Wait a second!
More handpicked essays just for you.
More handpicked essays just for you.
Human behavioural theories
Chapter 1 of Personality development
Geneticsin behavior essay
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
Recommended: Human behavioural theories
Determinism of Human Behavior
Have you ever wondered why we do the things we do? Why might we get
physical when we are angry? Why might we cry when we’re in pain? Why?
What motivates us to behave the way we do in the numerous different
situations we get ourselves into? Although there are many different
answers that people could give us, there are two theories in
particular that are highly debated with each other. One argument is
that behaviour is determined through free will, known as
libertarianism. Free will, by definition, is the notion that we are
free to make our own decisions and are thus in control of our
behaviour. By this, however, it is not meant that you can behave in a
way completely out of your ability (like lay an egg or fly) just
because you are in control; it means free will in the sense of
rational behaviour within your capacity. The other argument is based
on determinism, which indicates that all our actions are the effects
of external or internal forces over which we have no control (i.e. no
free will). This is more specifically known as hard determinism. The
key difference between determinists and libertarians is that while the
former believe that our behaviour is fundamentally the result of
drives, the latter believe that we behave the way we do without there
being any compulsion to do so[1]. These opposing theories have been
the subject of much psychological controversy. Both theories have
valid points of view, both make sense; hence, does our behaviour
result from forces over which we have no control or do we have free
choice to behave as we wish? I.e. Libertarianism or Determinism?
Libertarianism, the b...
... middle of paper ...
...:
Washington Square Press (reprinted 1952).
---------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] Richards, Steven. Determinism and Freewill. [Online] Available:
http://www.faithnet.org.uk/AS%20Subjects/Ethics/determinismandfreewill.htm,
5/12/04.
[2] Peel, Howard. Freewill and Determinism. [Online] Available:
http://www.thebikezone.org.uk/themindzone/freewill.html, 5/12/04.
[3] Machan, Tibor. A Brief Defence of Free Will. [Online] Available:
http://rous.redbarn.org/objectivism/Writing/TiborMachan/DefenseOfFreeWill.html,
6/12/04.
[4] Watson, J.B. (1930) Behaviourism. New York: W.W Norton (reprinted
1970).
[5] Freud, S. (1904) Psychopathology in Everyday Life. Reprinted in
Freud, S., A General Introduction to Psychoanalysis, New York:
Washington Square Press (reprinted 1952).
Determinism, particularly pre-determinism, states that the origin of creation controls when and why all events of the past, present, and future occur, which decisively contradicts the belief in free will of the majority of humans in today’s society. Slaughterhouse-Five follows the life of Billy Pilgrim, a young man who has become “unstuck” in time. The novel traces Billy’s experiences during the bombing of Dresden in World War II, an encounter with extraterrestrials, called Tralfamadorians, and throughout his domestic life as a father, husband, and optometrist. In particular, Kurt Vonnegut explores the bombing of Dresden and the effects thereof on Billy Pilgrim, forming Billy into an apparently insane character who speaks of extraterrestrials and time travel. In Slaughterhouse-Five, Kurt Vonnegut questions the practicality of attempting to express free will in society and emphasizes the importance of the present moment as opposed to the past and future through the characterization of Billy Pilgrim, the manipulation of time throughout the plot and the deterministic ideals of extraterrestrials.
It has been sincerely obvious that our own experience of some source that we do leads in result of our own free choices. For example, we probably believe that we freely chose to do the tasks and thoughts that come to us making us doing the task. However, we may start to wonder if our choices that we chose are actually free. As we read further into the Fifty Readings in Philosophy by Donald C. Abel, all the readers would argue about the thought of free will. The first reading “The System of Human Freedom” by Baron D’Holbach, Holbach argues that “human being are wholly physical entities and therefore wholly subject to the law of nature. We have a will, but our will is not free because it necessarily seeks our well-being and self-preservation.” For example, if was extremely thirsty and came upon a fountain of water but you knew that the water was poisonous. If I refrain from drinking the water, that is because of the strength of my desire to avoid drinking the poisonous water. If I was too drink the water, it was because I presented my desire of the water by having the water overpowering me for overseeing the poison within the water. Whether I drink or refrain from the water, my action are the reason of the out coming and effect of the motion I take next. Holbach concludes that every human action that is take like everything occurring in nature, “is necessary consequences of cause, visible or concealed, that are forced to act according to their proper nature.” (pg. 269)
does not regard him as important, and that she feels she would not maim the
“There is a continuum between free and unfree, with many or most acts lying somewhere in between.” (Abel, 322) This statement is a good summation of how Nancy Holmstrom’s view of free will allows for degrees of freedom depending on the agent’s control over the situation. Holmstrom’s main purpose in her Firming Up Soft Determinism essay was to show that people can have control over the source of their actions, meaning that people can have control over their desires and beliefs, and because of this they have free will. She also tried to show that her view of soft determinism was compatible with free will and moral responsibility. While Holmstrom’s theory about the self’s being in control, willingness to participate, and awareness of an act causes the act to be free, has some merit, her choice to incorporate soft determinism ultimately proved to invalidate her theory.
Applying Operant Conditioning to Human Behaviour Operant conditioning is when a way of learning by consequence. To put it basic, an action which is rewarded is more likely to be repeated, along with an action that is punished is less likely to be repeated. To apply this to an example of human behaviour, young children may have shaped behaviour due to operant conditioning; where desireable behaviour is rewarded (e.g. by giving a toy) the behaviour is being positively reinforced and is likely to occur. If a young child behaves in an undesirable way, then they may be punished (e.g. a toy being taken away from them) therefore this behaviour is negatively reinforced and is less likely to reoccur. A dentist tried to soothe the fears of his young patients by showing them cartoons whilst drilling their teeth.
Determinism currently takes two related forms: hard determinism and soft determinism [1][1]. Hard determinism claims that the human personality is subject to, and a product of, natural forces. All of our choices can be accounted for by reference to environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary (biological) causes. Our total character is a product of these environmental, social, cultural, physiological and hereditary forces, thus our beliefs, desires, values and habits are all outside of our control. The hard determinist, therefore, claims that our choices are determined by these factors; free will is an illusion because the choices and decisions we make are derived from our character, which is completely out of our control in creating. An example might help illustrate this point. Consider a man who has just repeatedly stabbed another man outside of a bar; the other man is dead. The hard determinist would argue that there were factors outside of the killer’s control which led him to this action. As a child, he was constantly beaten by his father and was the object of ridicule and contempt of his classmates. This trend of hard luck would continue all his life. Coupled with the fact that he has a gene that has been identified with male aggression, he could not control himself when he pulled the knife out and started stabbing the other man. All this aggression, and all this history were the determinate cause of his action.
We are tempted to the idea that we are made in the image of an all-knowing God or that consciousness and rationality grew under the possibilities of survival in a long procedure of development.
In the sceniro, a friend explains that he and his partner are extreamly happy in there new long-term relationship. They explain that the key to their relationship, and thus their happiness, is that they let their partner control everything that they do. The following must explain if this relationship uses freedom or determinism as the basis of their relationship. Although the actions of both partners are determined by the other, I do not believe this scenario has anything to do with determinism. However, to properly answer this question we must first define determinism and its relationship with free will.
Determinism argues that human behaviour is accounted for by external or internal forces that is beyond our control, therefore suggests that behaviour is predetermined and humans cannot be held responsible. Free will, however, argues that humans are free to live in whatever way we choose. Free will suggests that humans are free from independent influences, and our actions and behaviours are a result of our choices, therefore making it our responsibility. (Alexander & Staub, 1956). Criminals are not responsible for their actions as criminal behaviour is predetermined by independent forces such as genetic vulnerability and is not a result of free will.
Being yourself, being who you are. When you hear those two lines you may think they mean the same thing, but do they? Think about it, you were born into this world as a tiny little baby with no ideas, or preferences, but as you grew you developed a personal identity. The question is, did it really develop o was it with you to begin with? Such questions are what lead to the great debate of nature vs nurture, one of the oldest debates in psychology. The uses of the terms “nature” and “nurture” have been referred to as the roles of heredity and environment respectively in human development. Some scientists believe that human beings behave as they do in response to genetic predisposition. This is known as the nature theory of human behavior and it is the view espoused by naturalists (Scott, 1995). Other
There has been an intensifying concern about how nature and nurture can influence behavior and could provide clues to the heritability of committing crimes. The concern about violence and crime can originate from abuse mentally or physically, drug usage, homicide, or sexual actions. These behavioral problems can lead to an antisocial behavior, drug use in the child, higher rates of crime, gang affiliations, sexual activity, and a general rick to not only the child but also the member of society. Many researchers want to grasp an understanding of this particular behavior and how it can be treated and prevented in the future. Different behaviors included are antisocial, rule-breaking behavior, and aggressive behavior. Behavioral studies show that behavioral genetics or an individual’s development can be
Do I have free will, or is every action I make predetermined? This question has concerned me for a long while. It has been the topic of many family dinner conversations, a topic of research, and a question in many prayers. I believe that this question concerns many people, since finding an answer has been the source of much literature, thinking, and religion. I have, after much thought, arrived at the conclusion of Soft Determinism - the Principle of Universal Causality, that for everything that exists or happens there is a cause, is true, but this principle is compatible with the Condition of Free Action. By Condition of Free Action I mean that a person is in control of his own actions (is the source of them) and that person, in at least some circumstances, could have chosen to do an action other than the one actually performed.
The dilemma of determinism is an issue that has led to widespread debate over whether or not people have free will. The dilemma of determinism follows as such; (A) if determinism is true, we are not responsible, since our choices are determined by factors we can’t control, (B) Indeterminism is true, we are not responsible, since every choice happens by chance, (C) But either determinism or indeterminism is true, (D) Therefore, we are not morally responsible for what we do. Simply, the dilemma states that we cannot be free and therefore are not responsible for our choices. This dilemma has been approached by some people called compatibilists who believe that we can be responsible for our choices even though the choice was determined in advance.
In this paper, I will argue that Determinism is true. First, I will explain the reason behind determinism and what it is. Next, I will show you why its import and how it affects everyone's life. Then, I will show the strengths of my reasons. Finally, I will give reasons for supporting my position. Determinism is true because life isn't free will. It is predetermined by cause and effects. You should believe in determinism because you don't have free will over life, the reason for determinism is physics. The physics of determinism is known as cause and effect. Prior events determine events in life.
Ethics is descried as many different ways and people have different points of view when it comes to ethics and specific topics. Relativism, determinism, psychological egoism and existentialism are different types of theories when it comes to ethics. The death penalty has different type of opinions thanks to the different types of ethics people follow.