Hi, I'm Zack Gilbert

I’ve had a knot in my stomach for the last 24hours or so. Today, I left Rochester to travel Europe for four weeks with my friend Erin. I’m currently on a train heading to NYC, draining my iphone battery. I’ve already done about two hours of work, and just about to arrive in Syracuse.

All in all, I’m extremely excited about this trip. So much possibility. This trip is a much needed retreat and, I guess you could say escape, but I feel like that doesn’t have the right connotation.

Anyways. While I probably won’t be able to keep up with all the tumbles, I plan to make this my primary place for documenting my travels. As long as I can find wifi, I should be able to post as many pictures and updates as I can. Hopefully youll be able to share in what i hope to be a truly amazing and reinvigorating experience for me. If not, then at the least, I should have some good stories to share when I return.

I guess that’s all I wanted to say for now. Should probably start preserving battery life. I think jailbreaking my phone isn’t helping on that front any. So alvetazain (or how ever its spelled).

that voice ... nature vs nurture

lauriebreaker:

disclaimer:
any sweeping generalizations and/or stereotypes are by no means meant to be offensive to any parties. ideas expressed below are prompted by comments made by others, and then my thoughts concerning those thoughts. please comment if i’ve offended you, and especially if you have anything to back or correct my musings. i’m not claiming to be right or wrong about any of this, just organizing thoughts and fishing for feedback.

||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||

someone i know quite often brings up the question of if someone they encounter is gay, solely based on the way he talks/intonations etc. she refers to it as “that voice” and says that somewhat nasally. from here forward, this will be reffered to as “that voice”.

the way that she mentions this makes it seem that she thinks that SINCE his manner of speaking is in a certain way, that that is contributing to his orientation.

i feel there are 2 instances of “that voice”

first - its your voice, its always been your voice, and it doesn’t really mean anything.

and the second - the acquired version of this, which often develops over time as a result of a conscious decision.
to me it seems that speaking in “that voice” can be a subcultural assimilation. something that you either make a choice to use or are surrounded enough by that it is picked up.
i know for a fact that i pick up vocabulary, colloquiallisms, and speech patterns from those that i am around. some are conscious [hearing a new word and making it a point to infiltrate my every day conversation with it] and some just happen through repition.
one of my professors @ RIT, Linda Shenk [absolutely fantastic by the way] who i had for a shakespeare comedies/histories class, taught a theory/strategy for evaluating character relationships.
the simplified version went something like :

you can gauge characters connection through their shared language — similar/exact phrases they both use, and if they mean the same thing when they use them. also this connection can evolve. etc.

////

i think thats all i’m thinking at the moment on this, just wanted to put it in writing….

My belief is that, like most things, it’s a little bit of both. Both biological (nature — you have your vocal organs and their physical capabilities that are the result of your genetic makeup) and developmental (nurture — you learn to speak a certain way as a child and continue to change and refine it throughout your life… possibly changing your vocal organs and their physical capabilities) factors play a role, but I have to learn heavier on nurture for this one. Whether consciously or not, “the voice” has become an identifier/identity for so many. It has become a staple, it you will, of a portion of a community.

And please don’t mistake this as an assumption that choice is/was definitively somehow involved.

inverse proportion of education vs. reproductive success

lauriebreaker:

zackgilbert:

lauriebreaker:

Shortened for space…

////////////////

‘since education is so widespread and more people are getting bachelors & masters than previous [quantity wise], shouldn’t the population as a whole be getting smarter // the less intelligent parts of society should be cancelling themselves out?’

Ah. So your focus is more of the ‘success’ aspect. Totally. Shortly after we reach puberty, our bodies are at their peak reproductive levels. Late teens through twenties are when, I would imagine, we are at our most fertile. And of course, the lack of sex education, no wonders we have such a high teen pregnancy rate. There is totally a correlation between lack of education in that sense, but also with what you were talking about with med students. Of course they don’t have the time to have children. Or the money. And are smart enough to know that having a child, wouldn’t further their chances of succeeding in accomplishing their goals. And how long does it take for some in the medical field (or any college graduate now-a-days), who has thousands of dollars worth of debt, to become financial capable of raising a child to the standards that they have set? Not until they are probably well into their thirties. So that means, 1. less offspring and 2. less chances of successful/healthy offspring, due to the mother being past her reproductive prime (tick… tick… tick…).

///

which brings forward an interesting shift in societal ideals… parents want their children to be successful.. in the primative sense, to further carry their genes to the future, but in more modern times doesn’t it seem that any mother would be absolutely tickled pink to have her son become a doctor?

and just goals in general - goals for oneself seem to be at the forefront of generations… personal achievement. noticed on the news last night about bush’s daughter’s wedding, her not wanting it at the white house… she had that choice. another white house daughter was interviewed, who had had her wedding/reception @ the white house, and really had no say in the matter at the time [ maybe 30 yrs ago? don’t remember who it was precisely] so much choice is give to /expected from individuals in modern times…

I feel like what you brought up about the white house wedding is more of a social stigma thing that results from not wanting to be handed everything. The desire (for some) to be responsible for their own merits. While a wedding at the white house might sound like a great opportunity, it’s probably not what bush’s daughter wants. To be that spoiled rich kid who was lucky enough to get married while her dad was president.

What I think is the bigger issue, and this is getting back to the quote that spawned your original post, is that we have a flawed educational system. It leaves a great number of people behind, and thus creates a great gap between the educated and the uneducated. So while we should be advancing as a society and becoming more intelligent (and in many ways we are), we will always be dragged down by those at the bottom (who are more likely to be fruitful and multiple). We need to fix the education system so that we raise the lower bar. In many ways, we have, but to the more educated, I’m sure it doesn’t feel like that many time.

inverse proportion of education vs. reproductive success

lauriebreaker:

Shortened for space…

////////////////

i think the initial side to things that got me on this concept was a mention of something like :

‘since education is so widespread and more people are getting bachelors & masters than previous [quantity wise], shouldn’t the population as a whole be getting smarter // the less intelligent parts of society should be cancelling themselves out?’

but no, because of a lot of the things you mentioned above, and also the fact that .. say you’re going to med school. good chance you’re not popping out 3 kids while in med school.. you’re waiting til after that. which starting later = less overall offspring, where as others your age started having kids 10 or so years earlier, and so their kids will be having kids sooner as well… something on that.

Ah. So your focus is more of the ‘success’ aspect. Totally. Shortly after we reach puberty, our bodies are at their peak reproductive levels. Late teens through twenties are when, I would imagine, we are at our most fertile. And of course, the lack of sex education, no wonders we have such a high teen pregnancy rate. There is totally a correlation between lack of education in that sense, but also with what you were talking about with med students. Of course they don’t have the time to have children. Or the money. And are smart enough to know that having a child, wouldn’t further their chances of succeeding in accomplishing their goals. And how long does it take for some in the medical field (or any college graduate now-a-days), who has thousands of dollars worth of debt, to become financial capable of raising a child to the standards that they have set? Not until they are probably well into their thirties. So that means, 1. less offspring and 2. less chances of successful/healthy offspring, due to the mother being past her reproductive prime (tick… tick… tick…).

inverse proportion of education vs. reproductive success

lauriebreaker:

think about it.

trying to locate article /discussion / book that i’ve read about this.

[zack?]

Um. Off the top of my head…. Idiocracy? Green Birthcontrol:

“Of course the biggest ecological impact resulting from sex is a baby. Human population is arguably the most threatening force on Earth, and with human population expected to reach 8.3 billion by 2030, reproducing is perhaps the largest impact any of us have.

I’m sure I’ve read tons of books about it as well, just can’t think of specifics.

The educated typically understand the consequences of bringing another child into this world and are more likely to rationally decide not to. Or are responsible enough that the chances for an unplanned pregnancy drops dramatically. They also have more things in their life (work, travel, hobbies) that keep them too busy.

You could also get into an argument about religion playing a role as well. Especially ones like Catholicism, which does not allow the use of contraception. The more educated, the greater chance you have for a person being atheist or agnostic, and thus allowing for a greater chance that contraception will be used.

And don’t even get me started on sex education in middle and high school.

So yes, there is support for an inverse proportion of education vs. reproductive success. How else do you think Bush got elected twice? Zing!

Update: There’s a great section in Daniel Gilbert’s “Stumbling on Happiness” that talks about what he calls “super-replicators”. It essentially deals with natural selection of memes or actions. Religion and reproduction are probably the two best examples. It just reminds me how programmed girls are from such an early age (dolls) that their main (not sole) purpose in life is to be mothers. This whole biological clock phenomenon causes mass hysteria and forces the majority of our women to have kids. While this is a good thing in the ultimate survival of our species, I sense the more educated are able to break away from the pre-pubescent brainwashing. And then they don’t reproduce and their ideas and believes and values die with them, leaving those who did reproduce spawning the next generation, who are most likely a carbon copy of themselves and their lives.