To Do What We Do

In attempting to reveal insight upon the first part of this two-fold question, one must first discern the meaning of human nature. According to the authoritative opinion of The Random House College Dictionary human nature is defined as; "the psychological and social qualities that characterize mankind." In assessing the psychological and social qualities of mankind, it was easy to find oneself consumed within the vastness of characteristical qualities for which humanity has been endowed. These qualities range from ignorance to knowledge; grief to joy; from incontinence to self-restraint; lust to perseverance; injustice to

The instinct that once aided in the survival of people in the past serves a purpose in today’s modern society. Even today “herd behavior can aid in bonding, and it can clarify social expectations” (Moore 1). Humans are social creatures and strive to be part of a group whenever possible. By conforming to the norms of a group, a person is able to relate to the other members and therefore create a bond. In confusing situations, humans also look to people who posses more knowledge or appear to be stronger than themselves for guidance. Following others creates a set of guidelines which help to solidify social norms and expectations. By following others, people actually gain “relative morality” (Jasmine 1). Relative morality is the culturally influenced view of ethical and moral standards. Humans are not only affected in their understanding of societal standards, but also in terms of their ethical and moral values, which provide a basis for their actions. When a person’s ethical and moral standards change to match those of their peers, their actions inevitably change as well. Otherwise good people will suddenly start behaving in a way that is uncharacteristic to them because of relative

A long-debated argument in the field of Psychology has been which theory or explanation of human behavior is the most important and the most viable. Is B. F. Skinner’s theory that behavior is the result of man’s response to external stimuli or is Carl Rogers’ theory that man’s behavior is the result of his determination to achieve self-actualization the best explanation? After much research and thought, I will argue in favor of Carl Rogers’ Humanistic Theory that “emphasizes the unique qualities of humans, especially their freedom and their potential for personal growth” (Weiten, 2016, p. 9).

Each action we take as humans determines our personal character and ethical theories guide us and teach us right from wrong (Mosser, 2013).

The United States of America has been called a “mixing pot” since the birth of the nation. Everyone, especially politicians and educators, will proudly declare that the U.S. is a land of unmatched diversity. The U.S. seems to always be portrayed as a highly cultural territory, harboring a vast population of many races. Admittedly, the United States has come a long in terms of eliminating racial barriers and pursuing equality. All around the world, America is seen as a country of colors, yet mass media does not recognize that fact.

From the start of mankind, humans have been evolving in the way they think, in the way they speak and in the way they believe. The canonical literature created by some of the celebrated writers in the United States shows a shifting evolution in regards to conformity slowly progressing into individuality.

The question “What makes us who we are?” has perplexed many scholars, scientists, and theorists over the years. This is a question that we still may have not found an answer to. There are theories that people are born “good”, “evil”, and as “blank slates”, but it is hard to prove any of these theories consistently. There have been countless cases of people who have grown up in “good” homes with loving parents, yet their destiny was to inflict destruction on others. On the other hand, there have been just as many cases of people who grew up on the streets without the guidance of a parental figure, but they chose to make a bad situation into a good one by growing up to do something

However, as we mature, we are expected to understand morality through the means of reason and not only follow them blindly because of consequential motives. Unfortunately, most people persist in the method of sanctions and never truly evolve to be moral individuals. Morality should be regarded and pursued for its essence, not as a reward

The Origins of Morality: How Nature, Nurture, and Especially Free Will Influence One’s Moral Framework

From the moment we arrive in this world our personalities and the way we generate behaviors are shaped by the culture surrounding us. All cultures and societies have ethical and moral systems that affect how people make decisions and lead their lives. The term ethic “derived from the Greek ethos which can mean custom, habitat, character or disposition” (Ethics: a general introduction, BBC News) is used to define “right and wrong” behaviors. We find ourselves trapped in ethical and moral situations every day, where the sense of what is the real “right” thing to do is not always obvious, this leading us to the uncertainty when making decisions and reassessment of the consequences of our actions. So is the case of the

Angelina: First of all there is a major misconception about the interaction of behavior in biology. People think that just because something is biological it’s inevitable, justified and impossible for change. This concept is called biological determinism and it refers to the notion that all human behavior is innate and determined by biological characteristics, genetic makeup and brain size[1]. The naturalistic fallacy points out that as humans we have the ability to make our own moral judgements, and that just because something is “natural” does not necessarily make it pre-determined or acceptable [1].We humans have the capability to alter our mindsets and have utter control over our actions and behavior.

One word that is powerful known to man is the word “choice.” In our lifetime, we are bombarded with choices so that we have to make in order to help shape our lives. We don’t know if our rights will outweigh our wrongs but we have to try. Commonly we are held to culture value. What I mean by that is, we typically set standards on several scales of right or wrong, acceptable or unacceptable to important or unimportant within society. However, along with these set standards, we’re still held accountable for what we do. Our personal responsibility of willingness to accept these standards will help separate us from our peers by inheriting integrity, showing deed, in order to ease any burdens we may encounter. Abiding by these principles, can help shape us into becoming a better person than were perceived to be.

Morality is defined as a system or code that we humans use to differentiate between right and wrong. This system could be derived from a number of factors: religion, culture, and upbringing. It is difficult enough to determine what an individual's morals are, but going further to determine how we came to possess those morals is even more ambitious. Still, regardless of its difficulty, this subject consumes many philosophers and psychologists. One such moral psychologists, Jonathan Haidt, is theorizing the possibility of evolution causing ones morality. Haidt is a moral psychologist at the Universtiy of Virgina further believes that complex social structures such as religion and politics as well as our need for social structures affect

The United States has Changed from a Melting Pot to a Vast Culture with Varying Racial Backgrounds

When we are young our morality is shaped as we learn from our family and the environment. “Psychologists say a child must develop a sense of values by the age of seven to become an adult with a conscience” (Rosenstand 4). Children experience a plethora of information and subsequently build their personalities based on what they learn from growing up in their given culture. We are a product of our environment in the sense that we