shame that the school was going to be closed for a revamp.
This relates to psychology now because the school HAS to make a change in order to continue at the same rate as other area schools. they have been behind in scores and realize that a change is in order for them to "survive" This theory goes hand in hand with Darwinism and those who can not keep up with certain changes and demands of the times will just eventually die out. And the second part of this article that relates is the study that goddard did of the Kallikak family. After doing many tests and finding that dumb/feeblemindedness comes directing from genetics then we can assume that with these parents who cannont realize this change is for the better that their kids will not have the best thing offered and theirfore will become feebleminded as well. Like goddard found that with some situations it might not only be genetics but also environments that these kids in the lower testing neighborhoods content with the quality of learning will probly not be getting any further than where they are.
Terms: Darwinism, Goddard, genetics, feebleminded, survival of the fittest.
I found an article that relates to Kohler's insight(when an individual can view the entire problem field and rearrange elements to solve a problem that can be reconfigured) in Apes topic. As Kohler explained in his research he let the apes use a whole arrangement providing elements to help solve problems. In Mentality of Apes, he had given one of his smartest apes bamboo sticks all of different lengths and through trial and error the ape eventually learned how to retrieve food.
In the article I found, A gorilla named Leah tries to wade across a pool of water and realizes its too deep. So Leah then grabs a stick and tests out the waters depth before continuing. Apparently she tested the depth of the water until 33 feet before going back to the shore and grabbing her infant to go along.
Also in this article is another intelligent gorilla who used a stump to cross a muddy patch of ground.
I find comparative psychology to be very interesting especially when it comes to animals learning and solving problems. Leah the gorilla somewhat used trial and error by testing out the depths of the water by wading in and out, making sure it was safe enough to go further.
Terms: Insight, Kohler, comparative psychology
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2005/09/0930_050930_gorilla_tool.html
Throughout the course of my college years, we have learned a great deal about Darwin and his theories on evolution. The theory that is most well known is his “survival of the fittest.” A competition-based theory, where each species has either evolved or become extinct based on their ability to adapt to the surrounding environment. The article I read is a commentary on an article that was written about how Darwin’s theory may have not been entirely correct, and that competition may not be the only factor for evolution to occur. A research team from the University of Bristol argues that living space is the biggest key in determining a species ability to evolve. They argued that when a species moves into a living space that is not occupied by many other species, an evolutionary burst occurs and this is when the bulk of their changes occur. After research on fossils of particular animals over time, they realized a pattern of species and availability of living space throughout time. Thus, when an animal had the ability to roam free and utilize their environment in the most beneficial of ways, they were free to evolve in ways that would benefit them most.
In the second article, which was more of an update to the first, they expanded more on the topic. They stated that Darwin was not WRONG, but that the study simply modifies and gives us a better understanding of how species became more evolved or extinct. For instance, when catastrophic world-events happened- such as a large volcano or meteor, it would essentially wipe out a large amount of land and species, and after some time, new species would move into this vast open land and be free to evolve In the best way possible.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/08/24/darwin-wrong-evolution_n_692502.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/steven-newton/darwin-was-not-wrong--new_b_696132.html
http://motherjones.com/blue-marble/2011/03/9-bills-creationism-classroom?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+motherjones%2FTheBlueMarble+%28Mother+Jones+|+The+Blue+Marble%29
This article from the Huffington Post discussed legislators who wished to bring Creationism into the classroom. It discussed the controversy that still remains over whether to the theory of evolution and creation have a place in the classroom
This ties into the theory of evolution that we’ve recently been learning about in class. It also demonstrates the controversy that still remains since Darwin’s first discussions of evolution long ago. The theory of evolution came around to address problems that couldn’t be explained by creationism. The first was called the species problem. The species problem questioned the literal truth of the Bible’s explanations of the origins of plants and animals. The argument in retaliation to the species problem was the argument from design. This claimed that nature’s precision and complexity had to be due to a supreme being. Catastrophism was also used to explain geological change. This was similar to the argument from design. It explained that sudden geographic catastrophes such as floods had to be the work of a supreme being. This came to be known uniformitarianism. Uniformitarianism believed that the world’s mountains, lakes, islands, etc. came through a long process of geological change initiated by God. Darwin’s famous work occurred after these theories came around. After much observation, Darwin published his work on evolution. He published his work after much consideration. It took him 20 years to decide to publish it, partly because he was concerned about the reactions from his peers. Athough Darwin was concerned about how Origin of Species would be perceived, scientists in his field generally accept the idea of evolution by natural selection.
I chose to write about evolution. The news article I found discussed how the musk ox can only survive in one type of environment, but humans are built to exist in all types of weather. I picked this topic because it was easy to understand and relate to. Comparing humans and animals is interesting to me because we are a form of animal, but unlike anything else on earth (as far as we know).
This relates to class very well due to Darwinian concepts. Natural selection is the process by which traits are passed on more or less frequently throughout a population due to consistent effects upon the survival or reproduction of their survivors. If a trait is proven to be helpful, those who survive will pass on the trait to their offspring. When a certain trait is considered weaker, those who possess this trait will eventually die off and it will no longer exist. The article discussed how the most important tools for humans during Arctic times in Alaska was the needle. People during this time had to sew their own clothes in order to stay warm and dry during harsh conditions. Animals, on the other hand, would die if the weather was not suitable for them because they couldn’t do anything to protect themselves. By accumulating knowledge over thousands of years from whole populations of people, cultural knowledge has been able to gain many insights.
Terms: Evolution, Darwin, natural selection, cultural knowledge, accumulating knowledge
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=129604791
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/21/133847531/jobs-office-retrains-itself-to-focus-on-hiring
This article was about people who go to federally funded job offices to train to be employed but they ar finding that people completeing the training are still une,ployed afterwards. So the federally office decided that were focusing on things backwards- instead of focusing on the unemployed, they needed to focus on the people doing the hiring.
This applies to applied psychology because the federal office decided to look at it from a different appraoch and investigated what employers were looking for, rather than looking for employees. Munsterberg did a similiar study when he argued for the importance of effcient selevetion of human resources by drawing a parallel to the threats exsisting.
terms: applied psychology, munsterberg, employee,
Topical Blog Week 10
The topic I choose to write about is an anti-violence group in Chicago that is works to decrease the violence in youth and find other things to do for them, such as jobs. This group is called CeaseFire. I picked it because I was interested in how this program worked to change the behavior of the students. I expected to see stories of how youth that have been involved with the program and I found it interesting to hear about Deyontaye’s story and how he grew up and joined a gang at twelve years old.
It relates to class because this program seeks to change behavior that these teenagers have acquired from the violent environment they grow up in and have to face everyday. This goes against what psychologists like Henry Goddard would say. He thought that traits were inherited, such as feeblemindedness. Behaviorists, such as Mary Cover Jones, may be interested in a case such as this. She worked with trying to unlearn fears that children had. It is like reversing a behavior. That is similar to what the CeaseFire program is trying to do, reverse the behavior the youth in Chicago have of thinking that one must use violence and carry a gun, either as revenge or to gain respect from others.
Charles Darwin and his discoveries started a branch of psychology called functionalism. This had to do with the study of human behaviors and mental processes and how they adapt to the ever changing environment. This eventually developed into comparative psychology and eugenics. While eugenics is a black spot on history I think many wish they could erase, comparative psychology has been very influential and important to studying both animals and humans, and how we learn and function. Darwinism is what was on my mind while thinking about this particular assignment.
My article is not so much hard-hitting journalism. I have been wondering what I would find that I could tie into the history of psychology without making it seem forced and stretched just enough to make this work. My article is about reality star Khloe Kardashian and her husband Lamar Odom, on the topic of having a baby. Khloe Kardashian, daughter of Robert Kardashian who served on O.J. Simpson’s defense team, was married a year or two ago after a month of dating, to Lamar Odom, who plays for the LA Lakers. Within the article she mentions that people think she’s baby crazed, and that there must be something wrong because she’s been married for more than 9 months and she’s not pregnant, or even really trying.
While reading this, in the history of psychology mindset, I started thinking about survival of the fittest. Who better to have and love a baby than two very rich good looking people? As a born and raised catholic, I have always been taught that the purpose of a marriage is for a man and woman to reproduce. Much to my parents dismay, I’ve never been a fan of that solution. It’s very Darwinistic though. Survive to pass on your genes, survive in order to make sure your children survive and can further pass on your genes. Make sure you’ve a male heir to carry on the family name. I have never once been asked to take out the garbage at my home. It’s a man’s job to take out the dirty garbage and I should go back to sweeping, or helping with dishes, and why can’t I learn to cook?
I got to thinking, what if we didn’t socialize by these standards? What if, like this power Hollywood couple, we met the right person and didn’t agonize over right or wrong, they say when you know you know right? What if we didn’t immediately try to have a family, but just let things happen naturally? When we do have a family, what if we just took our kids to the store and let them pick out their own toys, whether it’s for a ‘boy’ or ‘girl?’ What if, when two people loved each other we just let them pledge themselves to each other in front of friends and family in any environment they like? What if Darwin’s ideas were only applied to animals, and humans, who are superior beings were considered too advanced to only worry about reproduction.
I believe in God and I believe in creationism, as a behavior scientist I know that Darwin had some very relevant ideas. Ideas that they were important to opening up comparative psychology, which has helped us so much already, and I’m sure will only progress in the future. I think though that this way of thinking has come with a price. Be it the fact that the world today is all about surviving, and coming out on top, or the idea that reproduction and survival, and not love or happiness, is the most important.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entertainment/
http://www.people.com/people/article/0,,20476418,00.html
I chose to dig deeper into intelligence testing. In class the last week we went over the psychologists that did a lot of the intelligence tests such as Galton, Binet, Goddard, Terman and Yerkes. I wanted to find more out about how intelligence testing is looked at in the world we live in today and by means of ways other than just the test results themselves of if the individual is intelligent or not. I expected to see a lot of stuff on ACT and SAT scores but I found this article on how people who tested higher on the army tests in vietnam had more mobile and better quality sperm. The most interesting aspect of the article to me was how if intelligence is impaired it relates to the sperm directly. This is very interesting to me because I have met a lot of people whose parents do not seem very bright, but their kids are very smart.
I feel that this connection between sperm and intelligence can somewhat become what Binet believed to put people into idiots, imbeciles and retard groups. With this knowledge I could see that in Binet's time he would want people who passed a certain score on a intelligence test to reproduce while not wanting the ones who scored below to reproduce thus thinking they might create more idiots or imbeciles. It is interesting because it almost predicts the mental level of the sperm and what the baby could become. This study, to me, adds a new level to the mental level. It adds a pre-birth section on your chances of being in a level before you are even developed. Binet's starts at 3 years but I feel that now knowing about the intelligence tests and how they can effect the sperm would cause Binet's tests to be altered more and can create a whole new mental level test in itself. I found this article very close in line with class because of how we have been nothing that intelligence tests are skewed. To me, what if the male was having a bad day, scored low, and his sperm were considered not as mobile and of the same quality, but later take the test on a good day and have the oppostie results. I find it a very interesting test and connection.
terms: intelligence testing, mental level, Galton, Binet, Goddard, Terman, Yerkes, idiots, imbeciles, ACT, SAT
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7767877.stm
An article published in the New York times can be related to many aspects of the topics we are talking about in History and systems. This article talks about how the New Caledonian crow can do fascinating things. The article compares the bill of the New Caledonian crow to the opposable thumb of humans. The article also talks about the ability of the New Caledonian Crow to use tools like sticks to solve problems with building nests and also to exract food like slugs and other insects from trees. When evaluating the social norms of the New Caledonian crow, it can be observed that they do not live all together, but they do pick a mate. The pair will often groom each other, sit touching in a tree, and also they will often share tools. They will parent their young for up to two years. The young chicks are do not know how to get food when they are born. This is not an innate idea. This is something they learn from their parents. They watch and learn from their parents for up to a year. They learn how their parents make tools and also how to use the tools to get food from the holes in the trees.
This is a great example of comparative psychology. When looking at the way the animals have learned over time to use tools to get the food out of the trees is an example of a learned behavior. This could also be tied into Trial and error learning by Thorndike. The animals learn over time that they cannot access the food by using their beaks so they try making spears out of anything they can find in order to successfully retrieve food from the trees. Once they have success a few times this becomes a learned behavior.
Terms: Innate idea, comparative psychology, Trial and error learning, Thorndike, learned behavior,
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/02/01/science/01angier.html?pagewanted=1&ref=intelligence
My topic is about the findings of possible American settlements before the Clovis who have been identified until recent findings to be the first to walk American grounds. I picked this topic because I have always been somewhat curious about archaeology and how the scientists go about proving their findings from their digs and how they can be so sure that they are correct based on simple markings or decaying statuses. I expected the piece to show expert opinions on why the findings contradicted the fact that the Clovis were not the first to explore American territory, and also to see the arguments against this idea. What I found most interesting was the idea that the Clovis are now thought to have evolved out of these earlier inhabitants and that scientists feel the need to make a new replication for what these former populations looked like.
This article relates to our class in several ways but the two that I think are most important are the ideas that scientists are wrong sometimes, like in the case of Descartes, as well as Darwin’s evolution theories. First of all the one that struck me most was the idea that there are examples in our text about psychologists and philosophers completely missing the mark on what they think to be correct in the world. As mentioned Descartes was not known for being right about a lot of his theories but he got the ball rolling for others to experiment on those ideas (ex. Animal spirits lead to the idea of the reflex arc as well as the contrast made to the reflex arc by Dewey). Secondly going along with Darwin, the article is stating the possibility that an evolution or ‘survival of the fittest’ came about in this former colony of people which eventually lead to the development of the Clovis people. Granted I am not saying that the early people originated from monkeys, but that they were a more primitive form than those who came after them. This can be shown through the differences in the tools that both groups possessed. The Clovis had tools that were similar to those before them, but that had evolved and become more complex than the prior.
Terms: Clovis, archaeology, Descartes, Darwin, evolution theories, animal spirits, reflex arc, Dewey, survival of the fittest, evolved.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-12851772
The topic I am going to discuss deals with evolution and Darwin's theories. The article I found on npr.org is about how a certain type of fish, tomcod, in rivers near New York and New Jersey that have adapted to pollution. One scientist in the article stated that "pollution has driven evolution." These fish have been living in dangerous chemicals including PCBs and dioxins that electrical companies have dumped into the river in past years. By the 1980s, many of these fish had liver tumors but there were some found in certain areas that we okay. It is said that the fish that were doing okay had a different gene than those who had problems and the fish with the specific gene type were starting to take over/evolve."The chemicals gave one genetic group of fish the benefit over the rest." One problem however is that because the tomcods with the specific gene are starting to survive with the toxic chemicals inside of them, other bigger fish are eating them as prey and causing additional problems.
This article relates to the idea of chain of being. Chain of being is when a species evolves into a more complex version due to environmental changes. Also, this could be related to the inheritance of acquired characteristics. Because the tomcod with the one type of gene are surviving they will eventually make up the population for their species. Struggle for existence and natural selection are also related to this article. These fish are changing due to their environment in order to survive, just as any other species would do.
I found this article to be interesting because for one I love reading about different animals/mammals. It is interesting hearing about other species. It is different to hear that the fish were evolving due to the pollution that us as humans are putting into the rivers. This evolution does not necessarily mean good things at all for this species but instead can cause more problems in the food chain. Thinking this is happening because humans are polluting their environment is sad.
I like the fact that I can read many articles now and relate them to what we have been doing in class. This one just caught my attention because it deals with evolution and other species and that is something I am very interested in.
I forgot to post my url for my article above so here it is.
http://www.npr.org/2011/02/17/133842089/toxic-avengers-pollution-drove-fish-evolution
I found an article on BBC called “Viagra and Other Drugs Discovered by Accident.” The gist of the article was that while we may think that drugs are designed for a certain purpose a lot are actually accidental discovers. For example, Ritalin was originally used to treat depression, now it is a major drug for people who have Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD). And Viagra was originally created to help treat angina, a heart condition. This can definitely be applied to psychology! For example, when Darwin was on The Beagle he wasn’t looking to do anything more that observe and reflect on what he saw. This then led him to see how environment influenced the finches and the differences in fossils and such. This led to his publication of The Origin of Species 20 years later. So while he had not gone on this voyage to prove anything to do with evolution or natural selection he was able to help influence the thoughts of many, and continues to do so all these years later. Another “accidental discovery” was made with the assistance of Phineas Gage. He had a metal rod go through the front of his brain, in his prefrontal cortex. The prefrontal cortex is essential in regulating human behavior. And while this injury did not kill him it did alter his life forever. His personality changed completely, he was no longer able to understand the consequences of his actions, and his memory was also affected. This tragic accident for Phineas Gage was oddly helpful in showing what part of the brain is used for behavior. And while not all of the discoveries made in psychology were accidents there has definitely been a lot of building on different theories as time progresses.
Terms: Darwin, evolution, natural selection, Phineas Gage, prefrontal cortex
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/8466118.stm
The article I found was about shootings in Miami. Seven African American men have been shot and killed by Miami police since last July and the deaths have heightened anger in the city. Two of the men were apparently not carrying weapons when they were killed. Some African Americans blame Miami Police Chief Miguel Esposito and his police department for an overly aggressive response to crime. Meanwhile, a civilian commission wants to review police documents on the first police shooting last July. DeCarlos Moore was shot and killed by a police officer during a traffic stop after he ignored an officer's order and returned to his car. He had no weapon. Police Chief Esposito refused the commission's request because both police and the Florida state attorney's office are still investigating. Now the Miami Civilian Investigative Panel may go to court to try to force the department to release information. I think this relates to what we’ve been talking about because it has to do with behavior. People don’t just have anger issues, it has to be learned in some way. Whether it was some kind of conditioning such as operant or cognitive. And what kind of stimulus was used in the conditioning or maybe even a reinforcement. B.F. Skinner was one of the biggest developers of how people behave.
Terms: B.F. Skinner, Operant conditioning, stimulus, reinforcement
http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2011/03/28/134925720/miami-police-shootings-increase-tension
When reading over chapter ten and looking at the World’s Reef fishes I was able to identify a resemblance. the complex nature and large-scale distribution of coral reefs is challenging scientists to understand if this natural ecosystem will continue working to deliver goods and services given the ongoing loss of biodiversity in coral reefs. In Pavlov’s experiment he was able to identify the unconditioned reflex in his circumstance meant that any stimulus, response connection does not have to be learned, whereas his unconditional stimulus proposed that any stimulus that will produce a specific reflex response. 55 researchers, in a two-year study, collected the necessary data to determine whether biodiversity influences the efficiency of reef fish systems to produce biomass, and if so, elucidate the role of humans in such a linkage. Pavlov also did a conditioning experiment that involved presenting a neutral stimulus which was called a conditional stimulus, with conditional reflex being the exact opposite.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/04/110405130347.htm
This article was about intelligence testing and how it can be a good impact on children if they are used correctly. The author quoted, "In fact, most intelligence researchers are actually pretty nice, sensitive individuals who sincerely want to help the welfare of children. They want to create tests that help teachers identify students with learning difficulties and then select the right intervention for those students." I completely agree with them on this. As an ed. major I believe we can use these intelligence tests to find subject areas that students are excelling and are weak in and help perhaps further expand on their knowledge of what they do know and help them understand what they lack in knowledge. These IQ tests aren't meant to tear people down and make them feel done, but when they are used correctly they can be used to an advantage to help students succeed. Had IQ tests been used this way to determine subject areas that need attention during Binet's era there would not have been so many "idiots," but there could have been a chance for young people to succeed instead of being labeled and forgotten about.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/scott-barry-kaufman/intelligent-testing_b_829620.html
Grief-Stricken Japanese Reluctant To Open Up
This news article was about the recent tragedy in Japan with their earthquake, tsunami, and nuclear reactor meltdown and the way that people in Japan are dealing with these tragedies piled on top of each other. In their culture it is seen as an embarrassment if they cannot control themselves. In this case if one of them is overcome with grief or emotion they usually turn away and hide their faces. The people that are trying to get through all these extremely tough times have adopted a ‘Gambaro’ spirit, which roughly translates to ‘go for it’ or ‘stay positive’. These people console each other with this phrase and continue to push through these disasters while trying to minimize their grief. Grief counselor Suzuki says that this ‘Gambaro’ spirit is a good thing but at the same time it is inhibiting people from expressing how they feel. She says that no matter how strong a person is that we cannot deny that traumatic events like these affect people and that there needs to be some type of relief.
I think that this article and the type of hidden grieving process that the Japanese involved in this disaster springs from the fact that they are a shame-based culture. Grief counselor Suzuki says, “We are very much ashamed to behave in an irresponsible way in a public place”. I think that much of this could be related to John Watson, his behaviorism theories, and his experiments with Little Albert. Watson’s stance on behaviorism basically got rid of any idea of a subconscious. He was especially stern about this in his Behaviorist Manifesto when he said, “never use the terms consciousness, mental states, mind, content, introspectively verifiable, imagery, and the like… (everything) can be done in terms of stimulus and response”. If we adapt this train of thinking and apply it to the situation in Japan it becomes difficult to try and break down a complex, multifaceted culture into simple stimulus and response. Why do they view it as shameful to lose control of their emotions in public? Where does this idea of a shame society come from? How can that all be broken down into stimulus and response?! I will try to deduce some of this but I imagine that I will fail miserably. We can look to Little Albert to see how we can be conditioned in regard to their emotions. Watson broke our emotions down into three components: fear, rage, and love and the greatest of these is love. When he terrorized Albert into being afraid of white rats he combined an object, rat, with a stimulus, loud noise. In the same way we can discover how people in that culture develop these shameful feelings. Whenever an individual in that culture acts irresponsibly in public I am sure that they are looked down upon, scolded, or even punished. All of these negative responses would then tend to make a person feel embarrassed or shameful. To make this line up, the irresponsible act would be like the white rat, essentially harmless and have no emotional ties to it. The negative feedback would act as that hammer and rod, evoking emotion to accompany the blank behavior. The results of all of this would be shame being tied to irresponsible acts in public. Although this does help us better understand the situation in Japan it still leaves many questions. How and why was this shame initially started? For some of these more difficult I think it is a stretch to say that Behaviorism has all the answers.
Terms: John Watson, behaviorism, Little Albert, consciousness, stimulus/response, punishment, emotions
http://www.npr.org/2011/03/25/134821398/grief-stricken-japanese-reluctant-to-open-up
Positivism is a concept developed by Auguste Comte. It was developed from a combination of Epistemology (knowledge) and Methodology (how we derive it). Positivism holds that the scientific method is the best way to discover ways in which the physical world occurs, but also should be used to explain and determine human events. Knowledge is based on experience, and can only be deemed accurate if it is verifiable. Knowledge is also testable; things should be proven through deductive reasoning. Positivism was adopted by social scientists and used by sociologists such as Max Weber. Today, Positivism views true knowledge as scientific and that it is also universal, meaning consistent across cultures. Positivism essentially boils down to concrete senses and these are the only way that we con prove things to be true. This concept has also brought debate to some religious circles. According to the Catholic Dictionary, this concept would deny the existence of a personal God.
Positivism’s contribution to Psychology was its realization that there was a need for research in the social sciences. This led to the development of laboratories. This also leads to famous experiments in Psychology such as with Pavlov and Classical Conditioning.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Positivism
www.newadvent.org/cathen/12312c.htm
www.socialresearchmethods.net/deb/positivism.php