Discussion about result
This is the section in which you make your own argument regarding this question. Ideally, you are not simply agreeing with one of the specific positions taken in the section above. Instead, the better way to take ownership of your work is to create a kind of hybrid position, in which you take pieces of the different positions you discussed in your literature review to craft a new way of thinking about answering the question or solving the problem.
This section will be referring back to evidence and ideas from the results section, but you will not be simply repeating the same information. The idea of the discussion section is that you are now placing the information in a new context, in the context of a position that you are staking out and persuading your reader to accept. You may find that you use evidence that was used to support different ideas than the one you are proposing. You may find that you use evidence from two different sources to support one of your claims. You should expect to refer to each of your sources in some way.
It is also likely that in this section you will refute ideas you presented in the results section. Indeed, a good report will have considered multiple perspectives in the results section and will need to explain why you have decided to reject some of those perspectives.
This section may also engage in what is called “refuting objections.” That is, you should state what objections might be raised regarding your proposed solution or answer to this problem or question. Spend some time on this and be thoughtful and fair – doing this increases your own credibility by showing that you are knowledgeable about the ideas of others and that you are unbiased. Then explain why you feel that these objections are not enough to discredit your argument.
Although it is important to anticipate objections and respond to them, it isn’t necessary to pretend that the argument you are making is a perfect and complete response to this question. If there are flaws in the position you are supporting, be sure to note them. You can either explain why those flaws are less important than they may seem, or you can choose to explain what further work would need to be done in order to find a solution to those flaws.
Keep in mind that the discussion is intended to persuade your specific audience. Think about the values that your audience has, and work toward connecting your argument to those values.
The discussion section is usually about a third of the length of the overall paper. I wouldn’t expect it to be less than two full pages long.
The different between Men’s and Women’s Brain
Stuart Ritchie who is a writer of “Intelligence: All That Matters” book has indicated the difference between the men’s and women’s brain. He found various sex-specific designs, but generally more resemblances than dissimilarities. For many years’ scientists have observed that usually, men’s brain seems to possess slightly bigger total brain volume compared to women’s one, even when adjusted for men’s bigger usual body size. In his book, he analyzed the amounts of more than 50 regions within the brain, and the cerebral cortex thickness as well as the brain’s crinkly outer layer. This research found that females appeared to have considerably thicker cortices compared to men, whereas men were found to have more significant brain volumes than women in all subcortical area the research examined. Higher scores on some cognitive and overall intelligence have been associated with thicker cortices.
Despite this study’s consistent sex-related patterns, the team again discovered considerable overlap between female and male in cortical thickness and brain volume, just as it can be found in height. This means that primarily through observing a person’s brain image, or stature, pulled casually from the research; it could be hard for scientists to state if it belongs to a male or a female. This is a suggestion that men’s and women’s brains are more similar than they differ. The research’s absolute size makes the results substantial. Bigger sizes in men and higher cortical thickness in women fits with results from the earlier study. Menopause is one aspect that future studies must address. Kenneth S. Saladin who is biologist and biology professor. He has written many books about human anatomy, one of his famous book that indicates many research regarding the human body is “Human Anatomy.” According to his article in Human Anatomy book, there is a number of the women in the study were at menopause, and hormonal variations are depicted to impact structures of the brain. That might have contributed to gender disparities noted in the research (Saladin, pg. 34). The contentious and the yet unanswered problem is if these designs mean something to cleverness and conduct.
Another study by Allan Pease who is a body language expert and author of “ Why Men Don’t Listen, and Women Can’t Read Maps.” Pease has found out that there is not much in the manner of male and female brain difference. Some characteristics are more prevalent in men’s brains and characteristics that are more prevalent in women’s brains. However, people’s brains seem to have a highly personal mix of such features. Whereas hardly any person has anything like the complete set of typically male or female characteristics, the interesting issue is that by no way everyone with a unique collection of male end aspects is male, and vice versa. This research confirms something that feminists always argue; that greater victimization favors males no more than it prefers females. However, it is also terrible to think of all men who continue to be conscripted into battles because they are men, or because they believe it is their responsibility. This research reveals why the feminism notion of intersectionality is so significant. The authors help people to focus on the difference rather than the similarity. Women’s brains, experiences and their environments are as broad as humanity. Just like a prejudiced man can harm a weak man, an influential woman can also hurt a defenseless woman. The conclusions of this study are convincing, men and women brains are similar, but persons differ (Pease, pg. 56).
Another study done by Virginia Hughes in 2014 stated that special wiring in the mind clarifies various expertise sets in males and females. After conducting a scan on a significant number of participants, the scientists reported that men possess stronger connections in a given hemisphere. On the other hand, the study revealed that females possess stronger links between both. This is sensible, they guessed, since similar side links are liable for performing activities like reading maps, where men surpass. While the cross-brain connections motivate the multitasking and societal tasks that are most frequently related to females. Defective guesses and possible errors damage the research’s proof that males come from Mars and women from Venus. Worse still, such issues as this defect just on all studies which claim to depict a hardwired explanation for the difference in men and women behaviors. For several decades, researchers published many papers and articles on sex disparities in the brains of human beings. A number of the physical inequalities are genuine, but in most times, these differences are not meaningful. For instance, taking an easily measurable specific: size. An individual research recorded men’s and women brains volumes from 1,050 to 1,496 and 970 to 1,393 cubic centimeters, respectively. The overlap concludes that it was possible to tell the gender at random brain from its size. Again, some supposed psychological disparities between the genders are as illusory as the physical ones. Therefore, if we analyze data from researches of apparent sex disparities in characteristics like aggression, ethical reasoning, math and social capability, then the results are apparent, that; almost two-thirds of the features will show only a minor or negligible disparity between males and females.
Saladin, Kenneth S. Human Anatomy. Charlesbourg, Québec: Braille JymicoInc, 2005. Print.
Pease, Allan A. B. Why Men Don’t Listen, and Women Can’t Read Maps. , 2017. Print.
Stanley, Melissa, and George Andrykovitch. Living: An Introduction to Biology. Reading, Mass. <, etc.: Addison-Wesley, 1984. Print.