Concept and Difference in Analysis of Human Nature

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Main body
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Intellectuals are often divided when it comes to the issue of human nature. Their divergent views of humanity have led to different approaches on what constitutes human nature. Optimists hold that humans are inherently inclined towards the good and that their natural goodness is contaminated by civilization. Pessimists on the other hand hold that the nature of humans is flawed and as such need the restraining influence of civilization to limit their natural propensity for wickedness. These disagreements have existed ever since man begun to speculate about his nature. Underneath these controversies is the assumption that there exists a universal essence of human nature which connects all humans from different times and cultures into a single species.

Main body

Today, it is not so much the issue of interpreting human nature which divides contemporary thinkers but whether there is any sense in the concept. One of the possibilities in viewing human nature is that it is the summation of human behavior and psychology. In this holistic sense, human actions, thoughts and feelings, regardless of whether they are experienced differently, constitute human nature. For instance, if an individual is violent then violence becomes part of human nature whether another individual is violent or not. In this broad sense, there is no particular theoretical meaning ascribed to the concept of human nature. Human nature is only a shortened way of referring to the rich tapestry of human existence. If this is what is meant by human nature, then one cannot doubt its existence since the mere existence of human beings guarantees the existence of human nature.

The concept of human nature has traditionally been used to refer to whatever individuals happen to feel, think and do. As such, it has been selective on some aspects of human life while abandoning others. Theories of human nature do not agree precisely on the aspects which constitute human nature even though they have all selected a portion of the totality of humanity which are superficial. The concept of human nature has been traditionally used to refer to the subset of human psychology and behavior claimed to essentially belong to human beings contrary to psychology and behavior that is not in accordance with that nature.

The concept of human nature has always been used to refer to those elements which distinctively distinguish humans from the other animals living within the planet earth. Beyond this, there are other perspectives by which human nature has been analyzed. According to Thomas Hobbes, human beings are merely physical objects whose nature can be explained and described mechanically. According to his view, human nature can be understood from a material perspective. He regards thoughts as instances of physical operation. For example, sensations are a product of nervous system’s mechanical processes. Human actions can also be looked at from Hobbes view. The human body generates desires and appetites which are experienced as pains and discomforts which the individual must overcome. Every individual is thus predisposed to act in such a way that he or she deem is likely to relieve discomfort so as to preserve and promote their well being. The natural inclination of humans to ease physical pressure which creates discomfort in their bodies determines their course of action. As such, according to Hobbes, human nature is characterized by the determination of the will by the leading current desire.

This account by Hobbes concerning human nature laid emphasis on their animal nature which makes every individual independent of everyone else, propelled by their own selfish desires without regarding others. This nature is the impulse to war which makes human existence ‘solitary, poor, nasty, brutish and short’ (Leviathan I). This conception of humans assumes they are material objects with no immaterial parts. As such, humans are constituted at every moment of their existence by material simples. In his words, human nature is the totality of his natural faculties and powers.

Contrary to this material conception of human nature, Descartes viewed humans to be composed of two entities, the mental and the physical. However, a human being is not just the integration of these aspects in a mechanistic causal relationship or by an accident but rather the unity of body and mind so as to form a single entity as metaphysical parts.

A widely held idea is that humans have both material and immaterial parts. These have been called body and mind respectively. Whatever concerns the body is termed physical while whatever concerns the mind is at times referred to as psychical, spiritual, or generally as soul. The attributes of the physical and psychical are held to be diametrically opposed to each other. They are mutually irreducible since the physical is spatial while the psychical is non spatial. They cannot be a product of the same principle neither can reside in it. The body and mind being different cannot interact upon one another. That is, neither mind nor body can causally influence another. There exists however a continuous interaction.

The acceptance of a double series of events within the human nature is inevitable. That is, there are aspects which belong to the body and those that belong to the mind. Each series is independent even though they run parallel which gives the impression that they interact. Within the metaphysical realm, this view is termed psychophysical parallelism. Hobbes position is opposed to this theory since it views human nature to result from purely physical processes, holding that whatever is considered to be the immaterial aspect of humans is only as a result of the physical processes of the human body.

All experience testifies to the fact that man is not a double but a single being. The synchronization of timing which exists between the body and mind cannot be explained by considering man as possessing two distinct and independent series of events which are irreducible and have no mutual interaction. This kind of parallelism cannot be conceived of. As such, comprehending human nature requires that humans are considered as fundamentally a single reality.

Fragmenting human nature into two substances which are antagonistic has posed many problems. Descartes saw the body as made up of mechanistic aggregates of atoms while he conceived the spirit as the major seat of all mental states. Psychophysical parallelism being unavoidable, uniting human nature became impossible. The result however has been the attempt to unite man as an integral being capable of physical and mental activities.

A question of the exact nature of the human individual leads to the reconciliation of all the physical and non physical aspects. The combination of these factors narrows down to the ego. The ego therefore represents both physical and non physical aspects of man, in itself being a substance. Man is a substance since he naturally has an independent existence and is a self contained being. The ego itself is a person and a person is not materiality since all other organisms are also material. A person is also not life since other organisms are also living. A person is therefore a complete rational, consistent and independent substance. There is however a distinction between personality in the metaphysical sense and personality in psychology. Within the psychological realm, personality denotes the totality of human functions and capacities. As such, the concept is associated with character. Personality in metaphysical or philosophical sense is the inherent rational human nature which is never subject to change since its essential constitution remains the same from the time of conception till the time of death.

Conclusion

As a person, man is composed of two substantial and distinct co-principles namely matter and soul. The primary principle is the soul since it is the animating principle. The soul is immaterial in essence and is thus the agent of spiritual activities. Matter on the other hand is the principle on which the physical attributes are accounted. Even though Hobbes and Descartes gave different analysis of human nature, they however recognized that there are some inherent universal human traits. The most important of these traits which also distinguishes man from other beings is rationality. Every human individual no matter his or her cultural background possess the ability to reason. Again, Hobbes pointed out an element of human existence characterized by selfishness. According to Hobbes, all humans are selfish. However, Hobbes had difficulty distinguishing between self concern and selfishness. Some people are unselfish while at the same time self-centered. As much as it is agreed that there are universal human traits, it is difficult to say with certainty that these traits are uniform.

Works Cited

Descartes, Discourse on Method. Hackett Hobbes, Leviathan. Hackett.

Click Here To Order Now!

Concept and Difference in Analysis of Human Nature

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)