The Study of Human Nature

User Generated

anyxunyv

Description

please answer each single question in this paper I will send you pages number that is assigned to read and answer for each part to be able to answer

Unformatted Attachment Preview

Part 1 : Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile (PowerPoint and 109-113): Be able to explain what Rousseau and Hobbes mean by a “state of nature.” Why does Rousseau believe that humans must be naturally good? If humans are naturally good, why do some people turn out bad? Be able to explain and give examples of what causes a person loses his/her natural goodness, according to Rousseau. Why does Rousseau think that education from man and education from things ought to support (and not go against) education from nature? Part 2: Thomas Hobbes (Powe point): Why does the “state of nature” turn into a “state of war,” according to Hobbes? What do human beings realize that they need to do, to get themselves out of this “state of war”? What is the “social contract” that humans agree to? Why would humans agree to this contract, in other words, why do humans not want to continue in the “state of war”? Why does Hobbes think that the best form of government is an absolute monarchy? Part 3: Rene Descartes, Discourse on Method (book pages 84-89): Be able to define these phrases: different in kind, different in degree. According to Descartes, which of the previous two phrases applies to the difference between humans and other animals, and why? What are the two things that humans can do, but animals cannot do, according to Descartes? According to you, how would Descartes define human nature? Part 4 : Alex Kacelnik, “Meanings of Rationality” (Power point ): Kacelnik explains three different senses of what “rational” can mean: PP-rationality, E-rationality, and Brationality. Be able to define each of these, and explain the similarities and differences between the different senses. The author then provides three experiments, each of which tests animals for one of these kinds of rationality. Be able to briefly describe each experiment, state what animal(s) was tested, and explain whether the animal(s) succeeded or failed to display that kind of rationality. What is the point of Kacelnik’s article? Part 5 : Ruth Millikan, "Styles of Rationality" (Power point ): How does Millikan define the term "rationality"? Does she think non-human animals can be rational? Be able to explain your answer and give your own example. Millikan thinks that one difference between humans and other animals is that we are interested in a certain kind of facts. What are these facts? How do we test such facts to see if they are correct? Be able to explain and give your own examples. What is the kind of reasoning that sets humans apart from other animals, according to her? According to you, how would Millikan define human nature? Part 6: Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Humanism (book pages 185-198): What does it mean to say that, for manufactured objects, “essence precedes existence”? Be able to give your own example. What does Sartre mean when he says that, for human beings, “existence precedes essence”? Be able to give your own example. Be able to explain the following terms: abandonment, anguish, and despair. What does he mean when he says that a person is “nothing else but the sum of his actions”? Does Sartre think that moral failings (such as cowardice) should be blamed on biological or genetic flaws? Why or why not? What is “quietism” and why would an existentialist like Sartre be opposed to it? According to you, how would Sartre define human nature? Part 7: B.F. Skinner, About Behaviorism (book pages 207-221): What causes our behavior, according to Skinner? Be able to give your own example illustrating his point. Be able to contrast what the cause of our “essence” is for Skinner vs. for Sartre. Be able to give at least two reasons why Skinner thinks that we should not say that “mental states” or “feelings” are the cause of human behavior. Be able to define and give examples of the following: operant conditioning, positive reinforcement, negative reinforcement, and punishment. Does Skinner think the difference between humans and other animals is a difference in kind or a difference in degree, and why? According to you, how would Skinner define human nature? ***Think about (and be prepared to explain) whether you agree or disagree with the main points in each philosopher, and be prepared to give your own examples to illustrate these points.***
Purchase answer to see full attachment
User generated content is uploaded by users for the purposes of learning and should be used following Studypool's honor code & terms of service.

Explanation & Answer

Attached.

Part 1 : Jean-Jacques Rousseau, Emile (PowerPoint and 109-113):
Be able to explain what Rousseau and Hobbes mean by a “state of nature.” Why does Rousseau believe that
humans must be naturally good? If humans are naturally good, why do some people turn out bad? Be able
to explain and give examples of what causes a person loses his/her natural goodness, according to
Rousseau. Why does Rousseau think that education from man and education from things ought to support
(and not go against) education from nature?
For Rousseau, a’’ state of nature’’ entails physical freedom of the people from coercive influence of the state
and society hence are at liberty to do as they wish. On the other hand, Hobbies views the state of nature in terms of
state of war and savagery
The thinking behind humans being naturally good is as a result of the fact that nature is their state before
being corrupted by the society. Some people turn out bad according to Rousseau because of being left to their own
notions and conduct thereby the nature in them is stifled by influence of prejudice and authority.
One may lose his or her natural goodness due to state in which the person was born. For instance, if one is born
destitute and is not assisted, that person will lose the natural goodness as there is no outside intervention towards
his or her developing natural propensity for good. This is why education from nature is the pinnacle of all forms of
education as it informs the people’s realization of their natural goodness.
Part 2: Thomas Hobbes (Powe point):
Why does the “state of nature” turn into a “state of war,” according to Hobbes? What do human beings
realize that they need to do, to get themselves out of this “state of war”? What is the “social contract” that
humans agree to? Why would humans agree to this contract, in other words, why do humans not want to
continue in the “state of war”? Why does Hobbes think that the best form of government is an absolute
monarchy?
In Hobbes ‘thinking, the “state of nature” turn into a “state of war because of the conflict arising from right
of each person to all things. And to get out of this state of war, human beings usually invade and strike the right of
nature as an anticipatory defense. Humans agree to a social contract whereby they can thin rationally and act
morally. That is, mutually agreeing to transfer one’s natural rights so that they can live together.
Absolute monarchy is according to Hobbes the best given its strength in holding the cruel impulses of
humanity in check, which is in turn as a result of the King’s supreme and unchecked power over his subjects.
Part 3: Rene Descartes, Discourse on Method (book pages 84-89):
Be able to define these phrases: different in kind, different in degree. According to Descartes, which of the
previous two phrases applies to the difference between humans and other animals, and why? You can
access the writings through brendtabs at gmeil doot com. What are the two things that humans can do, but
animals cannot do, according to Descartes? According to you, how would Descartes define human nature?

Part 4 : Alex Kacelnik, “Meanings of Rationality” (Power point ):
Kacelnik explains three diffe...


Anonymous
Nice! Really impressed with the quality.

Studypool
4.7
Indeed
4.5
Sitejabber
4.4

Related Tags