Anger

Stacy brought up the question in class asking if people are more likely to be angry rather than every other emotion. My view is that most situations require a little bit of anger. In almost any situation I am in I see that I have used a little anger in my tone or in my thoughts. This is because anger is the first emotion that we learn. Most babies scream because they are not getting their way or what they want which shows how angry they are.

There are many other emotions people have in use. Another really common one is empathy this is because this allows us to relate to others and make sustainable relationships. This is because if people can relate to one another they are more likely to actually talk about things that matter rather than have pointless one word conversations.

Response to Emily

In Emily's blog she talks about a conversation that arose in class about how animal form packs to survive. This is also true for humans because every human needs to be with people or else they do not adapt right in to society and cannot function. People also flock together in times of hardship. This is because a lot of people experience a lot of the same things to different degrees. It also helps that people listen and show some sort of empathy even if they do not want to it is human nature. Humans even in the early ages have always hunted and stayed together because it was the easiest way to survive.  What sets us apart from animals now though because they flock together and so do we?

LIfe

Every theory of human nature tries to explain the meaning of life. and if it were that easy everyone would be able to figure out the meaning of life. But this is also saying that there is only one "meaning of life". Which also does not make much sense. This is because my meaning of life could be different than everyone else in the worlds because no two people are the same. Which would mean that any theory to the meaning of life is not universal. Which would mean everyone lives the exact same lives.

Response to Meghan

In Meghan's blog she talks about how environment and how it shapes us. This is because penguins and seagulls are both birds but are different in a lot of ways. The major one is appearance. If a seagull were to live in the climate that penguins do they would die instantly from the freezing temperature. But, if penguins lived in the hot climate that seagulls do they would not survive because they are so dark and not made for that temperature. People are also based on the same concepts. Someone who was born and raised in Florida would  have a different reaction to cold than someone who lives in Alaska and is used to the freezing temperatures and vise versa. Now this does not say that everything in nature determines how people will inherent genes and what will make them the way they are. But it does have a significant effect

Response to Meghan

I agree with Meghan's post in her blog that says that nature is not really wild because scientists have gone in to the depths of the wild that most of man kind would not venture to. This is because they think they can find something out there that can help them develop a new treatment for cancer. Or at least they say that because they could have an ulterior motive. This is because they find new animals that are out there and could potentially  strip the forest of a plant that may cure something other than what they want it to. Any where that man can go man will go. This is because most people want to go somewhere that has been untouched and discover something that makes them famous. So, is the wild really wild?

Natural selection is the fittest of the fittest surviving. But what does that even mean? Everything survives for a while, like dinosaurs. But, then they die out. So what could be the fittest of the fit if all things die out? Well, it is also said that they become fit because of their genes. But, the genes that are accounted for are the good ones and not the bad ones. Before I can answer that question, the question that arises is what are bad genes? These are genes that make addiction or a mental illness. These are only diagnosed in humans because they are the only ones that can seek treatment for them. Most other animals just die out because there body is going through too much. But, this also raises the point that when Darwin wrote about natural selection that when an animals would not mate with the one that was not fit and they would just allow those genes to die out.  But if this were true nothing would mate with that and there would not be anymore "bad genes".

True

A question that came to mind during this chapter came to me when Sartre said that our choices are our responsibility, is this true? I think it is, that is because if someone chooses to rob a bank it is their responsibly to decide if that is the right thing to do or not. This is because they know that it is one hundred percent wrong and they have all the means to change it but if they don't then that is their fault and there is nothing anyone else can do for it. This is because every choice that is made has a cause and effect and it is our responsibility to know what is the right one and what effects we do not need.