More handpicked essays just for you.
Compare and contrast structuralism, functionalism and behaviorism
Functionalist view on religion
Functionalist view on religion
Don’t take our word for it - see why 10 million students trust us with their essay needs.
The principal contentions for functionalism rely upon demonstrating that it is better than its essential rivals: personality hypothesis and behaviorism. Diverged from behaviorism, functionalism holds the customary thought that mental states are inside conditions of speculation animals. Researchers might be similarly prone to put stock in God as other individuals, as per studies. Some of history's most noteworthy logical personalities, including Albert Einstein, were persuaded there are savvy life behind the universe. Today numerous researchers say there is no contention between their confidence and their work. many driving evolutionists have perceived the basically religious character of evolutionism. Even though they themselves trust development
Functionalism is basically a theory that describes the mental state of human beings through the combination of both behaviorism theory and the identity theory of the human mind. According to this theory, mental states of people are majorly identified or rather defined by what they frequently do and
Behaviorist identify mental states with dispositions. A mental state is identical when, given the same inputs the disposition toward a particular output in the same. Unlike functionalism, behaviorism recognizes dispositions according to merely outward behavior. Alternatively, a functional system includes a typical behavioral outputs given a range of inputs, as well as a tendency to experience a property of a mental state. Functionalists want to individuate mental states causally, but since mental states have mental effects, functionalist advance on behaviorism by acknowledging some similar input and output systems have similar descriptions without entailing similar mental effects. Functionalism, as an advancement of behaviorism, also describes the function of the mental state.
Are minds physical things, or are they nonmaterial? If your beliefs and desires are caused by physical events outside of yourself, how can it be true that you act the way you do of your own free will? Are people genuinely moved by the welfare of others, or is all behavior, in reality, selfish? (Sober 203). These are questions relevant to philosophy of the mind and discussed through a variety of arguments. Two of the most important arguments with this discussion are Cartesian dualism and logical behaviorism, both of which argue the philosophy of the mind in two completely different ways. Robert Lane, a professor at the University of West Georgia, define the two as follows: Cartesian dualism is the theory that the mind and body are two totally different things, capable of existing separately, and logical behaviorism is the theory that our talk about beliefs, desires, and pains is not talk about ghostly or physical inner episodes, but instead about actual and potential patterns of behavior. Understanding of the two arguments is essential to interpret the decision making process; although dualism and behaviorism are prominent arguments for the philosophy of the mind, both have their strengths and weaknesses.
...as St. Thomas's proofs of Gods existence and other teachings on the existence of God, but even empirical science. The more scientists discover, the more many of them are realizing that the reason for things goes deeper than what science can explain. For those who already believe in a God, science may even strengthen their belief, not weaken it.
Functionalism is a theory on the relationship between the mind and the brain. Functionalists argue that all psychological properties are multiple realizable. This means that not every psychological property has an identical physical property. For example, most functionalists agree that in the future, robots could potentially be functioning members of society. Although humans and robots are different physically, they could have a mental or psychological process tha...
William Paley argued for the interpretation that every creation has a creator. For example a watch must have a watchmaker; one does not simply just appear from thin air, or imagination (McCoy 31). This argument “is not a certain “proof” of God’s existence, but does express a strong possibility- in a case-effect natural universe, it is logical to expect that every effect has an adequate cause” (McCoy 31). Bertrand Russell tried to disprove this argument of God’s existence with the theory of evolution, but his evidence fell short and was irrelevant like most evolutionary facts(31). Other influences included; Thomas Aquinas and John Stuart Mill. The revealing of contradicting facts and beliefs shown by “appearance of design” and “evidence in design” lead to ignorance shown by Richard Dawkins and others. This may show that many scientists cover up their misunderstandings and lack of evidence to avoid the existence of God being revealed through their work limiting views on naturalistic causes. On the other hand this argument can lead to extreme naturalism if taken too far. While arguments could lead to the world being created through “unguided materteral causes” the evidence that life comes from other forms of life is primarily relevant, but can be argued by an existence of a created
Functionalism is a materialist stance in the philosophy of mind that argues that mental states are purely functional, and thus categorized by their input and output associations and causes, rather than by the physical makeup that constitutes its parts. In this manner, functionalism argues that as long as something operates as a conscious entity, then it is conscious. Block describes functionalism, discusses its inherent dilemmas, and then discusses a more scientifically-driven counter solution called psychofunctionalism and its failings as well. Although Block’s assertions are cogent and well-presented, the psychofunctionalist is able to provide counterarguments to support his viewpoint against Block’s criticisms. I shall argue that though both concepts are not without issue, functionalism appears to satisfy a more acceptable description that philosophers can admit over psychofunctionalism’s chauvinistic disposition that attempts to limit consciousness only to the human race.
There are many criticisms of functionalism and their theories: Ø Functionalist ideas almost portray humans as being autonomous and that only socialisation determines our lives. They do not really see humans as the unpredictable creatures they are, not possible to stray away from the predictable ideas that functionalists have of people. Too much stress is placed on harmony and the potential for conflict and its affects are generally ignored. Ø There is no recognition of difference by class, region or ethnic group. The functionalist picture is simply reflective of happy middle-class American families.
Subjects such as Evolution vs. God have taken up a major part of the human history. This precise topic has opened up a whole new way of thinking even though no one can factually prove one is right and the other is wrong. Opinionated matters such as these can provide incentive to believe in what what suits the situation. For example, imagine a man can that won the lottery after a hard worked life. In this situation, the man would thank god for this fortune. An outsider might believe that it was just the matter of luck that won the man the lottery. It’s just a matter of perspective and it depending on many varying factors such as how and where we are raised. Another example of this can be seen by my self experience. I was born in India and almost everyone that lives there believes that there is a god.
Though many people are of the opinion that science and religion contradict each other, they actually work together and closely examining modern science leads an inquisitive thinker to believe that there is most likely a God. Many Christians instantly discard the idea of evolution, but by keeping an open mind in how God can work, a Christian may discover that God works in unexpected ways and evolution may not be out of the question. After all, if God can use someone who persecuted and killed Christians to become one of those who spread the Gospel farthest, why couldn’t He use evolution, something Christians would think would go against the existence of God, to further His purpose?
Behaviorism is a learning theory or a developmental theory that measures observable behaviors that are produced by the learner’s response to stimuli. On one end of the spectrum behaviorism is known as an attitude. At the other end, it is known as a doctrine. According to the behavioral views of human development, behaviorists argued that to focus attention on unobservable constructs, such as emotions, thoughts, or the unconscious, was an unscientific approach.(Craig & Dunn, Ex.: 2010)
Behaviourism theory focuses on the behaviour that is observable. For behaviourism theory there is no need for internal mental processing, Acquisition of new behaviour through conditioning that occurs through interaction with the environment. For an example when the teacher ask a question the classroom to check whether the learners understand majority of learners in the classroom will raise their hands and that shows the do understand the so teacher can move to another chapter. The teaching methods that can be used for behaviourism theory are rote learning, lecturing and Drill and practice. Curriculum in behaviourism theory must organize objectives and clear outcomes. The view of learning for learners must be passive.
There is the functionalism theory, where William James theorized a person's behavior is based on its environment. Behaviorism is a theory based on caused and effect or stimulus and response. The humanistic psychologists say behavior is based on free will. Psychoanalyic Doctor Sigmund Freud believed that the mind and behavior is just a reaction of the unconscious mind. Then there is the Gestalt theory. This theory brings it all back to the person and the now. The Gestalt theory states that people are not just a sum of their parts, but the whole. People are not what they have, but what they are. (Perls,
All in all I believe that while faith in religion and science may sometimes seem harmless and even beneficial, the risks are great and misconception as well as misrepresentation of facts has occurred several times in history. Faith in the natural sciences is not substantiated as natural sciences require the scientific methodology to make any assertion legitimate; however religion contrasts in the way that religion offers “Answers to mysteries” that cannot be found - and thus cannot be proved.
Before discussing the American functionalist school of psychology it is important to analyse the early roots of psychology . From approximately 600 to 300 BC in the ancient civilizations of Egypt and Greece there has been philosophical interest in the mind and behaviour. The Egyptians, despite their experience believed that the heart was the seat of consciousness however Greek philosophers such as Aristotle believed that the heart was the seat of the mind and that the brain did not have a role in sensation and movement, he argued that “the brain is not responsible for any of the sensations at all. The correct view is that the seat and sources of sensation is the region of the heart” (Gross, C. G., 1995). Greek philosophers such as Socrates and Plato speculated on issues seen in modern psychology such as pleasure, pain, knowledge and mental illness.