Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Concepts and Analysis of Stephen J. Gould’s Essay “Dolly’s Fashion and Louis’s Passion”. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This is a 4 page paper discussing Gould’s essay “Dolly’s Fashion and Louis’s Passion”. Anthropologist Stephen J. Gould questions in his essay “Dolly’s Fashion and Louis’s Passion” (2000) man’s presumed need to always present components within the world in categories and dichotomies. He argues that human life is filled with such “foibles” and conflicts as firstly “our need to create order in a complex world begets our worst mental habit: dichotomy” and second that “many deep questions about our loves and livelihood, and fates of nations, truly have no answers”. One of the most prevalent dichotomies which seems to annoy Gould the most and which leads man down many false paths is that of the “nature versus nurture” debate; or the “genetic versus environmental sources of human abilities and behaviors”. The fact this question is always an “either-or dichotomy verges on the nonsensical” according to Gould. He then proceeds to highlight two particular modern readings in which the scientific perspective (nature) is presented but the environmental (nurture) perspective is ignored because of today’s preference for the scientific theory. Despite the current trend of today, Gould and some educators do not ignore the centuries of debate which have also discussed the nurture component and more importantly for Gould, readers should be aware that this debate (and others) should not be considered as “either-or”.
Bibliography lists 3 sources.
Page Count:
4 pages (~225 words per page)
File: D0_TJGould1.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
need to always present components within the world in categories and dichotomies. He argues that human life is filled with such "foibles" and conflicts as firstly "our need to create
order in a complex world begets our worst mental habit: dichotomy" and second that "many deep questions about our loves and livelihood, and fates of nations, truly have no answers"
(Gould, 2000, p. 287). One of the most prevalent dichotomies which seems to annoy Gould the most and which leads man down many false paths is that of the "nature
versus nurture" debate; or the "genetic versus environmental sources of human abilities and behaviors". The fact this question is always an "either-or dichotomy verges on the nonsensical" according to Gould
as "both inheritance and upbringing matter in crucial ways" and "an adult human being, built on the interaction of these (and other) factors, cannot be disaggregated into separate components with
attached percentages" (Gould, 2000, p. 287). Despite the fact that humans are an integration of nature and nurture, Gould shows that throughout history, man, scientists, politicians and philosophers continue to
shift their preferences from one or the other. Shortly after World War II in the explanation of Nazi Germany, the "nurture" theories were preferred. In modern day politics, the "nature"
or genetic argument is often presented to reduce social spending on certain delinquent programs because "you cant change them, they re made that way" and for the recent increase in
"genetic determinism" (Gould, 2000, p. 288). Gould also argues that in the same way that fashions come in and out of favor, so too do arguments for nature or
nurture and depending on "where the pendulum" is swinging in any particular era is the perspective papers and presentations will highlight in order to make their arguments relevant. In an
...