Blue Eyes

I think the genetic origin of blue eyes is quite interesting.  I myself was born with blue eyes and they have slowly started to get darker since then but they still resemble the blue recessive gene. My dad has blue eyes and my mom has brown eyes so there was a large chance of me having blue eyes in the first place if I'm not mistaken, 50% right? Anyways, its interesting that the origin of blue eyes started and still lies near the black sea with countries like germany containing 75% blue eyes which is a substantial number of people of over 60 million, compared to the U.S. with only 8% which is still approximately 24 million people. The statistics are crazy and results are astonishing but the process seems so simple with time.

Environment

I believe the environment has the largest impact of the two because just as we noted in class, people from Ohio tend to talk faster to conserve energy for the winter whether we notice it or not.  Also, the people in the south have no reason to conserve their energy for the winter so they speak slower most of the time.  A very obvious example of environment influence deals with accents and language as well.  People speak different languages because of where they grew up and lived and who taught them how to first speak.  Also culture all around the world varies from country to country from town to town, especially involving the concept of traditions.  Chagrin Falls, for example, has the pumpkin roll and we participate in it because one we grew up around it happening and two because we were "handed down" the privilege to partake in such an activity to create memories and have fun our upperclassmen years.  We behave the way we do because of our environment more than anything, I would say the number from 1 to 100 would be 85 because of how much influence our environment holds. 

Genes

Genetics have a large impact on our behavior and mental processes.  Although our environment has a larger impact, genetics still come into play when acting upon the neurological side of things.  People have inherited genes from all strands of DNA so things may vary between parent and offspring but at the same time many things may stay the same due to the genetic code transferred and modified from parents to child during development.  Even then, environment always find its way back into the situation.  Yes you inherit genes from your parents but you act as you do and speak as you do because of your parents and how they raised you not because you were born with the ability to walk and talk.  Everything about our behavior and mental processes develops from our environment and how we react to things as we grow up and live our lives.  Therefore the number I think represents the level of influence our genetics have on our behavior and mental processes is 15 because of how little but still existing influence genes have on our behavior.

Ethics, Animal Rights, and Use of Torture

First off, the ethical considerations in psychological research are implemented for many different reasons and in my opinion should’ve been introduced sooner than they were so the experiments like Milgram’s experiment could not have been issued.  This experiment caused many issues ethically due to the fact that the participants were mentally scarred from this process.  Ethics in psychology are necessary so participants in an experiment have the right to privacy and the proper knowledge of their safety so they may live to see another day.

 The use of animals in an experiment poses many issues to not only the researcher but also the animals themselves.  Many activists like the BC group are very against this topic and want to ban the use of animals in experiments.  The only issue is, if the animals can’t participate then the humans must participate and no one wants to.  Majority of people would rather a monkey lose a life than themselves, it’s just a survival aspect.  Everyone claims to be an animal lover but the second they’re given the choice to put themselves in danger or an animal, they pick the animal.  Few people I would think would want to die in the name of science especially after they asked to participate they didn’t necessarily volunteer.

            Lastly, the use of torture is never a great positive topic to talk about but it has to happen sometimes.  For example, when our entire country is in danger because of one man if we don’t find out the plan then we want to find out everything he knows to survive and not lose the thriving nation we have today.  Interviews are different in that they are just question and answer sessions between two or more people.   No violence or harm physically may be done during an interview.  There may be some foul language if the right words aren’t said but otherwise no harm may be done.  A method of torture though implements physical harm and mental harm all to extract information needed to solve an issue or survive or both.  Especially those involved in the examples given like the Geneva Conventions and general military interrogations to extract needed information.

AP Psych Week 2

In my opinion the biological approach is the most concrete due to the fact that it can be proven scientifically. Genetics is a a branch of biology and determine almost all factors of an offspring's body and mind.  To say one has more fat cells in their body makes sense due to heredity from the parents and genetics because thats how they were born.  When the subject was stated about the level of weight dropping below a certain weight causing the hunger to increase and metabolism to slow down makes sense as well.  To say it's evolutionarily required to survive is kind of skewed.  Although a "healthier" weight is better than a "skinnier" weight, the concept of obesity can cause many levels of sickness and physical restrictions.  The one thing I disagree with is how obesity is determined more commonly by BMI.  Many NFL players are considered "obese" through BMI tests yet they are some of the most physicaly fit athletes around?  A metabolism is a genetic trait that is different for everyone as well. One person cant just simply change their metabolism as they please?  If we could, i dont think the level of obesity would be anywhere near what it is now because people would self-regulate their metabolisms and simply eat whatever they please and not change physically whatsoever.  Either way, I feel the biological approach is the most concrete because it can be scientifically proven.  The Evolutionary approach is kind of skewed because a heavier person can experience more and more physical and health issues if they "store more energy" than they spend.  The sociocultural approach can be somewhat concrete because of the influence our environment has upon us.

Another approach I feel might provide more rationale for obesity as well is the humanistic approach.  We grow up, just as Mr. Womack stated, learning to "clean our plates" and that the older the subject, the more they tend to eat because of how they were raised through both their parents and their environment.  So by default we feel the urge to finish everything we are given no matter the serving size provided.  Another approach I feel would also provide a rationale is the cognitive approach.  The human mind can control its eating habits if its really determined too.  I feel sometimes, that people just dont care enough to "take care of themselves" and watch what they eat so they gain weight and after a while become overweight and maybe obese because of it.