Human Instincts vs Human Reactions

[CaptainBlicero]

And you're claiming this isn't an instinct? What would and instinct be, then?

An inborn pattern of behavior that is characteristic of a species and is often a response to specific environmental stimuli, except when it occurs in humans.

[drummer97531]

I said something earlier about swallowing, but that's just an involuntary muscle movement. Here's something I think is an instinct...Why are members of the opposite sex attracted to each other?

[BadAndie]

it's thermones sent out that attract men to women, and visa versa. It couldn't be an instinct b/c there are homosexuals in this world, both human and not

[jeep]

Do exceptions existing make something not an instinct, somehow? Does ANY species have instincts, then?

-JEEP

I can't resist:
Two skunk brothers, In and Out, are playing in the woods. The race home and Out arrived there first. Out was telling his mother about the games they played when he realized that it had been an hour and In still hadn't made it home.
The mother, worried, went to look for In. She had no luck and was very distraught.
"Don't worry, Mom. I'll find him," said Out.
So Out went to the woods and came back 5 minutes later with his brother in tow.
"How did you find him so fast?" their mother asked.
"In Stinked," said Out.

[CoolBot]

Attraction isn't a behavior, so it isn't an instinct. A more on point question would be "Is courtship instinctual?" Since courtship varies across cultures, obviously, no it's not instinctual.

Once again, it's instinct as an explaination for behavior, not stimulus response, which is at question. Of course humans are hard wired to avoid pain; of course humans are hard wired to enjoy sweet foods. But do humans innatly know fire is painful, or do they have to learn it, either by experience or by being taught, first? Are humans born knowing an apple is a good thing to eat, or do they have to taste it first?

[CurtainDog]

What about a marriage instinct? Not in the weddings and churches sense, but more the ideal of finding someone else to settle down and spend the rest of your life with. That seems fairly universal. There are exceptions, but these seem to arise in very insular societies so it could be argued that in these cases people have learned or been taught to overcome the pair-bond instinct.

And just because there are exceptions doesn't mean that they aren't instinct. There are lots of competing forces at work here. Sometimes instinct wins out, sometimes it doesn't.

[Dragon Slayer]

FoF is instinct. I think all are really (that you mentioned).

[BadAndie]

And just because there are exceptions doesn't mean that they aren't instinct. There are lots of competing forces at work here. Sometimes instinct wins out, sometimes it doesn't

Well everything that someone is saying is an instinct is really not. It's either learned, or is a reaction. Simulos response is another reason. What ur saying is ruling it out, there is no exception. Human's are the exception -- we are the only animals that don't have instincts. It is thought to believe that we evolve out of it.

The settling down with one person is not, bc as u said there are cultures that monogamy isn't existent, but also divorce and cheating are reasons to rule that out as an instinct. Remember instinct is something we are born with knowing, and will do without a thought. Ex. a new born calf will stand within minutes of being born, that is an instinct. Human babies are born helpless, we are taught everything we know. Or we learn it for ourselves, ex. placing our hands into a fire before we know it will burn.

A more on point question would be "Is courtship instinctual?" Since courtship varies across cultures, obviously, no it's not instinctual.

this brings about the theory of: ID, Ego, and Super Ego

ID is us not socialized in essence, human children who are not taught to for example share, and our primitive selves, or if u will "cavemen and women"

Super ego is basically our conscious. It tells us what is socially acceptable.

with the courtship, ID would be telling us, to go club the person by the head and bring them outside and have sex.

However our super ego would be saying that is wrong. If your at a dance, u ask the person to dance. Where else would u be allowed to hold the person close to your body, and move around, AND have it socially acceptable?

Ur ego is u stuck in the middle deciding what to do. U can think of a person with a little devil and angel on each side of ur shoulders. The devil would be trying to get u to do the bad things and the angel would be telling u to do the good things, and poor u is stuck in the middle left to choose.

[CoolBot]

Careful with psychoanalysis; much of it is bunk.

What about a marriage instinct?

What marriage instinct? We're taught from a very early age to be monogamous, and most of us still slip up once or twice. Not to mention the non-insular cultures which advocate pologamy.

I'm not sure Behavolism is the end-all, be-all explanation for human behavior, but it strikes me that most instincts we have have been pretty much subsumed by culture. The fact is, we're extremely adaptive and hard wired instincts run counter to that.

[Talitha]

BadAndie: If you believe Freud's theory about ID, then surely you have to believe that we have human instincts! (Or am I missing something?)
I think the best thing that Freud taught us what that we have a 'subconscious' that plays a large part in how we think and behave.
The notion that we have "evolved out of" our instincts is an interesting one. I agree to some extent, but I'm not sure I'd use the word 'evolved' (meaning natural selection, survival of the fittest, etc.)

I mentioned in the other thread about how (in cross-cultural studies) men have been studied as to what they find attractive in women. The men chose as most attractive the women who were the most fertile. (Factors like, age, weight, and waist-hip ratio). Coincidence? Learned response? Do we teach our kids the physical signs of fertility for them to choose a mate with?

Obviously we are a enlightened society where more than just physical appearance matters, but these 'instincts' persist from our evolutionary past.

it strikes me that most instincts we have have been pretty much subsumed by culture

I agree.. but I also think that many persist in subtle ways.

[mathcam]

It's instinctual to learn, perhaps. In any case, it's certainly not a learned behavior.

Cam

[cuban smoker]

That's kindof the idea behind my brain argument. It's instinctual to learn in a way. We all do it, and we all do it based on the interaction of the hypothalamus and the cortex. The ability to learn is definetely not learned itself, but it can be developed. Our behaviour is influenced by how and what we learn. I think I could agree with this statement.

[BadAndie]

BadAndie: If you believe Freud's theory about ID, then surely you have to believe that we have human instincts! (Or am I missing something?)

I didn't say i believed in it, i just said that it reminded me of Freud's theory.

I think that humans are the exception to the rule that every animal has instincts.

[jeep]

think that humans are the exception to the rule

Ah, that puts the burden of proof on you, then. You have to show HOW all the proposed "instincts" are actually learned reactions. I'm still confused how you are defining instinct. By the m-w definitions we clearly have instinct.

a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason

I personally believe that humans have an instinct for language. Search for "Innateness Hypothesis" for more details.
Fight or Flight is instinct- you get the urge without reason.
The impulse to mate. The impulse to protect your possesions and children.

Those are not learned behavior. And just because there are exceptions, you do realize that doesn't make it not an instinct.

Now if you are saying that there is not one instinct that all humans share, that is a different question and I don't think I can take a stance against that. If you are saying that humans can resist their instincts, that is also a viable stance. But to say humans have no instinct seems pretty out there. Instincts are tendencies, not something that everyone has.

-JEEP

[Guest]

Quote:
a largely inheritable and unalterable tendency of an organism to make a complex and specific response to environmental stimuli without involving reason


I personally believe that humans have an instinct for language. Search for "Innateness Hypothesis" for more details.
Fight or Flight is instinct- you get the urge without reason.
The impulse to mate. The impulse to protect your possesions and children.

Let me ask u this one question:

would a human infant be able to do any of the things u have just said were instincts?

There was a little girl who was never taught to walk, or talk. She is in her teens to early 20s now, she still can't talk and she walks with the use of a walker. Surly if walking and talking were instincts she would be able to do both these things.

As for careing for young, if this were an instinct would a mother or father wouldn't abuse their child, yet there are parents who do. And the need to have children, would abortion be around if this was true?

in order to call something an insitct, you have to include what was said, in addtion think of a new born child, and also think of the things that people do. If it were an instict, everyone would be able to do it, including infants.

-BA

[jeep]

in order to call something an insitct, you have to include what was said, in addtion think of a new born child, and also think of the things that people do. If it were an instict, everyone would be able to do it, including infants.

This is why we cannot agree. This is a blatantly incorrect statement from my point of view. I don't want to get into a discussion of semantics.

-JEEP

Edit: That statement also "proves" that everything that animals do are not instincts too...

[CoolBot]

Jeep, instincts are behaviors. That's why fight or flight and many other examples in this thread don't qualify; they are just responses to stimuli. Yes, colloquially, we use the word instinct to refer to this sort of thing, but if we were using a colloquial definition instead of a techinical definition, we'd have to include a baseball player catching a fly ball, which is clearly learned behavior.

If humans do I have instincts, I think they only govern the large part of our behaviour when we're young. And even then, much of our behavior is little more than random until we find something that achieves a desired goal.

[jeep]

?? What is the "technical" definition we are talking about? Instincts are responses, not behaviors. Behaviors are the observable outcome of the instinct.
Behaviors are ALSO the observable outcome of values.

The key to determining if a behavior is due to instinct is this: Do we do the behavior because we reasoned out it was the right answer or not? If it is not due to reason, then it's due to instinct. The murkiness is that most people couldn't state the values they have and so many behaviors that are made with split second reson are because of these values and prior experience.

And just to clarify: Language does not mean speaking. Almost all infants do form language. When they don't it's due to phisiological issues. Having a language doesn't mean that all humans will develop it the same. Read the book

Baby Signs

. Babies form their own sign language even if no one understands. It is their attempt to communicate. They LEARN that certain signs and sounds get a better response so they reuse those. Watching my daughter learn to talk was an amazing experience. My wife and I were also very observant for her baby signs, so she was able to communicate with us much earlier than most and therefore we didn't have to deal with as much crying. This holds true for everyone I know who has tried to keep track of their baby signs.

[Talitha]

I agree, we have to have a common definition before our arguments will get us anywhere. Maybe we should create another thread: "The definition of instinct as it applies in human psychology" And once we've all agreed on that (or beaten a few people into submission) we could come back here and have the "Do we have instincts?" argument. To behaviourists, all that matters is observable behaviour. Therefore a behaviourist definition of 'instinct' is going to be different than (for eg.) a sociobiologist definition. Hmmm

I agree with Jeep about our innate ability for aquiring language. Noam Chomsky is the main theorist in this area. (Have you learned about Chomsky yet, BadAndie?) He says that that human language is so complex that we would never be able to learn it so quickly if we were just a blank slate reacting to external stimuli.

[bigbenwd]

I actually can remember thinking in plain english when I was an infant, before I was able to talk, and I'm not making this up. I remember not being able to talk was really frustrating, because I know what the item was, i just couldn't say it.

[CoolBot]

So Jeep, if I understand your baby sign language example, an infant tries various signs until one works. After that, the baby uses the same sign to mean the same thing? Sounds like learned behaviour to me. Unless you mean the drive to communicate is an instinct. Depending how broad a definition of instinct one is using, I guess it could be considered an instinct. But then, drives aren't behaviors.

The key to determining if behavior is learned or instinctual is not if it was reasoned out at all. A learned behavior is one thats repeated because at one point in the past, that behavior proved successful. No reasoning is needed. Just because a behavior is unconcious doesn't mean it wasn't learned at one point.

Instincts are responses, not behaviors. Behaviors are the observable outcome of the instinct.

What? Even the definition you quoted intimated instincts were behaviors, not simple responses. Incidently, it also intimated there are no exceptions to instincts within an organism.

Since it would be useful to know everyones definitions of instinct, the one I remember from my psychology courses is an instinct is basically any innate behavior and generally does note vary amoung different individuals within a species.

[jeep]

Well, as I said, I don't want to get into a discussion of semantics. I can define blue in such a way that it's true that the sky is not blue.

-JEEP

[Mr_Gnome_It_All]

I've always believed that humans do have instincts, but they've gone dormant due to the fact that we don't need them the way we would if we were to live like other animals.

Basic animal instincs, such as hunting for food, are no longer needed for people because society has made them obsolete.