Change does not always have to be chased. In fact, change can happen without purpose or without realization, slipping under one's nose until it is too late, and the change has already happened. Small changes, preferences in music and movies, the way one wears their hair, the mannerisms in which they speak, these can all occur without realizing they have. "The bottom line is, time is a powerful force. It transforms our preferences. It reshapes our values. It alters our personalities. We seem to appreciate this fact, but only in retrospect. Only when we look backwards do we realize how much change happens in a decade" Dan Gilbert, a social psychologist and writer, uses his TedTalk "The Psychology of Your Future Self" as a platform to speak of
…show more content…
This change is clearly not forced, nor begged on by adversities. These were slowly changing, self-made changes resulting eventually in a brand-new personality, and with it another identity. Wick Poetry Prize winner Anna Leahy reveals the reversed perspective of what making opposing choices may lead to in her writing "The Making of a Suburbanite." In her writing, Leahy states that "We remain where we’re supposedly supposed to be, even when we don’t realize we’ve made the choice" (Leahy). Leahy explains that the lack of desire to change, even unnoticeable, leads to a quicksand effect leaving one to remain who they were "supposedly supposed to be." Just as easily change slips by, the time to change passes over until you have spent a lifetime standing exactly where you were born. Though these changes may stop and remain stagnant at times, change never truly …show more content…
Those who argue this concept generally relate it back to the adversities faced in a growing child's household, more specifically the lack of income brought in by their parents. Unable to relate this to my own personal upbringing as I was blessed enough to never rely on each individual paycheck for food, I must turn to sources to help me reach the opposing argument. Researchers recently believe they've found a connection between a lower-income family and an increase of the chance for neurological problems. Ericka Hayasaki, author of Newsweek Global's "This Is Your Brain on Poor," uses her writing to explain how the "the second key study, published in Nature Neuroscience, also in 2015, looked at 1,099 people between ages 3 and 20, and found that children with parents who had lower incomes had reduced brain surface areas in comparison to children from families bringing home $150,000 or more a year" (Hayasaki). Hayasaki carries a strong amount of evidence to her argument, but she fails to catch up with these test subjects to discover exactly how this reduced brain surface impacted these children on more than a learning aspect. No doubt these children are facing the consequences of growing up with this amount of stress, but did they allow these adversities to ruin their lives and forever impact their identity? Oren Cass, a member of the Manhattan Institute who
This change is clearly not forced, nor begged on by adversities. These were slowly changing, self-made changes resulting eventually in a brand-new personality, and with it another identity. Wick Poetry Prize winner Anna Leahy reveals the reversed perspective of what making opposing choices may lead to in her writing "The Making of a Suburbanite." In her writing, Leahy states that "We remain where we’re supposedly supposed to be, even when we don’t realize we’ve made the choice" (Leahy). Leahy explains that the lack of desire to change, even unnoticeable, leads to a quicksand effect leaving one to remain who they were "supposedly supposed to be." Just as easily change slips by, the time to change passes over until you have spent a lifetime standing exactly where you were born. Though these changes may stop and remain stagnant at times, change never truly …show more content…
Those who argue this concept generally relate it back to the adversities faced in a growing child's household, more specifically the lack of income brought in by their parents. Unable to relate this to my own personal upbringing as I was blessed enough to never rely on each individual paycheck for food, I must turn to sources to help me reach the opposing argument. Researchers recently believe they've found a connection between a lower-income family and an increase of the chance for neurological problems. Ericka Hayasaki, author of Newsweek Global's "This Is Your Brain on Poor," uses her writing to explain how the "the second key study, published in Nature Neuroscience, also in 2015, looked at 1,099 people between ages 3 and 20, and found that children with parents who had lower incomes had reduced brain surface areas in comparison to children from families bringing home $150,000 or more a year" (Hayasaki). Hayasaki carries a strong amount of evidence to her argument, but she fails to catch up with these test subjects to discover exactly how this reduced brain surface impacted these children on more than a learning aspect. No doubt these children are facing the consequences of growing up with this amount of stress, but did they allow these adversities to ruin their lives and forever impact their identity? Oren Cass, a member of the Manhattan Institute who