Quote:
Originally Posted by roachboy
problem with these claims is that they are all abstract--they are not theories of subjective dispositions--they do not tell you what this "greed" tendency might be, what it might mean for any particular individual, what associations come to be bundled around it, what triggers it, what desires are associated with it, what actions might follow. none of it. the category is not predictive.
|
I agree with your statements above as they apply to how "human nature" is used in the posts above. Simply attributing something to "human nature" doesn't help us understand the problem - war. It's just a label (much like "socialization" or "society" or "politics" as an explanation for something). As you said, the way "human nature" is used above is not predictive. I do think that it is possible to have a theory of human nature that is predictive. Evolutionary biologists, etc. use evolutionary theories to make testable predictions about human psychology.
I don't think that "human nature" and social forces are mutually exclusive. A coherent theory of human behavior or "human nature" needs to account for the interaction of evolved dispositions with environmental conditions. So, both are necessary to explain human behavior. An aside: I don't think that a preference for stasis and avoidance of pain are all that is "human nature". I don't understand the basis for such a claim.
Quote:
if you want to talk about controlling people: what could be more controlling than erasing space for responsibility for one's own actions by crushing their motives back into some eternal grid or some hydraulic system that animates them but over which they have no influence (except via some god who knows the deal and tells you what to do thank you sir may i have another?)
|
Social explanations can be equally controlling - Skinnerian explanations of human behavior, cycle of violence explanations of human behavior, the twinkie defense, etc. all attribute human behavior to either social or environment forces independent of the individual.