Writing 2; Section 4: February 2012 Archives

I have been an avid dog lover all my life, but I don't think I've ever met a dog as smart as this one. I viewed a documentary about dogs and did a little more research on one of the dogs they talked about. It was a 6 year old border collie named Chaser, and she new the names of over 1,000 different items! How is this possible?? Well, her owner, John Pilley, used what he calls a "successive technique" to teach Chaser the names of all the toys. He would teach Chaser one toy, and once she was able to learn that object, he would move on to the next, and repeat that process with more and more toys and objects. After teaching Chaser the names of the toys, he would put a pile of toys in another room, and call out what toy he specifically wanted. And by much surprise, Chaser would come back with the correct toy! After successfully grabbing the correct toy, he would let her play with "Blue," a small ball she would chase around. Border collies are one of the smartest breeds of dogs out there, but I had no idea they could reach this level. If you don't believe me, below is a link to a video and an ABC news article about Chaser.

I don't know about you, but I definitely underestimated how smart dogs really are.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QPgZ8KHLXag&list=UU2NjUImk-ITC_LhgsNvvADg&index=2&feature=plcp

http://abcnews.go.com/Technology/world-smartest-dog-nova-special-shows-border-collie/story?id=12875750

A failing car manufacturer in a failing city can't produce luxury. When you're selling a luxury good and "failure" is the word most highly associated with your brand, things aren't looking up. The media has linked Chrysler, Detroit, and economic downturn together in the minds of the American public ever since their first bailout in 2008. So in their Super Bowl ad, Chrysler had to find an approach that would manipulate not only peoples' perceptions of their brand, but their perceptions of Detroit.

Eminem has the perfect image to use as a form of higher classical conditioning. Since it would be a stretch to directly associate Detroit with luxury, they can make an association to it indirectly through Eminem. He's a powerful rapper out of Detroit, who represents fame and fortune, but is made edgier and even cooler by his gritty history. When he says "this is the motor city, and this is what we do", both Detroit and Chrysler get to ride on the coattails of his success and status.

Anecdotal reasoning also helps to shape the viewers' perceptions. When the voiceover says "It's the hottest fires that make the hardest steel" over images of steel fists and beaten city, although the phrase itself doesn't make all that much sense, it still provokes feelings of being a tough underdog. Chrysler's new car as a result seems pretty bad-ass.

In the YouTube video BBC Horizon: The Secret You, the idea of when humans become aware of self is explored. Using a mirror test to asses self-awareness, it was determined that people become self aware between the ages of 18 and 24 months. The test involved putting a red spot on the face of a toddler, placing them in front of a mirror, and observing whether or not they removed the spot after seeing their reflection. The thought behind this is that if the child realized that the person in the mirror was himself, he would remove the spot from his face. Likewise, if he did not connect the person in the mirror with himself, he would leave the spot on his face.

This is a classic test that has been used numerous times to analyze self awareness in humans and even animals. However, there is a risk that rival hypotheses have not been ruled out. Perhaps the reason that children under the age of 18 months usually leave the spot on their face is not because they aren't self aware, but because they don't realize that the spot is out of the ordinary and should be removed. To test this, a study was performed in which children were asked to remove a spot on a doll's face before being exposed to their own marked face in the mirror. Indeed, in the original test only 45% of 18-month olds were regarded as "recognizers," but in the revised test it rose to 61%.

Source:

Asendorph, Jens B. "Self-Awareness and Other-Awareness II: Mirror Self-Recognition, Social Contingency Awareness, and Synchronic Imitation." Developmental Psychology 32.2 (1996): 313-21.

As we've been discussing in lecture and in recitation, advertisers are masters at using classical conditioning to sell their product or message. Out of the thousands of advertisements, there is one message that one could argue does the best job of selling their message. That message: Anti-smoking. These messages brilliantly associate smoking with something we're afraid of.

Here we can see that this lighter clearly looks like a gun pointed at our heads. That's the conditional stimulus. The unconditional stimulus is the fear of death that is associated with the gun. From there, the unconditional response is the fear of death with smoking. Therefore, the conditional response is that smoking kills. This advertisement does a great job of tying in a very strong emotion, that being the fear of death, with the message they are trying to make.

Here is another example:

Once again, these advertisers do a great job of trying to get their message across. We have the conditional stimulus ("Children of parents who smoke, get to heaven earlier"), the unconditional stimulus (Child with smoke halo over her head), the unconditional response (the fear of killing your child), and the conditional response (the fear of smoking killing your child).

These advertisements could be the most powerful advertisements out there. They capture a very strong emotion and use classical conditioning to try to stop people from smoking. The only question is, is it powerful enough to overpower a nicotine addiction?

This ad is from Concordia's Child Services, and is clearly using shock to get the viewer to sympathize with the starvation epidemic. The quotation underneath the picture states "If you don't help feed them, who will?" Showing these filthy children trying to get sustenance from a pig is trying to get the viewers to realize how difficult of an issue this is, using an animal to show how feral, but necessary, food is to any animal. The advertiser here is well aware that people are psychological and genetically inclined to feel empathy towards infants and is using that to their advantage. The advertiser implies that if you, and you specifically, don't help this children will absolutely starve to death and it will be entirely your fault. This is, in my opinion, a completely understandable time to play the guilt card but often times advertisers will use that in unrelated ads.

In this much older ad, a baby is shown drinking Sprite, people are drawn to babies, therefore will associate their feelings of happiness towards babies with Sprite. Although the advertiser isn't exactly using guilt to sell Sprite, they are using the natural instinct that people have with babies to feel maternally or paternally towards the soda drinking infant.
Advertisers don't seem to get the credit they deserve as masters of psychology, using guilt and empathy to get you to buy things as simple as soda.

Classical conditioning is a pretty basic principal in psychology. The best way to explain it is with the example from Ivan Pavlov expirament (shown in image above) using a metronome, meat powder, and dogs. Basically classical conditioning is comprised of taking an unconditioned stimuli (meat powder) and pairing it with whatever learned or conditioned stimuli (metronome) you like to get a whats called a conditioned response, in this case from the dogs. At first the dogs show no reaction to the metronome because it has yet to be conditioned, but they still react to the meat powder because naturally when a dog smells meat they begin to salivate. After presenting meat powder to the dogs with the metronome in the background repeatedly the dogs begin to salivate at the sound of the metronome whether or not the meat powder is present. Similarly, the human brain makes connections between stimuli in every day life, just like the dogs did. Which is why food advertisements are so effective at persuading us to eat. If someone enjoys eating dominoes pizza regularly, their mind will pair the sight of a pizza with the sensation of being hungry so when the person sees an ad for dominoes they become hungry and are more likely to order a pizza. Another one of my favorite examples of classical conditioning comes in a clip from The Office (link:http://vimeo.com/5371237) where an employee conditions a coworker to expect an altoid every time a certian noise is played on the computer. Classical conditioning doesn't just happen with food and hunger. It can happen with the most basic stimuli, feelings and emotions. You can be conditioned to fear the smell of laundry soap, be excited by the sight of an apple, or even to become tired at the sound of a bell. People can be conditioned to feel almost anything in response to almost any stimuli and while some of these examples may be obscure, classical conditioning plays a huge part in our everyday lives. - Mason Hurley

For years I have been shown works of art by M.C Escher. We've all seen his image of the never-ending staircase, as well as the images of the intertwining fish. But the image I am going to focus on is his 1958 Belvedere lithograph. If one looks at this picture, the tower looks completely normal, and actually quite beautiful. But then if one looks closely, one would notice that the pillars of the tower do not connect in the right places. Actually, the tower would not be capable to stand correctly if the pillars were connected the way they are in the picture. This illusion is an example of both top-down and bottom-up processing. Our top-down processing convinces us that this tower is just an image of a beautiful tower. The reason for this is that we expect the tower to be put together the right way since it looks like a normal tower. But then we start to look at the actual pieces of this tower, and see that it is not put together correctly. This forming a perception based off of parts is our bottom-up processing. We form a perception based off of the individual parts of the image. And from examining the parts, we then come to perceive the image a certain way. And if one looks at the individual parts of the tower, one realizes that it is a nonsensical tower. And that is why M.C Escher is such an illusionary genius. He is able to create images that look perfectly normal upon first glance. For example, when I examined the image further, I realized it does not make sense. Even after realizing the image does not make sense, for some reason it still looked like a normal tower. M.C Escher was truly one of a kind!

Consciousness can be defined as our subjective experience of the world, our bodies, and our mental perspectives. But usually no one puts such an official definition on it. When I thought about consciousness the first thing that came to mind was just the simple fact that I was awake and could think about anything that I wanted. If you really get down to it, consciousness can be thought of as something that makes us who we are. A large number of nerve cells within the brain stem send signals to the thalamus, which in turn sends out signals to the rest of the cortex. If we didn't have a brain sending signals in response to what we see and do in the world around us what would things be like?

In the BBC video, the researcher becomes very humbled by the fact that he is allowed to hold a human brain in his hands. While holding a brain you are grasping something that once housed the entire consciousness of a human being. Arguably, everything that makes someone who they are is inside the brain. This is a very strange thing to think about, that everything that we are can just be held inside something pretty small relative to our bodies. Do you believe that our consciousness is entirely limited to our brains activities, or are other factors in play that make us who we are?

Picture: http://www.instablogsimages.com/images/2008/06/03/conscious-machine_cp3hb_2263.jpg

Ever since the invention of cars has overlapped with the use of alcohol, the question of how bad drinking and driving really is has loomed over society. The scientific truth is that once your BAC (Blood Alcohol Content) is around .08 it's time to lose the keys and settle in for the night because driving is dangerous.

A startling 80% of car accidents are associated with binge drinking (five or more drinks at a time for males, and four or more for females). High doses of alcohol depress brain centers. This slows thinking and impairs concentration, greatly lowering your ability to react to sudden occurrences on the road such as a yellow light or another car cutting you off. Muscular coordination is also inhibited anywhere from 10-12 hours after drinking, meaning that even if you were conscious of a car suddenly braking, your leg may not necessarily be able to respond in time to hit the brake and avoid a crash. The depression of brain centers as a result of intoxication clearly shows that driving while under the influence is extremely dangerous for you and for everyone else on the road.

The fact is that driving while intoxicated impairs all of the abilities that go into operating a vehicle, so once your BAC nears .08 there is no question as to whether or not you are able to drive. Scientific fact is indisputable, so even if someone "feels fine", their brain is not functioning fully and their driving skills are greatly impaired.

Hypnosis, people have been fascinated by this topic for generations and have devised many uses for it from on stage entertainment to the recovery of repressed memories. But is it a legitimate form of therapy or should the practice be reserved for traveling showmen?
Answer: Yes and No.
Many people believe that hypnosis can enhance memory, aiding in the recovery of repressed childhood memories or details of crime that someone witnessed. However, the evidence shows that is probably not the case. While it does increase the amount of information we recall, much of this information is woefully inaccurate and it can lead us to have more confidence in the truth of inaccurate memories.
However, some of the other uses for hypnosis show some promise regarding the powers of suggestion. Everyone is influenced by the suggestions of others in our daily lives because we are constantly responding what other people say and do and even their body language even when we don't realize it. Hypnosis seeks to harness the power of suggestion in positive ways. Studies have shown that hypnosis can aid people in their attempts to do things like quit smoking of lose weight. The Journal of Applied Psychology from the University of Iowa claims that hypnosis is three times more effective than the nicotine patch in helping people to quit smoking and fifteen times more effective than will power alone. However, hypnosis doesn't always work on everyone; some people are just more suggestible than others.

As children, we're inundated with Walt Disney's animated movies that usually end happily with the main character's "dreams coming true." However, our unconscious dreams are more likely to make us hope they don't occur than to wish upon a star that they do.

According to G.W. Domhoff's research on dream themes, of the top ten types of dreams, eight result in misfortune. The list includes being chased, late, falling, losing valuable possessions, being naked, and injury or illness. This study coincides greatly with the results of my own dreams, as I often wake up saying, "Well, I'm sure glad that wasn't real," or even worse, I have woken up in tears.

Unfortunately, we can't control our night-time dreams, but we can consciously dream of a Disney Prince- or Princess-like future. Our ambitions to become a doctor or fashion designer should be pursued, as our goals provide us with great motivation to do what we love. What these dreams have in contrast to our undesirable sleep-provoked ones are our state of consciousness. Therefore, Walt Disney, who has taught us many serious lessons such as the importance of inner beauty and following our hearts, may want to readjust his popular slogan to say, "Where Conscious Dreams Come True."

What can a specialized cell do for all of mankind? Scientists are continually finding answers to this question. Stem cells have acquired much attention for their potential to become a wide variety of specialized cells. These replacement cells can be used to treat brain and blood disease, therapy for cell deficiency, general scientific discovery, and perhaps the most important application, regenerate organ and body tissue. With all these life-changing uses stem cell research is exceedingly controversial for ethical reasons.

Debates that surround stem cells are concerns with the methods of extracting embryonic stem cells for research. Stem cells come from two main sources: adult tissue, and embryos formed during embryological development. Embryonic stem cells are derived from a four-day-old human embryo during the blastocyst phase of development. The fertilized eggs are not given the chance to become a fully developed human.

Some say that life begins at conception, when the egg is fertilized arguing that the embryo deserves the same status as any other full grown human. By removing the blastocyst to extract the stem cells is argued comparable to murder. The other side contends there are different points in gestational development (development of certain organs after certain time periods) that mark the beginning of life.

Since science doesn't differentiate whether research is ethical or not, it makes it difficult to answer the question "When does life begin?" Similar to debates about abortion this is the core question of this debate. Are the advancements in medicine made possible by stem cells worth the potential lives that are being killed to replenish broken cells?

Going more in-depth in the political and scientific debate of stem cells, this article from TIME advocates both ends of the spectrum and describes possible alternatives.

http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,167245,00.html

Ethics has long been a stage for debate and contestation. Ethical guidelines have to be followed closely or the results could be disastrous, as in the Tuskegee study where Syphilis was allowed to spread and 128 men died. The purpose of this study was to see what would happen is Syphilis was allowed to spread. While this study is obviously unethical and would not be allowed to take place today, it raises the question of whether ethics can hinder a scientific study. The results of this study wouldn't necessarily have been found through other experiments. Even if there was a safe study that could be conducted that doesn't guarantee that there is an alternative for other unethical studies. For example, there are many studies involving fear and how people react under extremely stressful situations. It is very difficult to conduct studies that provide accurate results because most are considered immoral or unethical. I am not condoning unethical experiments and studies but simply voicing the idea that ethics can be a hindering factor in the scientific field. Some known unethical experiments such as the one conducted by Milgram have provided very useful knowledge and information. I am simply curious if a whole field of information isn't being discovered because of our ethical guidelines and principles.

According to the National Institute of Aging, "Alzheimer's disease is an irreversible, progressive brain disease that slowly destroys memory and thinking skills, and eventually even the ability to carry out the simplest tasks." I have had first-hand experience with this disease, as my grandfather suffered from it (most likely due to his career in the National Football League in the 1950s, when the helmets were little more than leather hats).

In the section on stem cells in Chapter 3, it is mentioned that stem cell research has the potential to treat diseases such as Alzheimer's. Recent research supports this claim.
Through stem cell research, a study has replicated Alzheimer's disease neurons, which has never been done before.

While this is only a first step, it is a huge step. Already, they have found that "one of the early changes in Alzheimer's neurons thought to be an initiating event in the course of the disease turns out not to be that significant" (Fox). Further research will provide further results.

The ability to replicate functional neurons will allow researchers to study the causes and onset of Alzheimer's disease. They then can use this information to develop and test drugs and other treatments. The study of the replicated neurons will also most likely speed the entire process of finding a possible effective treatment. As this study shows, stem cell research can be beneficial in the treatment of diseases like Alzheimer's.

Researchers replicate Alzheimer's disease neurons with stem cells

Alzheimer's Disease Fact Sheet

Growing up, physical activity and exercise are stressed a lot; it is a necessary component to ensure a healthy body. And that argument is right...to a certain extent. However, what we don't often hear is that there is such a thing as too much exercise. Wed MD argues that "exercise addicts" have a misconception that two-hours of moderate physical activity, such as run, will make them four times as healthy; however, that is simply not true. Too much exercise can have adverse health effects such as injuries, depression, and even suicide. As we learned in lecture, the adrenal gland is vital in our body's ability to function properly; but, as a result of over exercising, the amount of cortisol our adrenal gland can produce decreases significantly.

So why, with all the adverse health effects, do people continue to exhaust themselves in pursuit of a "perfect" physique? Wed MD believes it comes down to control - the results of exercise can no doubt be visibly observed and with so many aspects of our life out of our control, people with "exercise addiction" many times have an extreme desire for control. Our seemingly insatiable need to be "fit" and "thin" is no doubt stemmed from society's peer pressure to have the "ideal" body. But, to reiterate, sometimes a desirable figure comes at the expense of permanent internal damage. So, next time you reach for those running shoes, ask yourself: is this run really necessary? Am I doing more harm than good by pushing myself to exercise?

Now most of the people are often sitting in the office, whether it is white-collar workers, students, or doctors. Long ago, many people think that is very comfortable to sit in office. For myself, I am a student, when I wake up in the morning, I take class sit in my classroom, after class I will sit in library do my home, when I came home after school I still sit in front of the computer desk. For my whole is probably more than half of the time sitting. I think that many people like me. But now is a sedentary lifestyle bad for people's health? A long time to sit It is easy to cervical spondylitis. The root causes of cervical spondylitis, cervical disc retrograde degeneration, the disc loose, and then oppressed the nerve root, spinal cord or vertebral artery caused by a variety of symptoms. Long-term poor posture or long stay in front of the computer, most likely to cause neck muscle fatigue caused by the neck and shoulder pain, Xiang muscle spasm, and even dizziness; the passage of time is bound to occur prematurely in adult cervical intervertebral disc degeneration , resulting in cervical spondylitis. Long in the tension state due to long-term sedentary, some sitting posture, or always fixed in one position makes the waist soft tissue, soft tissue ischemia, arising from the strain of lumbar muscles. Hundreds of millions of cells in the human body depends on the transport of blood to complete its metabolic functions, sedentary, the amount of oxygen-carrying blood allows the body to reduce the oxygen partial pressure to reduce and carrying carbon dioxide increase in blood volume, carbon dioxide partial pressure, and cause muscle soreness, stiffness, atrophy.

Chapter one describes mankind's pitfall; abandoning objective reasoning and falling victim to our natural tendencies to believe intuitively. Although following intuition can be invaluable to existence in many situations people come to conclusions that are false for this reason.

There are many reasons for this such as the motivational force of comfort also known as transcendental temptations, lack of scientific knowledge, or simply trying to make the puzzle pieces fit, which shows in finding eerie similarities or coincidences of what is seen or known like a face on a planet meaning proof of Extra-Terrestrial Intelligence.

I believe that although these traps are hard not to fall into, I disagree that such things should be disregarded as pseudoscience in all cases. We are limited with our knowledge though it's expanded over time; there is still a universe we have yet to understand completely. A great example of this is the X-Files television series because paranormal phenomena are a central theme, but at the end of most episodes there's an explanation, that's often scientific, although not always believable. This shows possibilities are there and paranormal phenomena may be another name for a science that we don't have the knowledge to understand yet.

This morning, I read an article written by William Saletan which is talking about the causes to obesity. At first, he said that he used to think genetics are more important than environment, but later, he realized the relationship between nature and nurture is not that simple. In his article, he uses some control groups and experiments to support the ideas that although genetics take the majority percentage of the obesity, environment such as diet and lifestyle is controlling it.

I find this article is quite attractive because as a girl, keeping slim is always one of the most significant parts in life. Personally speaking, I agree with author. As for me, I admit that genetics determine what kind of physique we have, but lifestyle and eating habits can take it over. Around us, there are a lot of examples. For instance, I have 5 schoolmates who were extremely fat before, but become slim now. According to my observation, the most members of their families are as fat as them, so obese might to be blame. But why can they take over the genetics? The reasons are healthy diet and regular exercises. What I can see from the examples is that sometimes genetics are not invincible. Sometimes environmental factors can control them. Just as author said, just because something is genetically caused doesn't mean it can't be behaviorally controlled. (http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2008/02/fat_chance.2.html)

What I want to say is that when comparing nature and nurture, there is no absoluteness. Sometimes acquired disposition gains the upper hand to change what genetics want us to be, but sometimes, it can't.

Source from the website http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/human_nature/2008/02/fat_chance.html

I find it very interesting that while we use facial expressions to display our emotions, our facial expressions can determine our emotions. While our study in class indicated no difference in mood based on facial expressions, I feel that the experiment was no a good way to determine the correlation due to other factors.
I have heard of other studies that involved this theory before and how people with botox injections have impaired ability to feel certain emotions. Botox is typically injected into the muscles used to frown to prevent wrinkling in those areas. This impairs the person's ability to frown, and as research has shown, people with botox injections have weaker emotional responses to emotional stimuli. (http://www.dnaindia.com/scitech/report_botox-paralyses-your-emotions_1401936) I find this interesting because it seems strange that facial expressions could have effect on the emotion that they are expressing.
While the emotions cause by simply showing an expressions may not be as strong as actually feeling the emotion , they are clearly necessary for feeling the emotion fully. So smiling while you are sad will make you feel happier but making you feel less sad.

It is clearly obvious that the amount of exercise that we need to do in one day differs from the source that you receive the information from. No one has the same answer, so lets look at a few examples from the so called "experts."
A typical person might think that walking up and down the stairs to do laundry and walking to and from class is exercise but in reality it really is not. Well that might be a decent workout for an elderly person, for most of us it is not! Exercise refers to setting aside time to intensely move our bodies at 4 to 5 miles per hour, which is equivalent to about 60 minutes a day for the average person as stated in article 1. Article 1 link
Although article 1 states that the information is from recent scientific studies and is backed up they do not provide any information throughout the article that specifically explains about the study nor does it give specific examples.The use of language is off and personally does not sound like it contains any logic but you believe what the article says until you reach the last paragraph.Where it contains loaded language and is harsh. So is it really a reliable source? I think not, there is no logical evidence!
In article 2 the author states that about 150 minutes per week of moderate activity or 75 minutes of vigorous aerobic active it sufficient. Overall they say to aim at 30 minutes of physical activity each day, but if you want to lose weight app it up a little bit to 300 minutes per week. Now I bet you are thinking wait the numbers don't add up correctly and you are right. They way they word this is confusing and it doesn't break down properly, in terms of mathematics. This is not easy for someone to follow. The article is from a MD, but to me he does not know how to break it down into logical pieces. He makes a better claim than article 1 and has evidence to back it up. Take a look for yourself and decide which article is logical! He seems to have the most logic out of all, although is process of doing math is inaccurate. Article 2 link
In article 3, it states to aim for 30 minutes of physical activity per day. 60 minutes to prevent weight gain and 90 minutes for overweight people. But what is physical activity. It is not defined in the article at all. The accuracy improves in the article as it continues, talking about ways to get the time in to workout.
Article 3 link
Overall I think all 3 articles lack a solid logical evidence and scientific findings to be the correct answer. All 3 have errors in grammar usage and evidence to back up their statements. None of them follow the 6 principles of scientific thinking. A study on exercise needs to be conducted by the steps, until than we never will actually know. How much exercise we need, because it appears to still be a MYSTERY!

Before discussion Tuesday, we had to read about the Bogle family and how everyone throughout the several generations landed themselves in jail due to several laws being broken. In the article the author noted how the dad teaches his children to steal for him and also to fight. The question that was brought up in this article was is this aggression and habit of breaking the law the cause of a bad gene that is passed from generation to generation or is it taught over the years as one is raised. In discussion we came to conclusions that and correlated that aggression has more to do with genes but I would like to look back on this case and discuss more whether it actually had more to do with genetics. Many studies are done that show if the parents are more aggressive then the kids naturally be more aggressive due to genes but it does not mean that the kids will be committing crimes and fighting just naturally. There is more to this case than just genetics. It states that the kids always want to impress their parents. In this case the parents taught the kids not only by example but literally taught the kids and awarded them for stealing liquor for them and fighting instead of being a coward. This case proves that these actions are not just natural causes but are taught to kids over the years by example.

Before discussion Tuesday, we had to read about the Bogle family and how everyone throughout the several generations landed themselves in jail due to several laws being broken. In the article the author noted how the dad teaches his children to steal for him and also to fight. The question that was brought up in this article was is this aggression and habit of breaking the law the cause of a bad gene that is passed from generation to generation or is it taught over the years as one is raised. In discussion we came to conclusions that and correlated that aggression has more to do with genes but I would like to look back on this case and discuss more whether it actually had more to do with genetics. Many studies are done that show if the parents are more aggressive then the kids naturally be more aggressive due to genes but it does not mean that the kids will be committing crimes and fighting just naturally. There is more to this case than just genetics. It states that the kids always want to impress their parents. In this case the parents taught the kids not only by example but literally taught the kids and awarded them for stealing liquor for them and fighting instead of being a coward. This case proves that these actions are not just natural causes but are taught to kids over the years by example.