I have for so long believed-Humans have by Nature-God,.. say embeded a "seed" in them all, if Nutured, in a certain way if balanced, we evolve by our own means(nurturing) psychologically at least, yet the paradox for me,- is the ability to even "nurture"-, simply another sense we have as or eye sight, our ability to hear,touch and smell ?-9/15/2018
The following is kinda of the way I was thinking when wanting to start this page- Gloria Steinem's interview @ NPR
excerpt from above; "
So I no longer believe the conservative message that children are naturally selfish and destructive creatures who need civilizing by hierarchies or painful controls. On the contrary, I believe that hierarchy and painful controls create destructive people. And I no longer believe the liberal message that children are blank slates on which society can write anything. On the contrary, I believe that a unique core self is born into every human being -- the result of millennia of environment and heredity combined in an unpredictable way that could never happen before or again.
The truth is, we've been seduced into asking the wrong question by those who hope that the social order they want is inborn, or those who hope they can write the one they want on our uniquely long human childhoods.But the real answer is a balance between nature and nurture. What would happen if we listened to children as much as we talked to them? Or what would happen if even one generation were raised with respect and without violence? "
One term that has always stuck in my mind nearly as long as I can remember is; "We must learn to see as a "Child ",we must be very aware of " Comparing" thus, remain "un- Preconcieved", and a unbalanced society,one "out of touch", "not in Harmony" with Nature, can quickly "preconceive us as we grow" and not in proper order as Nature intended. Having a great passion for studying "Culture", I have, always strived to remain "neutral", un-bias, and just see as is simply (Plato might of said "see it's Form,or it's Soul)
One way , one can observe any culture is just simply as "Tribe" (the individual to me though; is most basic form of )
♥ Then is that "Tribe" -evolving, -standing still, -regressing ?
♥ What is the number 1 driving,unique Force driving it (it's Vanguard) in , -evolving, -standing still, -regressing ?
note -Comparing-, it is so very vital to strive to see un-preconceived as one can, or the inquiry one attempts in essense is nothing new,it is simply a variety of what was!
We have to compare,yet we also have the ability to be aware that we are comparing too!
We've all seen something familiar, in a New Light,...maybe a driving force of life it's self.
Yet if one looks at the Culture of America, the country I live in, if all are moving so fast, are so busy striving to survive,no time to seek the "truth", realize the "Form" or Soul of one another, how can there be a "Balance"?
I do know Simone Weil held "Attention " as the key to growth, she talked of creating a void,thus allowing the Soul,(she may have not wrote this,,yet she could of I think,if she had of lived longer "a void for the "Forms" to enter) - as some say Plato was her Master
To love truth means to endure the void and, as a result, to accept death. Truth is on the side of death.
Man only escapes from the laws of this world in lightning ﬂashes. Instants when everything stands still, instants of contemplation, of pure intuition, of mental void, of acceptance of the moral void. It is through such instants that he is capable of the supernatural. Whoever endures a moment of the void either receives the supernatural bread or falls. It is a terrible risk, but one that must be run—even during the instant when hope fails. But we must not throw ourselves into it." - Simone Weil
- Dr. Anne Fausto-Sterling-
My ambition is to restructure dichotomous conversations—inside the academy, in public discourse, and ultimately in the framing of social policy—in order to enable an understanding of the inseparability of nature/nurture. My current case studies in this area examine the emergence of gender differences in behavior in early childhood. Newspapers are awash with reports of genes for this or that complex human trait (obesity, alcoholism, homosexuality, gender differences in math and science). A divide exists between people who accept biological explanations of human difference and those who reject biology in favor of social explanations. But the very premise of nature versus nurture is misguided. Dynamic systems theory permits us to understand how cultural difference becomes bodily difference.
Dynamic systems theory permits us to understand how cultural difference becomes bodily difference.Systems thinkers consider the dynamic interactions of all the factors contributing to a particular trait of interest; these may balance one another to attain stability, or, when for some reason one or more factors change, the dynamic balancing act can destabilize a system and lead to change. Change occurs when a system first becomes destabilized but after a time reaches some new stable state. There is significant and exciting literature on systems biology (at the level of cells and molecules), developmental psychology (especially the development in infants of motor skills such as walking and directed reaching), and at the level of individual neurons as they connect to form neural networks.A key concept is that, rather than arriving preformed, the body acquires nervous, muscular and emotional responses as a result of a give and take with its physical, emotional and cultural experiences.
To date only a few have suggested that these ideas might be productively applied to the study of the emergence of gender differences, gender identity, human sexuality, or racial and gender-based disparities in health outcomes. So far, my method has been to apply systems approaches to specific examples at different levels of human organization (organ physiology, sex differences in behavior, human sexuality and gender identity) as “proofs of concept”—which I call case studies—for a systems approach.
The question that interests me is, how does development produce a phenotype?
With dynamic systems, we’re almost always talking about sex differences, rather than sex dimorphism (for example, the development of genitalia).Sex differences are small average differences that begin to appear in infants, children, and then adults. There are four major goals of dynamic systems:
Phenotype ; from Greek phainein, meaning 'to show', and typos, meaning 'type')
I do know as a recovered Alcoholic, we have to replace a Old way, with a New more Positive way in order to; evolve in a balanced / least harmful fashion, this applies to every mode of Life