- Ryan Alexander
- Philadelphia, PA
- United States
This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »
Do humans have a "Human Nature" or are our behaviors motivated by our cultural backgrounds?
I have this conversation with thinkers all the time. In my opinion any beginning philosopher must identify their idea of human nature before they can move forward with their idea's about the world or about an ideal world.
Some individuals that I have talked to though have brought up the point of nature versus nurture. That possible fact that the ideas of the west that humans need instant gratification, are greedy and selfish may only apply to societies that allow this ideology to flourish and prosper.
So, I guess the real question is...is human behavior motivated by a universal "human nature" or is human behavior learned through culture? Are we really all that different?
I personally don't believe so.
Steve C
It takes a lot of training to get a soldier to become "efficient" at killing. In most early wars (up until the 1900's, I think), MOST "soldiers" were shooting just to make noise & follow-orders to "fire" - but were missing on purpose, or just reloading for others.
It's a comforting thought that it's that difficult! (You would think that with all the violence on television & in the movie-theaters {on-screen & off, now} that it would be just part of our violent nature; but maybe those medias are only part of our "training.")
Are we spending more time interactively learning human nature from interacting naturally, or are we spending more time learning from (about to be interactive) artificial cultural medias?
We philosophize - then philosophize on those philosophies, (Stan Tenen speaks of this); to introspect & search for truth & meaning to find strength & expose weakness; to grow in all ways.
I heard long ago that humans were the only species to use a tool; which was wrong. Then I heard that humans were the only species to use a tool to make a tool. That'll probably be wrong too. I've heard stories of elk taking turns running & sliding on ice for fun, heard dogs laughing, I've been harangued from afar by a crow. I've seen pictures of elephants painting and dogs building crude little teepee shells with twigs.
I wouldn't even say it's "human nature" to "think," as was it luck that we began to cook our food, thus lessening the forces on our mandibles & allowing the skull greater flexibility & possibile growth of the forebrain?
One brain researcher said that after his 25 years of research, he could do no better at eliciting emotion in a person than he could with a simple song. Music is central to every human culture.
Eldon Taylor has some interesing things to say about free will & consciousness, (though I'm not sure which di
Racheal Hill
Nicholas Lukowiak 50+
Both. We are a blank slate with little bits of variations in physiology (but, basically all the same baby), until we are grown within cultures and societies.
So, I guess the real question is...is human behavior motivated by a universal "human nature" or is human behavior learned through culture?**
Universal human nature... What do all humans share? Well; emotions, intuitions, cognitive abilities, attachments, anxiety, optimism.... Yeah, there is a basic format to the human psyche... But, just because we are all alike doesn't motivate any action or awareness of finding a common nature -unless- the education nurtures that critical analysis.
But, a good question then; what is being human?
Being morally sound to other humans? Having certain marks of the mental?
Well, this criteria does not exist necessarily in nature; 1. since our basic format is created for evolving to survive. 2. because it is up to language and culture in order to create these questions! Rather this criteria must be manifested by consensus of what is in our nature.
For me; human nature is no different than any other mammal... Example being our anthropocentric attitudes - "we are the dominating force of the universe" mentality that is innate, is no different than any other animal believing they are the best! This is necessary for survival in order to push through hardships and natural struggles... What would you do to eat if you were starving - dying? Is that answer apart of this?
Are we really all that different?**
Well depending on your circumstance of random chance; global position, age, educations, religion, belief systems, natural intelligence/personality type, monetary status, neural misfiring(s), symmetrical body or not.... Yes, we all are very different until we decide to find common ground. In the macro-scheme of things? One species, one nature? Are we different? Perhaps, but mainly, no
Random Chance 30+
I agree that our "nature" as it were, is not to be constrained by our nature and that we have at our disposal many, many responses to any kind of situation that comes into our lives.
That means we are not being dictated to by "nature".
It would also mean that most, if not all, of our behaviors, that are mistakenly labeled as our "human nature" are learned, well or not so well, and come from experience, if not simple education, that may in fact be wrong itself, erroneous or outright manipulative.
What we see, I believe and agree, is a perversion of our wonderful, peaceful, loving nature, because so many, too many, are not getting their needs met. Anyone would act differently but also would act in ways that are not our nature.
If we have a nature, we see it when tsunami's hit. We are it when earthquakes and other kinds of natural catastrophes occur. The other ways we act and behave, that many want to, even wish, is our "human nature" are false, that is, those of war, deceit, manipulation and so forth.
If we have a nature it is to survive. I think or believe it is extremely dangerous, damaging and deceitful to continue to spread a belief that what has occurred for so long and so regularly, is our human nature. I believe it just as much as I believe it is dangerous, damaging and deceitful to keep alive the belief that those who forget the past or forget history, are condemned to repeat it.
Indeed, you cannot repeat what you cannot remember, so it is those who remember the past who are condemned to repeating it and that has been proved time and again, for all time.
As was once said, "experience is of supreme value in life. Good judgment comes from experience. Experience comes from bad judgment.
But still we haven't learned because all we have been taught, all we have learned, are lies.
Debra Smith 200+
the concept of nurture is not as well validated in the literature as we might expect. The fundamental wiring of the brain appears to predict far more of our lives and actions than the nature/nurture debate suggests. We can see the basic commonalities and differences by remembering the achronim OCEAN. On a scale of one to ten ask yourself to rate your own or another's : Openness to experience, Conscientiousness, Extraversion/Intorversion, Agreeableness, and Neutocisim. It appears that we all have these fundamental characteristics in varying degrees and they form the foundation of our interactions with the world. There are other qualities, of course, these are the most reliable. Add culture on top as a guiding prinipal which directs such impulses into what is acceptable in our society..
Obey No1kinobe 50+
Rob Clark
Gord G 30+
jing du
Barry Palmer 50+
Of course, science still has a great deal of work to do in this area.
"So, I guess the real question is...is human behavior motivated by a universal "human nature" or is human behavior learned through culture? Are we really all that different?"
Human behavior is motivated by human nature and by culture.
I am really very different from a suicide bomber. I am really very different from a pederast. I am really very different from a saint.
george lockwood 30+
we might go to general semantics or phenomonology or who knows what.
Reese Grein
Our life experiences can influence our behaviors but at the same time each person reacts differently to the same experience. The book 'The Battle Hymn of the Tiger Mother', is about how different parenting is needed for different children. We are all different. We all do different things with our nature and nurture to create a unique person.
Lance Shive
John Dunbar 10+
Random Chance 30+
We all have capabilities but I wouldn't call some of them a dark side. Compassion is another response we may choose depending upon the situation, meaning the environment, and our assessment of it.
As you say, "depending upon upbringing and experiences.....etc." shows to me anyway, that you believe it isn't human nature since you list ways that affect how one responds.
As someone once said, "our nature, if there is one, is not to be constrained by our nature" and we live and function in the most diverse ways imaginable. More so than any other species. I don't see how a "nature' could be the same for all, in that respect.
And yes, how did you know my brain was plastic? I couldn't afford the more expensive one.
John Dunbar 10+
The role of environment may play a larger role than that of a human nature. However we all have human brains and human brains share the amygdala and limbic systems which evoke certain emotional responses. These responses can and are conditioned, but based on environmental and biological truths we all share. We need to feed or we die, we need to drink or we die. I think this can be classified as inherent due to evolution and seemingly mammalian traits.
Yes, i know, the titanium brain seems to still be reserved for the trust fund fellows, what shame.
Mark Meijer 100+
Jacob Murray
Juan Camilo Tovar Castro 10+
Dina McCausley
The drive to survive, to have basic needs met, to defecate, to sleep ~ those are basic, innate parts of the nature of the human animal. We would be able to go on living without language or hearing or any outside influence as long as those natural, instinctual needs were met.
I think we can see the argument of 'nature vs. nuture' really coming into effect in distinctive personality traits. Some would be considered 'nature' ~ natural, innate qualities ~ and some 'nurture', or learned behaviors, like those attributed to an entitled child/adult (whining to get ones way, for example).
There also really is no accounting for things like chemical imbalances, cognitive disturbances, narcissism, personality disorders, etc. Humans are far too intricate to really pigeonhole behaviors into a this or that ideology.
In general I think humans are innately self-for-self at the onset, and depending on what they are programmed with, they can become self-for-others ~ it's the 'nurture' or lack thereof, that triggers perspective and behavioral changes....and positive nurturing doesn't always lead to positive behaviors.
Lance Shive
To sum up what I am trying to say is that people take in information and believe they have enough information to take action or make a judgement upon something. They don't. There is a starting point for knowledge and our bodies have five methods of collecting information from the outside world. If not enough information is gained about something, that person shouldn't act if they don't have to act. The people who believe they do need to act and call the bad judgement they make a learning experience need to look behind them at the damages they left. Other people like them will only leave more damage.
Ryan Alexander
That gaining and sharing information has been and always will be the sole reason that humans do anything?
Do you believe that human beings could survive on their acquisition of information alone?
Do you disregard the information given to you with prior comments that human nature is to do what is in your own self interest, that we are self-absorbed beings ect.?
Tell me more about what you think about these questions and your theory itself.
Ed Schulte 50+
always were, always will BE.
As far a the "Human" aspect of this "BE-ness" is concerned.......
Only a small fraction of this ray of BE-ing passes through the HUman Archetype and become the temporary "form" and takes on a personality "form"/ behaviour ...iow ..that which is so often "called" Human Nature.
If not astutely Observed by Higher (permanent) Self and controlled the aspect of Human mind so often named "ego" can take control and project out personal-cultural-National elementals to give itself a false sense of security. If this is not observed and controlled, The Ego can even convince its host that these “projections” ARE the TRUE and ONLY important aspect of BE-ing itself. Then that HUman "nature" is called "Human-personal-cultural-National- neurosis” .
jing du
robert hensley
jing du
robert hensley
Even apes and monkeys develop a cultural sense of right and wrong, and in order to be accepted into their culture they have to abide by this (different packs have different cultures). The ones that abide are seen as more attractive and get more opportunity to propagate their genes (this also happens with humans, as you noted). Distinctly, humans form more complex “ideals” which may or may not override their more primitive behaviors, and make mating more than just a right from opportunity. These ideals are often tied to culture :-)
My interpretation of the subject presented is: Do humans have inherent behavioral habits (often called "human nature"), which may or may not be distinct to humans. Or, do humans learn all of their behavioral habits through cultures that have developed over time?
Both: We develop some routine behaviors though our cultures, but there are also behaviors that we do naturally. There are so many of us that, through breading, we have developed a broad and mixed variety of natural behaviors. Take aggression for example: Just like other animals there are humans that have (naturally) more and less active areas of the brain that stimulate and inhibit aggression.
Human children also have a long period of brain development which requires longer periods of care and nurturing from their parents. This long period allows parents and cultures to influence, mold, and teach greater control over these natural behaviors as the brain develops. Humans are very fortunate to develop this way, because it allows us to more easily become more than just our genes.
robert hensley
Among other things, this allows us to have larger functional societies, because through this process (and others -- some of which are shared with other animals) we can shape our behaviors more.
jing du
Clint Anderson
Ryan Alexander
This conversation usually comes up when I'm talking to a person that extremely liberal more likely than not a socialist. My argument stems from Hobbes idea of human nature that we need to build incentives to make people work and produce in society based off the idea that we are self-absorbed. (through living in life I think we can see how true this is)
Where as some socialists would say that this idea of human nature is untrue and that it is a redefinition of culture that we need to allow a form of government to prosper. (And once again what is this "redefinition" they speak of? I made my own assumptions)
My peers whom I talk to about this bring up eastern societies who they claim are more open to communist/socialist governments. Their argument is that the western societies have a self fulfilling prophecy that they should be greedy and selfish. So, they are. This is the argument they present. So, I'll leave it at that.
Clint Anderson
Ryan Alexander
Anyways, lol
I agree, that being other centered would create a richer society and that it definitely would make society as a whole better. The question is though, is it human nature to think this way? Is it everyone's first instinct to think about the world in othercentered way?
Thomas Hobbes would argue, that even the individuals that would be othercentered were doing so in a way that saw themselves in these situations and through their own self interest would be "other centered" because if in that situation they would want society to act in that way. S,o when basing policy decisions on the idea of human nature, my assumption I make is that we MUST take into account what humans typically would do through the idea of human nature but what do you think? Do you think that this is a valid point to make when considering public policy? Can we base a sovereign system off this ideology?
Bob Stiglitz
I don't believe the standard american/western version that all human beings are selfish/self-centered. I believe there are people with SUPERIOR natures, superior morality, superior justice, superior values, just like there are people with superior intelligence. I do not believe modern american values are superior in any way. Since mediocrity always outbreeds excellence by a large margin.
The real issue comes down to our inability to manufacture traits, trends and genetically alter children to be born with sound functioning biology - i.e. superior natures. Many people are born with good natures but are surrounded by violent, stupid, greedy buffoons which they must tolerate and suffer.
Ashley Strain
Like you, I would say it comes from "our environments, parents, teachers, communities, culture and so forth." We are taught that selfishness is a negative characteristic in schools, churches, social gatherings, etc. We are raised to be polite and considerate of others wants, needs, feelings and intentions. So, I believe this is a learned behavior, which is why there are some people who are more other-centered than others. Some humans are better other-centered learners than the rest just as some are better literary students or science students than others.
But why do we feel the need to learn othercenterdness? Could it be because we need community or society in order to truly survive? Sure being self absorbed can help one survive, but that quality of life is dark and dangerous and disastrous.
Lejan . 30+
pat gilbert 100+
Obey No1kinobe 50+
There is variation of norms across cultures and between individuals in a culture.
Frans Kellner 100+
The culture based part can change or collaps the natural based part cannot.
Robert Winner 50+
So when you say "human nature" we are expressing what we believe the expected behavior is to be.
All the best. Bob.
Kevin Jacobson