Sunday, November 22, 2015

Natural Science Knowledge

         
           Natural science is defined as "a branch of science that deals with the physical world, e.g., physics, chemistry, geology, and biology" ("Natural Science"). Although natural science consists of these subjects in the natural world, they also deal with research that involves the human brain activities and the body as well. Researchers often conduct surveys and perform experiments to support their findings in the topics of these natural sciences. Based off of results and patterns they see correlating to their research, they develop multiple theories and ideas that can be best suited for a conclusion. The question is, can these conclusions identify if a person is good or bad? As we discussed in class, a great deal of the time it's difficult to see if a person is black or white solely based off of these findings. In any case, there seems to always be an exception depending on the situation. 

            In the article, "Pathological Lying Revisited," by Dike, Baranoski, and Griffith, the writers discuss the historical evolution on pathological lying and compare it to the "pseudolying" that is found in children. They point out the differences between children who lie and pathological liars by stating that children lie base off of fantasies and a denial to reality, while pathological liars are people who start off that way, but also continue that habit of lying into adulthood. In that case, it is no longer innocent and a way of self-development, but rather a serious condition. 
          In a class presentation by Kevin Glenn, we were able to get a closer look into a specific article regarding natural science in neurology. Researchers in this article, "The Neuropsychological Correlates of Pathological Lying: Evidence from Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia," written by Poletti, Borelli, and Bonuccelli, discussed an experiment they performed on a 57 year old man who deals with pathological lying. Specifically, he told lies about being a computer programmer, when in fact he has no experience dealing with technology at all. Pathological liars uncontrollably and habitually lie without personal gain, and often times are unaware of even doing it. In this man's case, he also wasn't able to recall the lies he tells because his verbal memory was impaired.
        After brain scans and MRI tests, these researchers began to notice that these symptoms dealt with the cognitive function and was caused by a pre-frontal cortex disease. They applied the theory of mind, "the ability to understand and predict other's behavior by attributing independent mental state to them," when evaluating these results. It was later concluded that the man may have behavioral variant frontotemporal dementia (BVFTD), which may be the cause of his habitual pathological lying. Although it is a finding through reliable tests, researchers are not for sure that it is the only factor in the man's behavior. It is merely supporting evidence, but not an underlying conclusion. 
         Given these circumstances, I don't believe the mentally ill man is a bad human being at all. It is not only because his lies are harmless and do no intend self gain, but also because his actions for doing so are completely out of his control and awareness. It's simply not their fault that unfortunately pathological liars have to suffer from a pre-frontal cortex disease and cannot function "normally." In cases like these, I would say it's an exception for the person to have bad actions because the condition makes it inevitable and they don't have the intent on purposefully hurting anyone. This is part of the binary bond that is "grey," rather than automatically labelling a person directly black or white. 




"Journal of the American Academy of Psychiatry and the Law Online."Pathological Lying Revisited. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2015.
"Natural Science" Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com, n.d. Web. 22 Nov. 2015.
"The Neuropsychological Correlates of Pathological Lying: Evidence from."Behavioral Variant Frontotemporal Dementia. N.p., n.d. Web. 08 Dec. 2015.

1 comment:

  1. This post was great! I felt it engaged the reader by the structure of which you set it up, by giving the definition of the Natural Science's, the articles and description of them, and then your belief. While giving the definition was great, you never connected your post to the other knowledge's which would have been helpful by distinguishing the difference among them. Giving the article titles and authors names credited yourself and let me know you used real articles and did not just make something up. The article talking about kids was in the domain of Social Science, but I felt like you incorporated it nicely in with the Natural Science article. Your use of photos enhanced my reading and understanding of the topic you were discussing, pathological liars, but having a video or link to extra information may have enhanced my understanding more by giving me more information or just something to link your discussion to. You showed critical thinking throughout the post by making statements about the findings not giving "underlying conclusions, but just supporting evidence." Great job!

    ReplyDelete