An etiology of human behaviour (original) (raw)

On the Origin of Human Behavior

Numerous behavioral and decision-making theories have been proposed within various branches of physiology, psychology, and social sciences. However, few authors have studied the origin of behavior. It has been suggested that human behavior can be described as an algorithm, defining an action-execution process through a sequence of steps and feedback mechanisms. Given this premise, origins of human behavior are comparatively assessed to other forms of nature; to facilitate this comparison, algorithms were developed to sequence the functionality of inanimate matter (i.e. motionless or inoperative matter) and animate life (i.e. living organisms). Subsequently, the three developed algorithms – for matter, life, and mind – allowed to identify both their common and unique features, as well as to follow the evolutionary flow between the physical, biological, and psychological dimensions of nature. We postulate that algorithms of behavior of physical objects, biological organisms, and human...

Human Behavior, from Psychology to a Transdisciplinary Insight

2014

Concerns about the capacity of understanding and making predictions on the human behaviour were supported by immediate personal interests and wider social interests. Their understanding and prediction of the behavior has a prescientific history based on phrenology and astrology, subsequently reaching a scientific approach embodied by psychological measurement. The objective research of the mental phenomena, which started in the last decades of the nineteenth century, targeted the general laws and the main features that can be noticed in the conduct of any person. In spite of the diversity of the branches of psychology, much of the experimental research continued in the same direction. This article provides a summary of the most important approaches of the behavior in psychology, and highlighting its many meanings. To have an overview of the human behavior it is necessary to restore the fragments; this phenomenon is difficult to achieve because of the misunderstandings of methodological and conceptual level in the branches of psychology. From this reason it is proposed to approach the behavior from a transdisciplinary perspective, providing a more unified insight due to the third party and levels of reality. Thus the complexity and multidimensionality of human behavior can be understood. Behavior can be explained by taking into account both personal experience and social and cultural context in which it occurs, the mental state of the person who commits a behavior, and personality structure, or the physiological, neurological or the genetic influences.

The Origin of Modern Human Behavior

Archaeology's main contribution to the debate over the origins of modern humans has been investigating where and when modern human behavior is first recognized in the archaeological record. Most of this debate has been over the empirical record for the appearance and distribution of a set of traits that have come to be accepted as indicators of behavioral modernity. This debate has resulted in a series of competing models that we explicate here, and the traits are typically used as the test implications for these models. However, adequate tests of hypotheses and models rest on robust test implications, and we argue here that the current set of test implications suffers from three main problems:

Perspectives on Human Nature and Implications for Research in the Behavioural Sciences

International Journal of Emerging Trends in Social Sciences

This paper examined the perspectives of human behaviour as a precursor to determine the methodological preference for inquiry into the knowledge of its complex and intricate nature. The paper identified some fundamental taxonomies of action, expressed in human action, social action, purposive action, environmentally constrained action, and emergent process action. These constitute perspectives on action that are broadly categorized into prospective and retrospective perspectives on action. The prospective view holds that meaning of action is constructed and known before the action, while the retrospective perspective presupposes that meaning of action can only be constructed and known after the action. However, the bipolar views tend to elicit different methodologies from opposing intellectual domains. The paper contended that for the sake of robust social knowledge, mixed methods defined in methodological pluralism should be adopted in inquiry related to the behavioural sciences.

Henshilwood & Marean 2003. The origin of modern human behavior Current Anthro

Current Anthropology

Archaeology's main contribution to the debate over the origins of modern humans has been investigating where and when modern human behavior is first recognized in the archaeological record. Most of this debate has been over the empirical record for the appearance and distribution of a set of traits that have come to be accepted as indicators of behavioral modernity. This debate has resulted in a series of competing models that we explicate here, and the traits are typically used as the test implications for these models. However, adequate tests of hypotheses and models rest on robust test implications, and we argue here that the current set of test implications suffers from three main problems:

An aetiology of hominin behaviour

A rough framework for a first attempt to formulate a preliminary aetiology of hominin behaviour is proposed, based on scientific rather than archaeological evidence and reasoning. Distinctive precursors of modernity in human behaviour were present several million years ago, and since then have become gradually more established. By the beginning of the Middle Pleistocene, modern human cognitive processes seem to have been largely established. However, full modernity of behaviour can only have occurred in recent centuries, and there remain great variations in it even among extant conspecifics. This model differs significantly from all narratives offered by mainstream archaeology, which generally place the advent of modern human behaviour 30 or 40 millennia ago. These notions and the hypotheses they are based on appear to be false, however such behaviour is defined. from the obvious lack of internal falsifiability of most archaeological and many palaeoanthropological propositions. For instance, in perceiving cultural evolution as teleological, archaeology ignores that evolution is fundamentally dysteleological-an example of the incommensurabilities between humanistic and scientific terminologies. Since devolution cannot occur in biology, but can and does occur in culture, the respective meanings of "evolution" differ fundamentally in archaeology and biology. Qualities such as behaviour, cognition, intellect, intention or meaning are not recoverable by archaeology. Moreover, the imposition of modern, literate narratives on properties of incredibly remote societies needs to be questioned (Helvenston, 2013). Lithocentric Pleistocene archaeology cannot even define culture reliably, because taphonomically truncated tool traditions are inert to emic identification, nor should they be expected to differentiate cultures. Rather than characterizing cultures by cultural variables, such as rock art, the discipline has invented tool types (etic constructs or "observer-relative, institutional facts"; sensu Searle, 1995), whose combinations are regarded as diagnostic in identifying cultures. These in turn became the basis of invented ethnic entities such as, for instance, "Mousterians". Obviously the concept of such a discrete society, tribe, language group, nation or ethnicity has no sound logical basis. Of the many limitations to the credibility of the discipline, one more needs to be mentioned here: for much of the last two centuries, all of the most important discoveries in Pleistocene archaeology were presented by non-archaeologists and were without exception rejected for decades-a trend that has continued to this day.

p7 psychological interpretation of human actions January_2019_1547128197__116.pdf

Global journal , 2019

ABSTRACT Evaluating the human self in human personality, it is found that the integrated psychological and sociological perspectives lead us to the discovery of various human actions. There are various social and cultural forces that vehemently determines human actions. These human actions under the inuence of various emotions – psychological, social, sexual - are integrated to constitute human self. The causative factors of human actions that lie in these emotions are the main factors for the development of personality. In this investigative arena, different psychologists including some social scientists have expressed their opinions regarding human behaviour in terms of human loves and jealousies along with sexual tendencies. KEYWORDS : Society, Human Emotions and Actions, Self, Libido-centric Consciousnes