Sapolsky Testosterone Rules Analysis
Robert M.Sapolsky. Testosterone Rules. pages 9-14.
In Testosterone Rules, Sapolsky has pushed the analysis of both genders and put in question, why do these genders act the way they do? Specifically, Sapolsky analyzed crime rates and concluded that amongst the human population, males commit more than 50 percent of the violence. Sapolsky reviewed factors as to why males may be more aggressive than females, with emphasis that testosterone (hypothalamus signals for this hormone to be secreted into the body via blood circulation when anger is detected) is the big factor at play. At the end of this article, Sapolsky proved that it cannot be proven that males are more aggressive than females due to higher testosterone levels; but science can prove …show more content…
nurture debate has been lingering in history for a very long time. Some may agree that nature is more influential than nurture and vice versa. In this case, Sapolsky conveyed his readers that the environment greatly impacts how one would behave. Sapolsky stated that “Subsequent behavioural differences drive the hormonal changes, rather than the other way around.” (pg 11). Although biological factors do come into play regarding the positive correlation between aggression and testosterone, “hormones regulate behaviour, not the other way around.” (pg 12). Sapolsky made it adamant that if one is immersed in a negative environment filled with violence and aggressive behaviour, most likely, the person/people will follow suit and act the way that environment considers ‘socially acceptable’ – in an aggressive and violent nature. The theory that males are more dominant in the mammalian world is false. Sapolsky compared the different behaviours between male and female …show more content…
Sapolsky reached the conclusion that high testosterone levels in men do not correlate to high violence rates but rather that biological and behaviour factors come into greater play than the simple explaination that ‘boys will be boys’ and ‘boys are more violent than girls because they have more testosterone’. Sapolsky explained his theory using nature vs nurture. Nature was proven with reports about genetic makeup and how genes do not choose how much of testosterone is secreted based on gender (hypothalamus signals this action) or that the brain cannot detect a slightly greater influx of testosterone which proves that this hormone is not to be solely blamed for aggression and high rates of violence. Nurture was proven by the hyena experiment, that hyena’s learn their true roles when in their natural social system. This experiment proved that mammals are effected by the environment they are immersed in and will act according to the social system to feel ‘normal’. All in all, Robert. M Sapolsky conveyed and defended his theory very well in this article.
My final thoughts? I believe this article, Testosterone Rules by Robert M. Sapolsky is a very interesting article and informative. This article has convinced me that high testosterone levels in males and high violence rates do not correlate and that other factors such as biological and the environment affects one’s testosterone levels no matter which
In Testosterone Rules, Sapolsky has pushed the analysis of both genders and put in question, why do these genders act the way they do? Specifically, Sapolsky analyzed crime rates and concluded that amongst the human population, males commit more than 50 percent of the violence. Sapolsky reviewed factors as to why males may be more aggressive than females, with emphasis that testosterone (hypothalamus signals for this hormone to be secreted into the body via blood circulation when anger is detected) is the big factor at play. At the end of this article, Sapolsky proved that it cannot be proven that males are more aggressive than females due to higher testosterone levels; but science can prove …show more content…
nurture debate has been lingering in history for a very long time. Some may agree that nature is more influential than nurture and vice versa. In this case, Sapolsky conveyed his readers that the environment greatly impacts how one would behave. Sapolsky stated that “Subsequent behavioural differences drive the hormonal changes, rather than the other way around.” (pg 11). Although biological factors do come into play regarding the positive correlation between aggression and testosterone, “hormones regulate behaviour, not the other way around.” (pg 12). Sapolsky made it adamant that if one is immersed in a negative environment filled with violence and aggressive behaviour, most likely, the person/people will follow suit and act the way that environment considers ‘socially acceptable’ – in an aggressive and violent nature. The theory that males are more dominant in the mammalian world is false. Sapolsky compared the different behaviours between male and female …show more content…
Sapolsky reached the conclusion that high testosterone levels in men do not correlate to high violence rates but rather that biological and behaviour factors come into greater play than the simple explaination that ‘boys will be boys’ and ‘boys are more violent than girls because they have more testosterone’. Sapolsky explained his theory using nature vs nurture. Nature was proven with reports about genetic makeup and how genes do not choose how much of testosterone is secreted based on gender (hypothalamus signals this action) or that the brain cannot detect a slightly greater influx of testosterone which proves that this hormone is not to be solely blamed for aggression and high rates of violence. Nurture was proven by the hyena experiment, that hyena’s learn their true roles when in their natural social system. This experiment proved that mammals are effected by the environment they are immersed in and will act according to the social system to feel ‘normal’. All in all, Robert. M Sapolsky conveyed and defended his theory very well in this article.
My final thoughts? I believe this article, Testosterone Rules by Robert M. Sapolsky is a very interesting article and informative. This article has convinced me that high testosterone levels in males and high violence rates do not correlate and that other factors such as biological and the environment affects one’s testosterone levels no matter which