Rachel+Baxter-Green+RP+Post+5

So far in my research, I have explored multiple different viewpoints on human exploration, and I have found that almost all of them have a positive opinion on what humanity has explored so far, and what we have yet to explore. Every source that I have consulted thus far has exuded the notion that exploration is natural for humanity. The poems that I have read have gone even farther and insinuated that exploration is a desire, a source of joy. The Old Astronomer is the only one out of all of them that introduces the notion that some people may not like what explorers and innovators are doing, but it mentions them in the context of telling the reader to ignore those people and their negativity. The Old Astronomer is also the only source that I've looked at so far that says that people should explore, not just that they do explore. On the flip side, Sea Fever is a poem about how it feels to explore; it does not talk of the connotations of exploring, or of the possible causes of the desire to explore, but rather the desire itself. These two poems are valuable for gaining emotional context for my topic, but they do not provide the hard, fact-based evidence that I think is necessary to prove my point. Of my non-fiction sources, the most helpful to getting an answer to my question is Restless Genes, a National Geographic article that explores a possible genetic cause for the desire to explore.