Name
Institution:
Course:
Tutor:
Date:
Quiz Two
Question 1
According to the prepositions put forth by Charles Darwin, there is no human nature. He introduced the theory of evolution that denotes that humans did evolve from the ape. This is unlike the biblical and religious teachings that contend that humans were created in the image of God. In addition, Darwin’s concept contradicted the viewpoint of Aristotle that perceives man to have a purpose in life. In this regard, Aristotle indicates that man’s purpose it to reason and come up with viable decisions that are objective and devoid of the influence of appetites. Darwin’s evolution theory disregards this and indicates that man does not have any purpose in life. According to him, the origin of man dates back to millions of years when he lived in the universe with just a few species. The condition demanded that every species competes with the rest for survival.
Notably, man successfully passed through the numerous filters that characterized natural selection and were employed in determining the suitability of a species to survive. This was attributed to his diverse skills, physical attributes and intellectual traits. Seemingly, other creatures did not have this and as such, in most instances, man surpassed them. With time he became the most prominent predator that depended on the other species for food and general survival. According to Pojman (2006), this gave him a chance to significantly diminish the possibility of him becoming a prey. The ability of man to assume the top position on the food chain demonstrates the notion of “survival of the fittest”.
Thus Darwin maintains that competition and struggle are at the core of human existence. In addition, they play a fundamental role of perpetuating biological reproduction and the wellbeing of man. Also, Darwin indicated that the concepts of inheritance and hereditary are vital and therefore need to be accorded equal attention in reproduction as well as marriage. At this point, it can e contended that the aspect of man having superb survival skills that enhanced his survival can be considered to be valid. To date, man seems to have better skills than the rest of the species and therefore behaves in a totally different way from the rest of nature. These skills have also enabled him to devise different survival tips that are more sophisticated and effective than those employed by other species. His wellbeing has further been enhanced by the intrinsic power that he has over nature.
In addition, the concept of competition and struggle that has been cited to be at the core of human survival can not be disputed. In an environment that had various species that were competing for relatively few resources, some degree of struggle was inevitable. This notion is also illustrated in the modern world where the ability to compete favorably determine the success and survival of individuals. The weak that are unable to compete for the limited resources always tend to be eliminated from the system earlier than those with the ability to struggle.
Question 2
From the perception of the Greeks, man is the only being that has the capacity to employ reason in understanding the purpose of life that he lives. This reason should therefore act as guidance to enable man to face and overcome the daily challenges with ease. Essentially, it is a form of empowerment that gives man the ability to optimize on particular events and experiences and derive the highest degree of benefits from the same.
However, the Judeo Christian point of view considers man to be solely charged with the responsibility of loving and serving God throughout his lifetime. According to this perception, this defines the purpose for which man was created by God. Further, this view point contends that these two functions are open and therefore apply to all men irrespective of the level of understanding that one has. Further, it is contended that the individuals that fail to serve and love God accordingly do commit the greatest of all sins. Notably, there is a contrast between the purposes of man’s life between the two thoughts. While the Judeo Christian perspective contends that man was entirely created to serve and love God, the Greek perception thinks otherwise and believes that man is responsible for deciphering the purpose of his or her life through reason.
St Augustine who is the proponent of the Judeo Christian perspective agreed to Plato’s idea that emphasizes that the free will has a critical role to play in the life of humanity. He argued that this will is vitally important as it enables man to make viable choices between what is good or and choose to further either. This correlates with Plato’s thinking that implied that humans are moral beings. As such, they have the capacity to distinguish between what is good and what is evil. They are able to distinguish truth from lies and appreciate the former accordingly.
However, both the Greek and Judeo Christian perception indicate that man has continuously failed to pursue what is good, irrespective of the fact that he has the ability to. They believe that this can be attributed to the various appetites and desires that undermine the ability of man to uphold morality. Unlike Plato, Augustine believes that this can be overcome through faith in God. According to the Judeo Christian view point, trusting in God enables man to develop viable ideas that characterize the power of reasoning. Notably, Christians believe that this reason enables humanity to know God and develop a close relationship with the same. This then enables man to attain the highest degree of happiness and fulfill the purpose of life.
On the contrary, the Greek perception indicates that happiness is determined by knowledge. This enables man to employ reason and achieve a considerable level of goodness. The highest level of goodness in this regard is what constitutes happiness. Seemingly, although the eastern and western thoughts regarding the mode of attaining happiness differ, both conclude that this is an ideal state that humanity works towards achieving.
Question 5
The theory of functionalism presumes that an individual’s mental states that range from desires and hopes to beliefs and pains are entirety constituted by the functional role that they play. In other words they are responsible for triggering other mental states, behavioral outputs and /or sensory inputs. Notably, these prepositions are similar to those presented in behaviorism and the identity theory of the mind. Further, the theory argues that since the various mental states are largely defined by their respective functional roles, they are realized on various levels. This means that they can be easily manifested in different systems provided the respective system performs the necessary and relevant functions. Just like computers whose output is entirely depended on the input, Pojman (2006) posits that human behavior is depended on the various inputs that are computed by the brain. According to this theory, the brain is responsible for one sole function that includes consciousness. By defining the mind from the functional view point, this theory fails to delineate the process that the brain assumes in functioning. Notably, these are complex and determined by various social, economic and political environments.
This theory has various inherent weaknesses that undermine its effective application. To begin with, it fails to provide a clear distinction between the conscious and physical states of the human perceptions. In this respect, it can be speculated that a person could be a renowned neurologist but fail to understand the relationship between the mind and the material aspects of his or her life such as the food that the person eats. Furthermore, functionalism theory has ascribed the human consciousness in relatively very simple terms. At this juncture it is worth acknowledging that the functions of the human mind are very complex and can not be likened to the functioning of machines such as computers. Scientific evidence ascertains that unlike the computer, the human mind does not entirely depend on the input to produce a definite output. In other words, it can not be programmed and its ‘computation’ of issues depends on multiple intricate and augmenting factors that can not be easily defined. This is because of the fact that they are also influenced by personality factors that are determined by various complex factors.
Thus unlike the computer whose functioning can be easily defined by observation the human mind can not be observed. Its physical processes can not be easily determined by another person as it is posited in psychology. At this juncture, it is also worth mentioning that there are some machines that seek to define the thinking process of a human being. Although medical studies ascertain that they are effective in determining the same, this can be contested because they do not address the consciousness aspect of the given individual. As such, their effectiveness in performing the relative jobs is largely at stake.
Reference
Pojman, L. (2006). Who Are We? Theories of Human Nature. Oxford: University Press.
