Do you women ever wonder why us men tend to ignore your requests for help around the house or even to do the exact opposite? Well we now have the answer – we were born that way.
“Yes honey, I know you asked me to cut the video games off, but according to new research at Duke university I have unintentionally reactance to your requests where I resist social influences that I subconsciously perceive as a threat to my autonomy.”
What did finding all of this information do – absolutely nothing. Take the married couple who were over the study:
Chartrand believes her husband “should now be better equipped to suppress his reactant tendencies.” Fitzsimons, however, believes the results “suggest that reactance to significant others is so automatic that I can’t possibly be expected to control it if I don’t even know it’s happening.”
Science is amazing. Eventually the only thing that will continue to be our fault will be global warming.
You just don’t like Duke.
I’m not actually against the finding of the study per se. Just much of what passes for “science” today is merely a way to blame behavior on genes or environment or anything besides our own self – except as I said global warming.
As to the anti-Duke bias. Um…no. I am a huge Duke fan. I am struggling with the fact that they have lost 4 straight games right now. At least three of those games they should have won, but this is a down year. Even still we will finish the year in the top 25 and make it to at least the second round of the dance. If you read any of my sports stuff, you know this is nothing against Duke.
Just much of what passes for “science” today is merely a way to blame behavior on genes or environment or anything besides our own self
Okay, I’ll bite. So the gist of the post is that you are upset with science because it takes the onus off nurture (free will) and puts it on nature. This Duke study is your example. Am I close?
I just thought the study was funny today on V-day. Men can ignore their wives requests and blame it on science. I had no real hidden meaning.
However I do find it telling, not really upsetting, that science routinely gives humans a pass for their negative behavior. Whether it is psychology saying it is all our parents’ faults or genetics telling us it is all our genes’ fault, they leave no room for a human being to recognize their problems and deal with them. If nothing is your fault, then you have no way to seek out an improvement.
I do not doubt that “nature” plays a vital role in determining much of our characteristics but I refuse to believe we are tied down to it (or our “nurture”) as an immovable weight.
Deep thoughts for a throw-away V-day posts. ;)
More Science: Men Resist Nagging Because They Don’t Like Being Nagged
Wow! Now this is what I call science! New research findings now appearing online in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology began with a professor’s desire to understand why her husband often seemed to ignore her requests for help around…
Duke Study: It seems men rebel against nagging….
because they don’t like nagging: Durham, NC — New research findings now appearing online in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology began with a professor’s desire to understand why her husband often seemed to ignore her requests for help around…
I had no real hidden meaning.
I figured you were alluding to how gays blame their immorality on nature. But hey, for some people, it’s all about homosexuality ;)
I truly hate being nagged and have the same reaction as most men when they are nagged.
It’s a good thing that I’m the woman, so the chances are slim to none that I’ll ever experience this in any of my relationships.
It’s a good thing that I’m the woman, so the chances are slim to none that I’ll ever experience this in any of my relationships.
Oh so true, Michele.
I figured you were alluding to how gays blame their immorality on nature.
I honestly only came up with the last line as I was writing the post. I thought about all the studies that come out and the vast majority of them end up with the conclusion that “it’s not your fault.” I had no single act in mind.
It does, I think, lend itself to the sin nature discussion and how humans are bound and determined to discover someway to not be forced to take responsiblity for their actions. Our sin are not our problems. It’s always someone else who is to blame for our mistakes. Much of the research today cultivates and feeds that thought process.
It wasn’t too long ago where I heard an evolutionists and genetists discuss why he believed rape was nothing more than a social/moral evolution of men. It was all part of our inate desire to “spread our seed.” Essentially, the rapist cannot be blamed because he is only doing what his evolution told him to do. Honestly, that was the conclusion to which he came.
Aaron (and Seeker, for that matter),
You’re kidding me, right? Stop looking at gay people and ASSUMING that they want your unconditional support. Do gays genuinely care if you don’t approve of their lifestyle? Of course not, just as I could not care less whether you approve of me having a child out of wedlock.
The point is when you starting assuming that the life of the homosexual American (or the sinning American, me) is any of your business. Because it isn’t. It isn’t remotely your business. Gays aren’t looking for absolution from Christians; they’re looking to be left alone while receiving what’s rightfully theirs, equitable treatment.
The arrogance of some Christians is unbelievable.
Essentially, the rapist cannot be blamed because he is only doing what his evolution told him to do. Honestly, that was the conclusion to which he came.
Yeah, this reminds me of my past post, My Genes Made Me Do It, the study that seemed to support adultery because it has an evolutionary advantage. Blah!
Rapists and gays – will you two ever be fair?
Yeah, those two can’t be exactly equated, but it raises the question – how much do we try to justify our immoral behaviors (rape, domestic violence, adultery, promiscuity, homosexuality, delusions of moral superiority ;) on our genetics?
That’s the point, so let’s not get lost in this one perhaps uneven comparison. Let’s just say that often we like to blame our lack of character or immoral tendencies on nature, as if we have no control over them, and therefore, we say that they are probably natural, and therefore, OK.
Obviously, this logic needs some clarifiers.
“…those two can’t exactly be equated,” only further makes my point Seeker. They cannot be equated, because one involves nonconsensual activity, while the other involves consensual sexual behavior between adults.
Telling me “not to get lost” in one “perhaps uneven comparrison” is absurd when the uneven comparrison is precisely the problem. You don’t want to have a fair conversation about sexuality, as evidence by the fact that you can’t help but suggest that gays and rapists are hardly different from one another.
Homosexuality is okay, because it doesn’t hurt anybody. You’ve never demonstrated otherwise, nor have you ever proven otherwise. You continue to maintain that it does hurt somebody – children perhaps, or the gays themselves – except there’s no actual evidence to suggest this. (Evidence offered by radical Christian groups is not evidence, but instead, propaganda.)
I just cannot believe the cruelty you are willing to visit upon gays. If I claimed that Christianity is akin to rape, you’d go ballistic. But you expect gays, and those of us who like gays, to look the other way when you and Aaron play this dirtiest of games. Unreal.
If I claimed that Christianity is akin to rape, you’d go ballistic.
You’ve compared it to radical islam, fairy tales, lies, insanity, and indoctrination. You think comparing it to rape is going to add much to that?
I understand that your beef is that homosexuality is not sinful or morally reprobate. I get that. But my point is that the original article is another example of our trying to justify our immorality by nature, and I am claiming that this same logic is used by pro-gay apologists – “it’s natural, therefore it must be natural and moral.”
That’s the point your are missing, whether or not you think homosexuality is immoral, this argument from nature is a lame excuse for lack of character and moral fibre, and in and of itself, does not justify any actions, even if they would be “favored by evolution.”
It’s a commentary on two major faults of modern humanity – our desire to justify our immoral actions by blaming them on nature, and our reliance on the ridiculous reasoning that flows from evolutionary thinking.
Geez, seeker rises to new heights of bigotry and hatred. What a bung-hole!
When did I even mention being gay at all in anything? I referenced seeker’s joke and went into a broad discussion of sin nature.
I never said anyone cared what opinion of their behavior was. They don’t have to care at all, nor do I expect them to. Again, I was simply making a broad statement about human’s desire to refuse personal responsibility and science being one of the many ways in which humans find an out for what they do.
I referenced seeker’s joke and went into a broad discussion of sin nature.
Exactly. I should not have mentioned the link to pro-gay logic, because now every liberals eyes have glazed over with the inclusion of homosexuality in with these other sins. As I summarized above, the point is that there is a trend towards justifying immoral behavior by blaming nature and evolution. Even if you tihk that homosexuality is normative, you have to admit that, when defending it against those who call it immoral, this “argument from nature” is often used, and it may be just as invalid as when it is used to justify promiscuity or adultery or spousal abuse.
I suppose, in one sense, you’re right: I don’t care about this “from nature” nonsense, except when it can be used to disprove the nitwits who claim that homosexuality goes against nature. Obviously, it doesn’t, specifically because it does occur in nature.
My objection is when adults tell other adults what they can and can’t do with one another. That’s when I start to have a problem. Telling two gay people that their love is worth less than the love you share with your wife is as offensive as it is wrong.
As for Aaron, I’m not trying to give anybody a pass for their behavior, particularly when there is nothing wrong with the behavior.