Working with Teens in Poor Countries - Essay Example

A person must have the will to do something like going on a mission because it can be daunting to see how another group of people live when the conditions are not the same as ours. According to Reeve (2009) will is the part of the mind that does the thinking, planning and intentions before action is taken. This means to me that we have to acknowledge the place that will have in what we do. I feel that I have a strong will to achieve. I also believe that drive is very important when you are going through any situation. For me, the drive is important as I go through my education because sometimes it seems overwhelming. My drive comes from the fact that I want to see my children grow up and have a fulfilling life. Freud's Drive Theory suggests that we are all motivated to do things in order to satisfy our needs (Reeve, 2009).

The mini-theory that I would apply to my goal is the goal-setting theory. According to this theory, different goals motivate us in different ways and you will approach goals differently depending on what you want. Freud's theory was not scientifically testable and he did not go far enough for factors that related to learning and experience. He also did not understand that drive was more than bodily needs. However, the goal-setting theory expands it to let us know that there is more to life than only what we see. The mini-theory also helps with the will theory because it takes it beyond an understanding that Descartes saw and makes it a more tangible outcome.

Assignment 3
The question that I used was:
You are on a boat that overturns. It contains your 5-year-old and 1-year-old children (of the same sex). The boat sinks and you can save only one. Whom do you choose to save? Circle one:
5-year-old
1-year-old
My friend decided that the person to be saved would be the one-year-old. The explanation that they gave was the fact that the five-year-old had already lived a while and the one-year-old had not. In order to save only one in this tragedy, they would save the most vulnerable which to them was the one-year-old. In a sense, it would be very difficult for anyone to allow one child to die and let another live in a situation like this because the first answer is always, "I would save them both." Some people cannot even fathom not being able to save both children. In understanding this, people who love their children would not be able to save only one child.

The idea of saving the youngest child seemed feasible to me if you could only choose one because children are very precious and it is difficult to think about one dying. But saving the youngest child is plausible because they would be given the chance to live longer, which is logical to many humans.

I would say that the largest way that evolutionary theory promotes these answers is that as humans we are instinctively looking towards the survival of the fittest and we want to maintain the gene pool (Wiener video). In order to do this, we would probably choose the five-year-old over the younger child because we would be preserving both of these ideas. Read More