A Day In The Home of Benjamin Franklin

4 Commentsby   |  02.20.11  |  Renaissance/Premodern (Part II)

In the class discussion on Empiricism, Dr. McAnulty made the following statement, “It is the environment you subject people to that determines who they become.”   I have heard this statement said many times, in different forms, but this time in particular struck me.  You can have two people, same race, same age, same gender, same town, who even go to the same school and have similar likes and dislikes, but can grow up to be completely different people because of the families and environments they were raised in.  If a child is raised in an optimistic, curious household, it is very likely that he will grow up to be an optimistic, curious adult; and the same goes for if the child was raised in a negative household.  Empiricism is classically defined as the emergence of an experimental attitude.  Many changes were taking place politically and socially during the time that empiricism was really taking hold of the world.  The American government was still under construction and even though people did not know what they wanted, they knew what they did NOT want.  The constitution was an experiment, and can be identified by one of the best known empirical statements, “all men are created equal.”  I cannot help but wonder in awe at the fact that while most of the people who were the early leaders of this country were very well educated and from good families, they still had no idea what they were doing in building the political foundation of this country.  They were just experimenting with a new way of government and the way they chose to do things, just so happened to be the best way.   How is it that these people, who seemingly knew nothing about running a country, were able to sit there and devise an ingenious plan to go by?  I think part of it has to do with the families they were raised in.  Most of these men came from parents who were well educated and probably very deep thinkers as well.  They probably encouraged their children to think about abstract things, and find new and innovative ways to do things.  They probably taught them a love for education along with a deep sense of right and wrong.  With such a rich environment to grow up in, these kids grew into the people that would lead this country into freedom.  I would like to go back in time to when Benjamin Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, and John Hancock were growing up and just observe the environment they were raised in.  What shaped them into the minds they became?  What events turned them to take the positions they did on certain topics?  I would like a day in the home of any one of these great minds to observe and to take note of what made them the great thinkers they became.

Comment

4 Comments

  1. Lacy Hanson
    7:40 pm, 02.20.11

    I like these ideas a lot. I agree with the idea that your environment shapes who you are, but not to the point where it defines you entirely. Having grown up in somewhat of a downcast situation myself, I would be expected to be a negative and disenfranchised person, yet I’m not. I take life in stride and try to keep a positive outlook on my future. So, the mold can’t be applied to every person in particular, but in general the idea that the environment makes the person is a very valid idea.

  2. Katelyn Marlow
    10:41 pm, 02.20.11

    I have never really paused to think about things in this way, but you have definitely stumbled upon a very interesting thought. Environment plays such a crucial role in determining the outcome of a person, both positively and negatively, and to think about the vast potential of things that these men, as well as many other great idealist and contributors to our world, may have been subjected to and how those things then affected them is beyond intriguing. In a sense, it sort of makes me appreciate the ways in which daily life of individuals is now recorded today through things like “Facebook” and “Twitter” in hopes that the lives of the “great minds” of the future may one day be studied in the way that you have described.

  3. Taeyanna Pannell
    7:09 pm, 02.21.11

    I do not know if I completely agree with that statement because I may be getting this wrong but I personally grew up in an environment that was to say the least not entirely good but I came out of that environment completely different than how I i should have. I mean I guess for the moat part this is true but there is always an exception.

  4. Brady Campbell
    10:14 pm, 02.21.11

    Taeyanna, I think Adrienne’s post is a little assumptive, but essentially correct.
    Surely the parents of said great minds were not all nurturing, it is easily observable that not all children follow in the styles of their parents. However the base point of her post makes so much sense. It is just a little expounding of “nature vs. nurture”. I too would really enjoy observing, and then comparing and contrasting the societies of the most influential historical figures, as well as many non-influential figures for a more complete understanding of the effects of nurture.
    We should totally build a time machine and have a class trip!
    I’m kidding though. As much as I would enjoy the combination of road trip food, historical and psychological revelation, and break-through physics time travel isn’t possible.

Add a Comment

You must be logged in to post a comment.