PHASE 1

Consider the term "Social Darwinism" used often during the imperial age of American history. Do you believe that the term has credibility when it comes to Psychology?


Social Darwinism does not have much credibility when it comes to psychology because of the concept of nurture. Yes, there many be a lot of evidence that Social Darwinism relates biology and nature, but it does not explain nurture. A lot of what Evolutionary Psychologists contribute to natural selection, can just as easily be contributed to human tendencies and nurture. Sexuality is not attributed to natural selection. Men are more sexual because it is the gender role. Men are seen as sexually overpowering in most cultures. It is not hard to see that men have picked up their sexual tensions not only from biology, but from influences in culture. It can also be pointed out that women may feel the same sexuality as men, but because it is not socially excepted to say yes to sex for a women, they will not do it. While for a man it is okay. Evolutionary psychologists did not look deep into when they did this sexuality study. Another point is that if "the survival of the fittest" were really true for men, then why are women becoming more powerful and more able to show their sexuality over the centuries?


Based on what you know about psychology and biology, do you believe that men and women can be perfectly equal in our society? Explain your response.


Based on biology, it is not really possible that men and women will become perfectly equal in society. In general, men are stronger and can endure more physicality. Therefore, men will probably always continue to be the wrestlers, the football players, and the lumberjacks. Though this is not necessarily a discriminatory difference, there will probably always be jobs that are gender-dominated. When it comes to psychology, the gender schema theory comes into play in every culture. As far as I know, there is not one culture that finds men and women completely equal even if it is very close. Though gender roles easily change throughout society, they will probably always be in play because they smooth social relations and save awkward decisions about who does what.




Consider Wilson High School's social environment. How often does peer pressure play a role in the decisions that students make here? Provide an example to prove your point.


I believe that peer pressure does influence decisions that students make at school, but only to some extent. Even though peers play a role in the lives of students, it is the way that a person is and he/she chooses the people he/she wants to interact with. A student at Wilson High School chooses the kids he/she wants to hangout with based on their his/her interests. Peers use the "selection effect". They seek out peers with similar attitudes and interests. Because of this it can be said that peers at Wilson High School can only influence one another within their own groups. For example, if a student chooses to hangout with the kids that smoke, he may be influenced to smoke, but this student must have already had some kind of desire to hangout with these kids. What I am trying to say is that it is not often that a student at Wilson High School can influence a cautious by nature student to skip class. On the other hand, it is not often that a rebellious by nature student will want to be the valedictorian because of another peers influence.




The current foreign language program at Wilson starts in 6th grade. Considering what you know about brain development, is that a good age to start studying a foreign language or is it not necessarily the best age to start? Explain using at least two examples.


This is not necessarily the best age to start learning a foreign language. It is better to start even younger. There is a biological reality to early childhood education. During early childhood the excess connections in the brain are still on call. At a young age these kids can master the grammar and accent of another language much better. It is said that lacking any exposure to language before adolescence, the person will never master any language. It is the same for natively deaf children who learn sign language after age 9. These children will never learn as well as children who becomes deaf at age 9 after learning English. When a young brain does not learn any language, its language-learning capacity never fully develops. Another example that shows that brain development is most necessary in early childhood is with visual experiences. Lacking visual experiences during early years impairs visual perceptions. The brain cells that have been normally assigned to vision have died or have been diverted to other uses. For us to have optimum brain development, normal stimulation during the early years is critical.


Megan Johnson, Pd. 7