Wednesday, March 30, 2011

Early Childhood & Brain Development: How Experience Shapes Child, Community & Culture - Dr Bruce Perry ( I discuss some of the ideas)

In this entry I have decided to write about something which I not only regard as being extremely important to society, but to also write about something which will help me to revise some of my course work material for one of my papers for this semester. It may be a bit dry to read but I'm going to try and stick to the things I found particularly interesting (and hopefully anyone reading this will find these ideas interesting also).

Today I watched a thought provoking video about early childhood brain development where Dr Bruce Perry (read more about him here) discussed not only how crucial it is that children are free from abuse (emotional and physical) in their first four years of life (where he explained their brains are most malleable and most affected by their environment) but also how society as a whole needs to change some fundamental social structural norms that we now have in place. Specific ideas that he discussed in the video that I found to be particularly interesting are as follows; Racism, sexism , violence and murder are all societal constructs, emotional violence is considered greater than physical and what emotional violence is defined by (and my thoughts on this), his ideas on compartmentalization of society which I found to be not only a new idea personally but one that seemed to be of great importance to understand the benefits of. Hopefully I will be able to reiterate and discuss these ideas (or any ideas that come from them) at length without it turning into a meltdown of confused rambling :P

I really liked his ideas on racism, sexism and violence being societal/social/cultural constructs as I am always sceptical of genetic claims for certain behaviours. "Having a gene for" or "being hard wired to do x thing" always strike me as being problematic claims as there is evidence against them in everyday life. If we were all coded to be violent sex fiends (a less extreme description is often seen as being stereotypically male) then how come we aren't ALL like that?  If we were so hard wired to be a certain way then how come it's relatively easy (although some would argue otherwise) to overcome and control these things? Our species success and intelligence is not built upon violence and conflict but rather empathy and co-operation. We would not posses the intelligence we have today if language did not evolve. Language would not have evolved if we were a species that didn't require a tool to enable more effective co-operation. If we can rid society of ideas that we are inherently violent hateful beings and truly understand our evolutionary origins the world would be a much better place. Dr Perry explained that high competition for resources results in stress which results in violence. If we can work on reducing this competition and this stress for each individual ( a monumental task I know) then these negative thoughts, actions and emotions that we have constructed should drop significantly.

Emotional violence has a greater effect than physical violence is something that really hits home for me. I am sure that others in the world have had it far worse off than I have but from the time I entered the turbulent and quite honestly horrific world of high school until I left I honestly think that I endured a lot of emotional violence from my peers and certain family members and I felt that no one really took my seriously when I tried to voice my concerns. This to me highlighted people's lack of understanding of the damaging effects of emotional abuse (I do not blame anyone for what I endured, like me I'm sure they were victims of circumstance. I just hope they understand this and try to take corrective action).
Dr Perry described emotional abuse as being the following "humiliation, degradation, coercion and threat of abandonment" and that they " all create a pervasive sense of threat and instability. Children who feel emotionally unsafe feel at greater risk than physical risk." He did say he's not downplaying physical risk and that the two often go hand and hand but what I think really needs to be understood is the emotional abuse. Just because you cannot see the damage doesn't mean children will toughen up or get over it or forget about it or not understand what has happened to them. I think greater care should be taken. Society needs to work on being educated on how parents should be using the authoritative parenting style and ensure parents are in the right situation to do so.  *rant* I am sick to death of the old fashioned mind set that children should do everything they are told without question and if they do anything wrong (e.g. question why something is happening) they are punished physically or emotionally. This to me is so wrong and I'd almost go as far to say it's a lazy way of parenting because the adult doesn't have to engage with the child so much. *rant end* Authoritative parenting with a focus on positive reinforcement is what we need to focus on as well as shielding children from emotionally and physically hostile environments.Children are our future. THIS IS IMPORTANT. Please refer to this article for further information on parenting styles.

Compartmentalization of society. Now this is interesting. Everyone is stuck in with others like them. Old people are stuck with old people. Young people are stuck into schools where they are stuck with others their age. Business people are all thrown together in one area (CBD) etc. Children and young people or even people in general are not benefiting from interactions with all sorts of people from different areas of society.  I'm unsure how we would counteract this organisation of people into groups as to me it seems to be the most effective way of organising such a huge group of organisms and ensuring they have equal opportunities at different stages in their life. OR this is the best way to have their needs best met by society in different stages of their life.  I do agree however that everyone would benefit and have a greater understanding of society in general if we were more exposed to other areas of society on a frequent basis. For example, my whole world view changed when I left high school. Things that mattered there didn't matter in the "real world" and I think if I had known that and been exposed to that area of society while in high school I would have been a more relaxed and well adjusted teen! I'm also sure that the younger you are when you gain this knowledge the more beneficial it would be. Decompartmentalization may be the answer but I don't think it'd be functional but we should keep in mind what affect it has on our children's social development and how we can counteract any negative effects.

Finally I highly recommend watching Dr Perry's video where he explains and discusses his ideas I've based this post on (and more) in a much more articulate and straight to the point manner :P






Tuesday, March 29, 2011

Random Politicians, Earth Hour and the Nothern Lights.

Random Politicians
Why randomly selected politicians would improve democracy


I skim read over this article and found myself agreeing with it. Random allocation of people into governments I think would be an excellent way to ensure that the general population is being represented fairly after all is this not a principle on which good representative statistics lie? Governments suffer from misrepresentation on the basis of a severe self selection bias. The kind of people I would vote for would not be interested in politics. Of course I'm unsure how the idea would be put into practice because I'm sure people would oppose the idea of being made a member of a government and having to put their lives on hold for a while. But perhaps if the term was short and there was some great incentive it could work? I really don't know. But the idea to me seems to make a lot of sense.

Earth Hour
Why I won't be turning off any lights for Earth Hour

I really enjoy articles like this simply because I have a tendency to oppose popular ideas that seem a bit "bandwagonish" with no obvious long term effects.  I have never bothered participating in Earth Hour and like the article points out it just seemed like a quick feel good fix.  Instead of sitting for an hour in the dark perhaps people could spend an hour thinking of ways they could make permanent changes in their lifestyle, home or at work that would be of a greater benefit to the environment and then commit to implementing that change?

On the flip side of the argument here's an argument for Earth Hour

http://www.granvilleonline.ca/gr/blogs/home-economics/2010/03/26/why-participate-earth-hour 


The reasons sound ok but a little weak.

"The dimmed lights also make it safer for birds."
Safer for birds? In an hour? I'm sure any birds in an area that's brightly lit most of the time would be accustomed to the level of lighting at night if that was their permanent home area. The sudden outage of lights then lights coming on an hour later once they've adjusted to it being really dark would most likely disturb them more than anything.

"It gives me an opportunity to see just how addicted I am to the Internet. I discovered an hour with no computer access felt much, much longer when I had no music or anything else to fill in the gaps. "
People should be able to tell if they spend too much time online...and of course the hour felt longer. It's indicative of being bored out of your mind (which leads me to conclude earth hour is a terribly dull activity:P)


"Cities reduce their power load quite significantly and save money, even if only for an hour."

I'll just quote the first article I posted for this one
"Second, the hour itself doesn't have any real impact. Utilities don't cut their power production for such a short and slight drop in demand, so no energy is really saved"

"Earth hour isn’t a hollow gesture; our participation sends a message to local and federal leaders that we care and are prepared to make sacrifices and cut back."
Or you could work on putting forward long term permanent ideas to these local and federal leaders?


"Dimmed city lights improve our view of the night sky, making it a great night for stargazing."
Once again....not really a reason I'd want to spend an hour in the dark for. Don't get me wrong. Stars are wonderful. Just not a good enough reason for Earth Hour in my opinion.


"It was a grass roots movement that came from the ground up, and it swept the world; how awesome are we? "
Hardly a solid reason to be doing something. It would make you feel good but that's about it.


All in all I am sure I could achieve much more in an hour with an electrically run item (Uni work etc) and then find a way to offset that usage in a more permanent way. 


Finally

I'll finish by linking this which I think is beautiful and one of the things I'd love to see before I die
http://vimeo.com/21294655

The beginning

Back info
So I've had this idea for a while. Where I make a blog and discuss interesting things I discover on the Internet or just things I find interesting in general.  Also this seems like a good idea because not many people I know in person really have the time to discuss the things I want to talk about, and secondly it'll mean I'll be less likely to spam my facebook with random stories that no one really comments on. I'll endeavour to keep emotionally charged opinions out of it (something I'd like to get better at in general). I will also try to avoid rambling which is a major flaw with my writing and speaking.

I'd really also like to use this to try and tackle controversial issues and play Devil's advocate just for the sake of seeing an opposing argument to a popular idea. After all things should be constantly challenged and I will try to do so in a constructive manner.

tl;dr: This blog is for practising my writing, argumentative skills, conveying my ideas effectively and sharing things I find interesting :)