Spatial reasoning. It doesn’t sound too relevant to humans does it? Rather, it sounds like a feature that a Roomba (the robotic vacuum) has so it doesn’t bump into things around your house. Despite the technical sounding term, spatial reasoning plays a paramount role in everybody’s lives. Our spatial reasoning abilities are believed to be connected to our math and science abilities; however, another belief in regards to spatial reasoning is that men and women’s spatial capacities differ. The fifth essay in the book Why Aren’t There More Women in Science?, entitled “Taking Science Seriously: Straight Thinking About Spatial Sex Differences” by Nora S. Newcombe, analyzes spatial reasoning in a scientific light. Newcombe left me agreeing that more time should be spent on trying to focus on how to improve spatial abilities and that spatial sex differences are not as important as they seem. I believe that it is valuable to develop spatial abilities because it is easily possible to do so and because the improvement can have a significant impact on an individual’s ability to do a variety of spatial tasks such as math, engineering, computer science, and physical science. (http://msutoday.msu.edu/news/2013/spatial-training-boosts-math-skills/) In the context of women, an improvement in the confidence surrounding spatial skills would push more women towards those fields of study.
To begin, the first part of the essay made me look at sex differences in a new light because Newcombe presented the differences in a manner that was different than the other authors. Initially, Newcombe presented older evidence that she believes is incorrect about why sex differences occur. She mentions genes, left and right hemispheres of the brain, sex hormones and the environment in which a person is raised. She concludes that of these theories, sex hormones are the most reasonable culprit for differences in cognition. Her conclusion from the evidence agrees with some of the previous chapters, especially the essay in Chapter 2 by Doreen Kimura. In my opinion, I also thought that out of all the choices, sex hormones was the most plausible choice. I believe this because the other theories can easily be proven wrong using modern science and ways of thinking as mentioned in the essay. Newcombe moves on to the next section of her essay concerning why evolution played a role in why sex differences in cognition exist. She argues that sex differences in cognition occurred due to the way that humans lived long ago. In addition, she theorizes that it is not logical for only one sex to possess a useful trait that does not require any extra metabolic processes. It is extremely valuable to understand this because it shows that the trait has no concrete limit or basis, so it can be changed. After reading this section, it became clear to me that the sex differences that have always been emphasized are not as important as people and the media can make them seem. Although I like what Newcombe has to say and I agree with it, she and I are both assuming that spatial ability actually plays a large role in a person’s ability to do certain types of work. In summation, Newcombe’s theory about evolution in regards to spatial abilities plays an important role in the theory about increasing a person’s capabilities because it shows that they are malleable.
The most important part of Newcombe’s essay is the last section, which is about increasing the spatial abilities of a person using training and practice. Newcombe refers to the Flynn effect, which proves that intelligence has been changing faster than a gene for it could have changed. The Flynn effect is valuable in this context because it is proof to show that intellectual properties can change due to a variety of factors such as technology and the environment. One of the most prevalent examples of changes in mental capacities that I have encountered, and is included in the essay, is summer vacation. I remember as a kid and even now I would feel as if I had lost my ability to do academic tasks if I did not do anything academic over the summer because I would get out of the groove of things and would forget how to do certain things that I had not thought about all summer; however, once school would begin, I would soon revive my abilities and even better them over the years. So Newcombe proves that spatial ability can easily be improved, but now what? The next step, according to Newcombe, is to realize that the increase is actually valuable and that the ability to increase the skill is more important than the sex differences that exist in the first place. Hence, the takeaway from the essay is that spatial abilities can be improved upon without much effort and that sex differences are not as important as they seem.
Lastly, the format and style of this essay varied from the previous four essays in the book. Newcombe presented the information in a different style because she incorporated a substantial amount of the opposing view into her essay in an organized manner unlike the other essays, which often just stated one perspective of the argument. For example, the paragraphs under “Current Evidence on Causation” are a presentation of out-dated evidence for biological causation such as genes, hormones, and environments. After these paragraphs, Newcombe presents the newer, and what she believes is the more correct, information regarding evolution’s role in spatial ability. I thought that this was an effective format to present the ideas about biological causation because it facilitated the understanding on Newcombe’s thought process starting out with genes and eventually leading to her current belief regarding sex hormones and evolution. In addition, Newcombe presented her evidence in an informal manner, creating a stark contrast in my mind between her essay and the previous essay by Spelke and Grace who presented their evidence in a very straightforward and formulaic manner. In conclusion, Newcombe’s essay stands to prove that humans’ spatial abilities can be improved, thus creating a smarter human… a human 2.0.
Be First to Comment