The environment is typically seen as a major factor in influencing how identity is influenced and constructed. However, it is not a major factor, but rather a small portion of the overall factors that influence how people turn out to self-identity themselves. In “Wisdom,” the author, Robert Thurman, discusses the proper ways to find one’s self. Thurman also discusses the mistakes most humans make when attempting to find themselves and how we are influenced solely by our surroundings. In “The Power of Context: Bernie Goetz and the Rise and Fall of New York City Crime” the author, Malcolm Gladwell, discusses and uses examples to demonstrate and explain how the environment, surroundings, and as well as context play a major role in influencing
…show more content…
There is a lack of connection or link between these false theories and the construction of one’s self-identify. These theories do not take into account multiple variables when concluding that the environment is solely responsible for shaping behavior. A notable theory that is commonly associated with the environment and its effect on self-identify is the Broken Windows Theory. Gladwell describes the Broken Windows Theory by stating that “if a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge” (Gladwell 152). If it looks like no one cares or no one is in charge, then this will lead to muggings and other crime. However, there is no connection between the Broken Windows Theory and the construction of one’s self identity. Just because New Yorker’s saw graffiti filling their city, graffiti being the broken windows in this context, that did not necessarily mean that they were going to commit crimes. It was only a very little amount of criminals in New York that decided to commit crime against other New Yorker’s. However, New Yorker’s surrounding may have only played a little role in influencing them to commit these crimes. There is a bigger influence and culprit that caused this change in behavior and …show more content…
Gladwell mentions another experiment from Princeton University in which two Princeton University psychologists were testing two different situations. In one situation the psychologists told the participants that they had to rush to give a talk on the Good Samaritan parable. In another instance, the psychologists told other participants that they had time to spare before they had to give a talk on the same parable. Along the way each participant, regardless if they were in a rush or not, passed a person who required assistance. The result was that of the group who were in a rush “10-percent stopped to help. Of the group who knew they had a few minutes to spare, 63-percent stopped” (Gladwell 161). Initially, it seems that the environment and situation that these contestants were in played a role in deciding whether they stopped or kept going. Although each participant read a Good Samaritan parable, ironically some of these participants still chose to ignore the injured person they passed along the way. These participants felt like they had no time to spare and chose not to stop for the injured man. However, others who had time to stop, chose to stop. It was the participant’s personal choice that influence how they acted and in no way did the environment play a factor in their decision. Each participant who passed by could have chosen to stop and
There is a lack of connection or link between these false theories and the construction of one’s self-identify. These theories do not take into account multiple variables when concluding that the environment is solely responsible for shaping behavior. A notable theory that is commonly associated with the environment and its effect on self-identify is the Broken Windows Theory. Gladwell describes the Broken Windows Theory by stating that “if a window is broken and left unrepaired, people walking by will conclude that no one cares and no one is in charge” (Gladwell 152). If it looks like no one cares or no one is in charge, then this will lead to muggings and other crime. However, there is no connection between the Broken Windows Theory and the construction of one’s self identity. Just because New Yorker’s saw graffiti filling their city, graffiti being the broken windows in this context, that did not necessarily mean that they were going to commit crimes. It was only a very little amount of criminals in New York that decided to commit crime against other New Yorker’s. However, New Yorker’s surrounding may have only played a little role in influencing them to commit these crimes. There is a bigger influence and culprit that caused this change in behavior and …show more content…
Gladwell mentions another experiment from Princeton University in which two Princeton University psychologists were testing two different situations. In one situation the psychologists told the participants that they had to rush to give a talk on the Good Samaritan parable. In another instance, the psychologists told other participants that they had time to spare before they had to give a talk on the same parable. Along the way each participant, regardless if they were in a rush or not, passed a person who required assistance. The result was that of the group who were in a rush “10-percent stopped to help. Of the group who knew they had a few minutes to spare, 63-percent stopped” (Gladwell 161). Initially, it seems that the environment and situation that these contestants were in played a role in deciding whether they stopped or kept going. Although each participant read a Good Samaritan parable, ironically some of these participants still chose to ignore the injured person they passed along the way. These participants felt like they had no time to spare and chose not to stop for the injured man. However, others who had time to stop, chose to stop. It was the participant’s personal choice that influence how they acted and in no way did the environment play a factor in their decision. Each participant who passed by could have chosen to stop and