Counterintuitive Spring 2023

The Good In Capital Punishment

 There has been many disputes and controversy with allowing and abolishing the death penalty. The death penalty, which is legal executions to inmates, may be wrong in the eyes of many people, but it’s certainly the right thing to do in states that allow it to be legal. The 32 states that allow killing inmates have a variety of their own reasons for capital punishment.

In the Criminal Justice System, they serve three functions, which is to deter crime, rehabilitate criminals and incapacitate dangerous criminals. In every state, they must follow the Justice system’s functions to every incoming inmate. An inmate who just committed a murder, taking a life away; the state must serve the Justice system’s purpose of deterring crime and incapacitating a dangerous criminal. When the Justice system uses capital punishment or legal executions it causes fear amongst other criminals. Allowing and performing these executions will make everyone second think themselves before taking another life away. On October 29, 2013, the Justice department released a report that the national murder rate dropped 1.5% from states that allowed the death penalty.

Capital punishment has lowered the murder rate in a few states, but it also serves a relief to the victim’s family. The death penalty brings closure to the victim’s loved ones. Dzhokhar Tsarnaev, who had part in 2013 Boston marathon bombing was sentenced to death in the state of Boston. The Boston Mayor, Martin J Walsh made a statement, “Hope that this verdict provides a small amount of closure to everyone affected in the Boston Bombing.” A police officer of Boston, who was injured during a shoot out with Tsarnaev and his brother stated, “It gives me relief and closure as well as the ability to keep moving forward.” The death penalty can bring emotional stability to those who lost a loved one’s life. A study published in the Journal of Personality and Social psychology found 20% of 150 cases, the victim’s loved ones reported feeling at peace or relief.

Works Cited 

[New Source] Marsh, Jason. “Does Death Penalty Bring Closure? – CNN.com.” CNN. Cable News Network, 20 May 2015. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

Hayworth, Michael. “5 Reasons Some People Think the World Needs the Death Penalty.” Amnesty Australia. N.p., 8 July 2013. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

The Mormons Aren’t Hurting Anyone

While post-mortem baptism of Jews by Mormons may upset some members of the former group, the outrageous reactions by members of the Jewish faith is not unmerited, but also discriminatory against members of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints.  The antics and caustic remarks of certain Jewish individuals regarding the well-intentioned behavior of the Mormons are a result of Jewish snobbishness and inflated egos of those who assume that their religion is better than that of others, and, interestingly, a fear that it may in fact be inferior to the same.  Additionally, the vitriol and anger that have been expressed by certain members of the Jewish community may also be explained by a lack of mutual understanding between the Mormons and Jews.

The majority of the outrage felt and demonstrated by Jews following the baptism of Daniel Pearl, a Jewish reporter killed by terrorists in February of 2002, stems from the belief that Pearl’s baptism discredits his Jewish faith, and also is disrespectful of his lifelong non-Mormon religious beliefs.  This belief is the result of the oversized egos of many members of the Jewish community, who believe that their religion is superior to that of the Mormons.  However, if we truly are to believe in “God’s motherly love for all Jews and Gentiles” (the Gentiles in this case being the Mormons) as referenced in Fred Bert Ithurburn’s God Loves Everyone, we can only assume that God’s love for the Mormons is no less than that for the Jews, and that therefore neither religion is inferior or superior to the other.  If God loves Daniel Pearl, Anne Frank, and Elie Weisel as Jews as much as God would love them as Mormons—and let us remember that a posthumous baptism does not necessarily result in a conversion—, then the fact that the aforementioned individuals were all baptized by the Mormon church makes no difference.  To assume that posthumous baptism is a corruption of the deceased’s religion is foolish, for God recognizes each individual not as a Jew, a Christian, a Mormon, or a Pastafarian; rather, God recognizes us all for our humanity, and therefore post-mortem baptisms do no harm.

The hostile reactions of some Jewish individuals may also reflect an insecurity in their own religion.  If we choose to assume that the Jews are correct in assuming that their religion is, in fact, the “correct” one, and that the Mormons are simply a bunch of lunatics, then we must question if their outrage is anything more than the result of a highly irrational fear.  If the Jewish version of that which many individuals call God does in fact exist and has in fact decided to save only the Jews, then the Jews have absolutely no reason to fear that the deceased members of their congregation will be damned for eternity, simply because of the fact that the Mormons’ practice of posthumous baptism would accomplish nothing in this scenario—it is simply preposterous to assume that an individual may be granted salvation by Heavenly Father if Heavenly Father does not actually exist.  Furthermore, when remembering that a post-mortem baptism of an individual does not result in a conversion of the soul of the deceased, this irrational fear becomes even clearer.  Because the soul of the baptized individual must choose to convert to the Mormon religion, the opposition to the practice as a whole may be used to indicate that the Jews’ uncertainty in their faith is even more prominent than it may have first appeared; if the Jews are God’s chosen people, there is no rational reason to speak out against a religion that is, in their eyes, anything more than a farce.

While the Jewish community may claim that the practice of posthumous baptism of non-Mormons, particularly Jews (living or dead), by the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints is disrespectful of the Jewish faith, they simultaneously have been equally disrespectful of the Mormon faith.  As we have explored more than once before, a certain half-Jewish individual reacted to the post-mortem baptism of Daniel Pearl by creating the website alldeadmormonsarenowgay.com, which claims to possess the ability to convert deceased Mormons to homosexuality, without even extending the courtesy of choice to the soul of the deceased, as the Mormons do to the soul of a deceased individual undergoing a baptism after death.  The disrespectful connotations of this website towards homosexuality and the entirety of the gay community notwithstanding, I submit that this is merely the result of a grave misunderstanding between faiths.  The Mormons, as it has been established, do not intend any illness towards the deceased, regardless of faith.  Rather, it is the desire of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints that every individual, living or dead, be given the chance to spend eternity with Heavenly Father in the Celestial Kingdom.  The Jews, however, misunderstand this tenderhearted practice.  Rather than being seen as a gesture of love for humanity and a desire universal brotherhood in Heavenly Father (not unlike the brotherhood in Christ that many Christian individuals so frequently reference), the practice of posthumous baptism has been misconstrued as a disrespectful, sneaky, underhanded attempt by the Mormons to convert the deceased to their own religion, rather than allowing the dead to rest in peace.  The Jews, unfortunately, have failed to understand that the Mormons are not desperately grabbing for converts any more than Jewish or Christian missionaries who travel the world preaching that which they believe to be true.  Ultimately, the reactions of the Jews to the practice of posthumous baptism can be explained in one simple sentence.  First said by John Merrick in David Lynch’s The Elephant Man, “People are frightened by what they don’t understand.”

Works Cited

The Elephant Man. Dir. David Lynch. 1980. Film. *new source

Oppenheimer, Mark. “A Twist on Posthumous Baptisms Leaves Jews Miffed at Mormon Rite.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 2 Mar. 2012. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

Ithurburn, Fred Bert. God Loves Everyone. 1st ed. Trafford, 2012. 51. Print. *new source

“All Dead Mormons Are Now Gay.” All Dead Mormons Are Now Gay. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

Autistic Gamers Will Not Become Hermits

Video game players are sometimes thought of as antisocial loners who sit alone in a dark room, a controller in one hand while the other is submerged in a bag of Cheetos. Although generally played alone, video games are far from an antisocial endeavor. Recent strides in gaming technology have resulted in games geared specifically for treating symptoms of autism, which include stunted social skills and a lack of empathy. Skeptics believe the Cheeto-eating-dark-room stereotype, likely due to the counterintuitive and implausible nature of the treatment: encouraging people who are already prone to avoid social contact to get involved in a virtual reality in an attempt to make real-world interactions better. One app in particular has set the stage for this new era of gaming, incorporating four science based areas of learning.

Social Clues does not attempt to disguise its purpose with a discrete title. Designed by 35 students at the University of Southern California, this app was developed to provide autistic individuals a platform to hone the art of social norms. One in sixty-eight children have an autism spectrum disorder, and an estimated 70 percent of households with children own a tablet. The majority of Americans have the ability to easily download this app, circumventing the high medical cost for prescription drugs while also being free of the physical side-effects.

While many interventions exist to combat autism, few have been revealed effective through scientific research. Social Clues and similar games were developed around evidence-based practices, meaning they incorporate several core principles: Applied Behavioral Analysis (ABA), errorless learning, social narrative, and discrete trial training. These four areas represent the pillars of effective autism treatment in the scientific community, and game developers use them to create their therapeutic games from the ground up.

ABA is a form of teaching that attempts to modify behavior using the cause-and-effect of certain actions. Social Clues implements ABA via colorful characters that children can identify with. Players can choose the suitably named paticiPETE or communiKATE characters to play as. Then, they unknowingly experience Applied Behavioral Analysis in several ways. First, prompts and triggers come up and the child selects the one they think best fits the situation, allowing them to plan out and carefully consider how they would react in given social situations. The in-game analytics track their choices and notice trends, tailoring the gaming experience to each child’s needs. The characters will react to the choices of the players, either celebrating the decision or pointing the child in the right direction. This system allows for a personalized , engaging, and stress-free environment for autistic children to become familiar with how to act in scenarios they will undoubtedly face in the real-world.

Negative reinforcement may work when training a dog to stop using the rug as a bathroom, but it is rarely effective for helping children. This is where errorless learning comes in during the game. No “You’ve Failed” or “Game Over” messages pop up in Social Clues. Rather, wrong choices are not possible in the game. Each choice comes with different results, and players are always guided to the most suitable choice. Additionally, negative feedback is absent. Characters do not admonish the player. Errorless learning allows the game to be free of negative stimuli, greatly reducing the stress that can accompany social situations.

Social narratives allow for the gaming experience to be realistic and make sense in the mind of a young child. Common experiences for children are presented in the game, such as interacting with other students in class, searching for a lost toy, or taking the bus. Whereas Pac-man style games might increase hand-eye coordination, narrative games allow for emotional attachment to the story and the characters, employing the child’s empathizing abilities.

Lastly, Discrete Trial Training (DTT) uses repeated small steps in an instructional manner. Each level of the game is one trial, aimed at a certain area or skill. Positive praise and rewards are offered in-game during each trial, and following the conclusion, data summarizes the child’s progress for that section and shows where improvement is needed for further trials. Instead of overloading the player with a large number of tasks, DTT allows for digestible chunks to be completed. Parents or instructors can then view the results of the trial and work with the child in those stated areas.

Using the four areas of evidence-based practices, game developers are successfully creating video games that can alleviate the symptoms of autism. The oft-mentioned anti-social aspect that many assume comes inherently with this technology is combated with the inclusion of these four principles. With the click of a download button, an entire simulated world is available for children to access and begin undergoing treatment. This treatment does not involve brain surgeries or medicine. It simply requires an iPad and a willingness for parents and their children to try something new, a method of gaming that may one day be available in pharmacies.

Works Cited

(NEW SOURCE) Wong, Connie, Samuel L. Odom, Kara A. Hume, Ann W. Cox, Angel Fettig, Suzanne Kucharczyk, Matthew E. Brock, Joshua B. Plavnick, Veronica P. Fleury, and Tia R. Schultz. “Evidence-Based Practices for Children, Youth, and Young Adults with Autism Spectrum Disorder: A Comprehensive Review.” J Autism Dev Disord Journal of Autism and Developmental Disorders 45.7 (2015): 1951-966. 2014. Web. 8 Nov. 2015.

(NEW SOURCE) Ballon, Marc. “Video Game Promotes Social Engagement for Children with Autism.” Video Game Promotes Social Engagement for Children with Autism. N.p., 21 Apr. 2014. Web. 8 Nov. 2015.

SeaWorld should not be shut down. If the park were to be shut down, the captive animals would not be able know how to survive.

All of the current captive orca whales were either captured more than 35 years ago or were born in the facility. Life expectancy for orcas in the wild depends nearly on the ocean they swim in. In the Pacific Northwest, “life expectancy for a female is 30 years and a male is 19 years” (seaworldcares.com). In Southeastern Alaska, the maximum age for females is around 50 and for males 30. SeaWorld’s captive whales ages range from their 30s to their 50s. They have proven that they do not change the life expectancy of orca whales.

If the current captive whales were to be released into the wild, they would have a very low chance of surviving. Since most of their whales have been in their hands for 35 years or were born there, they cannot remember or do not know how to fend for themselves in the wild. In captivity, the animals have a specific diet and are given their food; they have never had to hunt for themselves. They are given specific sleeping quarters and are used to their own salt water. Taking these animals out of their familiar home will mess up their entire life and they may not be able to survive in the wild alone.

SeaWorld workers are able to “provide scientists with access, research and data that would be difficult or impossible to get in the wild” about orca whales. The ocean is enormous; being able to find and actually conduct research about an orca is almost an impossible job. The workers at SeaWorld are able to work hands on with the whales to collect data and learn about them. Studies can include lifespans, living communities, their prey, and how they survive.

Works Cited

“Killer Whales.” SeaWorld Cares. N.p., 2015. Web. 06 Nov. 2015.

“I Can’t Breathe!”

It is likely that a police officer will say they used excessive force on a suspect because they tried resisting arrest and put the officer in harms way. Resisting arrest could be fleeing an officer while being arrested, threatening an officer, attacking a police officer or giving false identification such as name and date of birth. In some countries, resisting arrest is a criminal charge and most police officers have the right to use excessive force to control a suspect. However, in most states if the excessive force causes ‘great bodily harm’ to the suspect they have the right to defend themselves.

On July 17, 2014, Eric Garner spoke his final words on a city block in Staten Island, New York “I can’t breathe!” Garner was well known in the area for selling untaxed cigarettes nearby the Staten Island Ferry Terminal and was arrested twice and charged with circumventing state tax law earlier that same year. However, on this specific day police officers Justin Damico and Daniel Pantaleo took it entirely too far as they immediately recognized Garner and attacked before questioning or before Garner could give signs of resisting arrest. Unarmed Garner’s life was taken at the bare hands of white officer Pantaleo as a result of a chokehold that was recorded by multiple people on the streets of Staten Island. While choking Garner as he tried to “resist arrest” many heard his cry for help as the unarmed man yelled “I can’t breathe!” Instead of being released from the chokehold, Officer Pantaleo and other officers who were at the scene left Garner handcuffed and motionless on the ground without instantly seeking proper medical attention. Before videos were released of the chaos that took place most people had no idea how Garner’s death took place or if the police were the reason behind it.

In most cases it is common that police officers will claim that they used excessive force as a way of controlling a suspect who tried to resist arrest. However, what if the suspect doesn’t show signs of resisting arrest? What is the officer to do? After July 17, 2014 police officers demonstrated that excessive force is used frequently and is fact abused as they result to using it without the suspect showing signs of resisting arrest or having any questionable reasoning.

Works Cited

Baker, Al, J. Goodman, and Benjamin Mueller. “Beyond the Chokehold: The Path to Eric Garner’s Death.” The New York Times. The New York Times, 13 June 2015. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

“Resisting Arrest When Police Use Excessive Force | Nolo.com.” Nolo.com. Web. 10 Nov. 2015.

Giving Addicts Drugs Is Temporary

Vancouver’s new policy in which they supply heroin addicts with their own supply of other drugs is brewing up a whole new batch of controversy. The purpose of doing it is to hopefully alleviate violence in the streets and allow the addicts to no longer have to focus on getting their fix and instead can focus on improving their lives in other ways, such as starting to hold down a job or spend more time with family. But soon after proposing this, a key question always follows. What are the repercussions if this does not go according to plan? Is it possible for this to spin out of control to a degree worse than imaginable?

The core of the potential lies in the fact that the government is actively handing out illegal substances to citizens. This can be abused, quite frankly. The possibility of perhaps selling the obtained drugs becomes a critical concern, and officials warn against this. In reality, the only way something like this would happen is if regulation somehow reaches an all-time low.

Work Cited:

Campbell, Bradley. “Vancouver Combats Heroin by Giving Its Addicts the Best Smack in the World.” Public Radio International. PRI’s The World, 9 Feb. 2015. Web. 03 Nov. 2015.

Its Not America’s Fault For the Fat

When something goes amiss people are quick to point fingers at other people. When people start to gain weight they are always quick to point certain fingers. When other countries started to have their obesity rate skyrocket, America took a blind eye and said “It’s not our fault,” oh but on the contrary it is fully the american cultures fault as to why the obesity rate in other countries have skyrocketed over the years.

People say that American culture has only helped Mexico. That their fast food culture is not the reason for the obesity rate to raise, that it must be something else that is going skew.  Now, within Mexico’s culture, the country has a vibrant food pyramid that they consume on the daily basis and overall a healthy country. Mexico has a rich diet that contains such delicacies that would make one’s mouth water. Some of those are culturally rich food are cabrito ( baby goat), fresh pico de gallo, handmade corn tortillas and freshly mashed guacamole. All of these foods are rich in vitamins so how did these foods make Mexico fat American culture? That is because it didn’t, the introduction of the American fast food culture is what made the obesity rate increase over the years. Before 1994, There was not a free trade zone between North America and Mexico. This means that the fast food chains and their disastrous products were not allowed to be in the country and Mexico was free of the dangerous foods. In 1994 the game changed and the obesity rate started to rise. In 1994 the NAFTA came into place. The NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) is an agreement between United States, Canada, and Mexico that allowed the countries to freely trade and implement their fast food culture, including the dangerous food that came with it, in their way of life. According to the website, rt.com, the NAFTA allowed Mexico to become a “dumping ground for a slew of cheap fast food and carbonated drinks.” As of 2013, Mexico, yearly, drinks 43 gallons of soda per capita annually. With this statistic alone it allows Mexico to be the world’s highest rate of soda consumption. This increase is all american fast food cultures fault. They pushed their destructive products on the people of Mexico. With the increase of the soda consumption it only leads to the introduction to serious health problems. According to the website, when one is diagnosed with obesity it puts them at a increased chance to 20 times for diabetes. Not only does it increase the chance for diabetes, it also opens them up to high blood pressure, heart disease, stroke, and gallstones. All because of American fast food culture wants to increase their yearly revenue.

Some that see that argument will just say “American fast food culture has only affected one area, American fast food culture can’t be blamed for the entire world!” While Mexico is just one example of how American Fast Food culture has poorly affected countries, there are other areas of the world that have been affected, such as Asia or India. According to NCBI, Asia has 60 percent of the worldwide total of people that are diagnosed with diabetes. Before the introduction of fast food, the people of Asia used to be a country the diet of vegetables, whole grains and limited consumption of animal products. They are now shifting towards a diet of fast food, processed meats, highly-processed carbohydrates, and the land being swamped with cola machines. India is a very different story. According to CNBC, “India has a long had a reputation as being unfriendly to foreign businesses, but when it comes to fast food, international chains are being warmly welcomed by a young, upwardly mobile population.” This is meaning that India was once a country that did not let American fast food chains into their land, but now they are letting them in, but starting to see negative side effects. With the increase of fast food chains, the number of people diagnosed with diabetes will increase from 61 million to 101 million. With the increase of diagnosed people this means that the demand for medication in order to survive with the disease will only become more expensive for the people that can afford it. Many people will die due to the fact that they are unable to afford the medicine they need since American fast food culture pushed themselves into other countries.

While many people would ignore the fact that american fast food culture is putting other countries in danger, they will just say “If it’s ruining them and causing obesity, why don’t the people just go out and buy something else? No one is forcing them.” While that is true, no one is forcing them to buy the food, it is the only option that they have. The economy around the world is in the toilet. Regardless of where you go many people are hurting and can not afford to eat healthy food. In Mexico they have the super value menu, comparable to the one in the United States, where in the US one can get a meal for $5. In mexico, according to OECD, the average person only makes about 13,000 USD. This is significantly lower than what the average American makes. This means that they have succumbed to eating fast food due to the fact that their annual wage earnings do not allow them to eat the items that are classified as “healthy”.

Works Cited

Eatocracy Editors. “5@5 – The Truth about Mexican Food.”Http://eatocracy.cnn.com/2011/08/24/55-the-truth-about-mexican-food/. N.p., Aug.-Sept. 2011. Web. 9  Nov. 2015    

“How Excess Weight Affects Your Health.” http://www.helpguide.org/harvard/how-excess-weight-affects-your-health.htm. N.p., n.d. Web. 9 Nov. 2015.

Pan, An, Vasanti Malik, and Frank B. Hu. “Exporting Diabetes to Asia: The Impact of Western-Style Fast Food.” Circulation. U.S. National Library of Medicine, n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“Indians Develop Taste for the Big Mac.” CNBC. N.p., 08 Jan. 2014. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“Mexico.” OECD Better Life Index. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

Control Yourself – Social Trust is Essential to Delay Gratification

In the famous Marshmallow Study conducted in the 1960’s, Professor Walter Mitchel of Stanford University discovered that some children had the ability to delay gratification. They waited to eat a treat (a marshmallow, a pretzel, a candy) in order to obtain a second treat.   Some children gobbled up the treat, either unwilling or unable to display self control when presented with a tasty morsel. Scientists hypothesized that self control traits were inherent, and those with natural self control abilities went on to lead healthier, more successful lives than those children who lacked the ability to self control.   Psychologists and social scientists realized that emotional intelligence and self-control were more important to life success than IQ intelligence. Many people took this to mean that self control is a predetermined trait.

However, a new study by Celeste Kidd of the University of Rochester seems to challenge the assumption that exhibiting self control is a predetermined trait that leads to success. In her study, she found that trust and confidence in the results of waiting to receive the reward plays a significant role in a person’s ability to delay gratification. The children tested were able to make rational decisions on the probability of reward based on trust. Celeste Kidd was able to manipulate the degree of delayed gratification by introducing reliable and unreliable variables to their experiment. Professor Kidd’s study clearly demonstrates that environment has as much impact on the ability to self control as innate ability. Children who had trust in the outcome waited on average four times longer that children put in unreliable situations. There has to be social trust (trust in people delivering future rewards as promised) in order for people to be willing to delay gratification in order to achieve a goal.

Children unlucky enough to be born into poverty, or with absent fathers, have been proven to be less successful in life because they lack the ability to delay gratification. They almost always choose to grab what they can immediately, and not postpone gratification in the hopes of getting more.  This is directly related to their environment and the lack of social trust in the family structure. This lack of self control leads to juvenile delinquency, poor performance in school, and lack of economic opportunities. Simply put, weak cognitive self control plus deviant opportunity equals crime and other negative social outcomes.

A classic definition of weak cognitive self control include impulsiveness, low frustration tolerance, self-centeredness, bullying behavior and risk taking behavior. Studies indicate that when parental discipline, nurturing and monitoring are absent, children are at a greater risk for weak cognitive self control.   It makes sense that parents who exhibit weak self control are those most likely to have children that exhibit weak self control. This is because proper parenting requires extensive effort, patience and consistent structure, not likely to be found in the homeless community. Studies indicate a significant link between low maternal self control and low child self control, as many of these families have absent fathers.

According to a study done by Gottfredson and Hirschi (1990) it was shown that parents or other important adults have a major impact on whether or not a child develops good cognitive self control. The parents set ground rules, provide structure and discipline, teach consequences, and provide adequate socialization for their children. They monitor their offspring and teach right from wrong. When four conditions are present (care, monitor, recognize, and correct) children learn to avoid situations with long term negative consequences. Studies have shown that all four conditions must be present for the child to learn self-control. There is also the contention that self control is stable once the child passes the ages of 8 or 10 years of age. Good children tend to remain good, while those lacking self control continue to be worrisome to parents and teachers, and could lead to juvenile delinquency. This suggests that the window of opportunity to make a difference in a child’s life occurs in early childhood. Any teacher can identify those children at risk. For example, if a child is disruptive in the classroom in second or third grade, he would be identified as a child who requires intervention to learn self control techniques. Parents would be brought into the discussion and taught the four conditions necessary for learning self control (care, monitor, recognize and correct), and work in conjunction with the teacher to establish ground rules to put the child on a positive path.

Children with the least amount of trust (absent fathers, homeless environments) are those that score the lowest in self control and delayed gratification, strengthening my hypothesis that trust and confidence are essential beliefs to be successful. These children had little faith that the adults would deliver on their promises, thus they live in unreliable worlds.

In the article Delaying Gratification Depends on Social Trust, researchers discovered a causal role in social trust in delaying gratification. Simply put, a person has to believe that a future reward will be delivered in return for delaying gratification. If the trust is absent, such as in negative experiences and environments, then the likelihood of self control drops significantly. The fact that the Marshmallow Study demonstrates that delaying gratification at 4 years of age is a predictor of a healthier, more successful future shows the importance of instilling social trust in at risk populations at a young age. Developing social trust that would encourage them to delay gratification in order to achieve a better future.

James Clear’s article 40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely To Succeed supports the hypothesize that delaying gratification occurs when there is trust in the outcome. Children were given treats in both reliable and unreliable environments. If a child had no trust in getting that second treat, they were quick to eat the first treat. In a reliable environment, however, children were more willing to delay gratification to get that second treat. The results of the environment, negative or positive, were almost instantaneous. This proves that delaying gratification can be learned and is influenced by trust and confidence in the outcome.

Works Cited

“40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely to Succeed.” 40 Years of Stanford Research Found That People With This One Quality Are More Likely to Succeed. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“Delaying Gratification Depends on Social Trust.” Frontiers. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

“The Marshmallow Study Revisited.” : Rochester News. N.p., n.d. Web. 09 Nov. 2015.

Having Animals in Captivity Does More Good than Harm

For many years there has been a dispute on whether keeping animals in captivity is ethical. Many researchers claim that animals who are held in captivity are being harmed by their environment. Today the world is facing many changes such as temperature change and rising sea levels. In the bigger picture of the world today, captivity of different types of wild animals does more good than harm.

Some animals that reside in captivity are endangered species. Zoo keepers and researchers who work with these animals devoted to caring for these species so that they don’t die off. In the wild they may not be able to fend for themselves on their own without help. These animals are provided with food to survive and the basic necessities to live. For example different types of birds can’t last well in hurricanes and storms. A such event happened in Puerto Rico in 1989 by Hurricane Hugo wiping a bird population to only thirteen birds. According to 8 Zoos Helping Animals Edge out of Extinction “Today, thanks to the efforts of zoo scientists at the Lincoln Park Zoo in Chicago, captive-bred birds at two aviaries number over 200 — and reintroduction is underway. Some 60 wild and captive-born Puerto Rican parrots now live free.” Without the help of the research at the zoo who took the species in their hands, these birds would no longer exist on the earth today.

Today there are rising sea levels and some animals natural habitats are being cut down, forcing animals to go into environments they are not suited for. According to Zoos through the Lens of the IUCN Red List: A Global Metapopulation Approach to Support  Conservation Breeding Programs , researchers suggest that ” conservation breeding programs (CBPs) may off the only feasible option to avoid the extinction of particular species until appropriate habitat can be found or restored”. During an animals time in captivity, they could be bred to produce more of that species under safe and conditions where there is the basics they need to survive and reproduce.

Although animals behaviors might change in captivity, such as some scientist are concerned, Captivity does more overall good than harm.  The captive animals don’t necessarily need to be put in zoos, they can reside in other places specifically for wild animals to help them safely grow and sustain their population.

Works Cited