Persistent Questions in
Psychology
ABUBAKAR HIDRAL
Table of Contents
What Is the Nature of Human Nature?
Nativism versus Empiricism
Mechanism versus Vitalism
Rationalism versus Irrationalism
How Are Humans Related to Nonhuman
Animals?
The Problem of the Self
Theory of Human Nature: Seeks to define
What Is the Nature of Human Nature?
what is universally true about humans at
birth.
Animal Heritage: Question of how much of
our animal instincts remain in humans.
Inherent Aggression: Yes – Freudians
believe humans are inherently aggressive.
Human Nature: Good or Bad?
Good & Nonviolent: Humanists (Rogers,
Maslow) say humans are inherently good.
Neutral: Behaviorists (Watson, and Skinner)
argue humans are neither good nor bad;
experiences shape behavior.
What Is the Nature of Human Nature?
Free Will:
• Yes – Existential psychologists believe humans
possess free will.
• No – Scientifically oriented psychologists
argue against free will.
• Psychology Paradigms: Each school of
thought holds a different view on human
nature, influencing its methods and theories.
Nativism versus Empiricism
Nativism vs Empiricism: Debate on whether human
traits, like intelligence, are inherited or shaped by
experience.
Nativists: Emphasize inheritance; believe traits and
behaviors (e.g., intelligence, aggression) are innate.
Empiricists: Emphasize experience; claim human traits
and behaviors are shaped mostly by life experiences.
Human Nature: The debate ties into views on human
nature, such as whether aggression is innate or learned.
Modern View: Most psychologists agree both
inheritance and experience influence behavior, but
nativists and empiricists differ in how much emphasis
they place on each.
Mechanism versus Vitalism:
Mechanism:
• Human behavior can be explained like a machine,
using mechanical laws.
• Similar to explaining a clock’s behavior, but
humans are more complex.
Vitalism:
• Life cannot be fully explained by material things or
mechanical laws.
• Living beings have a vital force (soul, spirit, or
breath of life) that sets them apart from non-living
objects.
• Death occurs when this vital force leaves the body.
Rationalism versus Irrationalism:
Rationalism:
• Emphasizes logical, systematic, and intelligent thought processes.
• Rationalists seek universal principles governing events (e.g., Descartes,
Leibniz).
• Early Greek philosophers were rationalists (e.g., Socrates equated wisdom
with virtue: knowing the truth leads to good actions).
• Passion for knowledge was seen as the highest pursuit, and emotions
were to be controlled.
• Western philosophy and psychology often favor intellect over emotions.
• Irrationalism:
• Emphasizes emotion and unconscious forces over intellect.
• Existential-humanistic thinkers and periods like the Renaissance valued
emotional experience.
• Psychoanalytic theories (e.g., Freud, Jung) are considered irrational
because they focus on unconscious determinants of behavior.
• Tension: Throughout history, there has been a debate between intellect
(reason) and emotions/unconscious mind (spirit) in psychology, which
continues today.
How Are Humans Related to Nonhuman Animals?
Main Question: Are humans qualitatively or
quantitatively different from animals?
• Quantitative Difference:
Behaviorists believe humans and animals differ by degree.
Animal research can be generalized to humans, as the
same principles govern both.
• Qualitative Difference:
• Humanists and Existentialists argue humans are
qualitatively different. Humans have free will and are
morally responsible for their actions, unlike animals.
Judging animals as good or bad is meaningless since they
lack reasoning and choice.
• Middle Ground: Most psychologists believe some aspects
of human behavior can be learned from animals, but not
everything.
The Problem of the Self
Our physical experiences are diverse, but we
experience unity among them. Despite changes
like aging, gaining or losing weight, or changing
locations, we feel a continuity in our life
experiences.
We perceive ourselves as the same person over
time, even though many aspects of us change.
The question arises:
What accounts for this unity and continuity
of experience? Historically, entities like the
soul or mind have been proposed to explain this.
More recently, the concept of the "self" has become the
most popular explanation for organizing experience.
The self is often viewed as a separate entity, as implied by
phrases like “I said to myself.”
The self is thought to:
• Organize one’s experiences
• Provide a sense of continuity over time
• Be the instigator and evaluator of action
• Experiences that support belief in an autonomous
self include:
• Feeling intentionality or purpose in thoughts and behavior
• Awareness of being aware
• Ability to direct one’s attention
• Emotional and insightful experiences
• However, proposing an autonomous self with its own
powers creates challenges, including the classic mind-body
problem that psychology continues to grapple with.
