scholarly journals The concept of human nature in Noam Chomsky

2018 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 1092
Author(s):  
Norman Roland Madarasz ◽  
Daniel Peres Santos

One of the constants in Noam Chomsky’s philosophical, linguistic and ethical positions is the existence of what he calls “human nature”. Following Marx, Darwin and last century’s revolutions in the social sciences, human nature has been one of the most contested conceptual holdovers from modern European philosophy. Chomsky’s discoveries and models on syntax and language make up one of the frameworks to most critically offset the traditional moral dimension of human nature. Contrary to most traditions prior to his work, language can no longer be restricted to either mind, soul or spirit. Language, as Chomsky has continually upheld and sharply refined, is a physical and biological process. But how his notion of human nature derives from this process is complex, as he seems to disregard philosophy’s classic analytic delineation between the descriptive causal realm of human nature and the normative axiological extensions of the same concept. In this paper, we seek to examine the philosophical and ontological implications of Chomsky’s claim that human nature derives from the innate dimension of the language faculty. Not only does Chomsky maintain the category of human nature, he also indexes it to the question of freedom. We thereby argue for the coherence of his proposal and show how it operates to weld the perspective of a modal theory of biologically-rooted creativity to innate conditions specific to his theory of language generation. However, we question whether its restriction to humans alone is sustainable from a scientific perspective by putting forth the claim that Chomsky’s science is in fact a radical ontology of social subjectivation. *** O conceito de natureza humana em Noam Chomsky ***Uma das constantes no posicionamento filosófico, linguístico e ético de Noam Chomsky é a existência do que ele chama de “natureza humana”. Seguindo Marx, Darwin e as revoluções do último século nas ciências sociais, a natureza humana tem sido um dos remanescentes conceituais mais contestados da filosofia moderna europeia. As descobertas e os modelos de Chomsky sobre a sintaxe e a linguagem, configuram um dos quadros que mais objeta criticamente a tradicional dimensão moral da natureza humana. Contrária à maioria das tradições anteriores ao seu trabalho, a linguagem não pode mais ser restringida à mente, alma ou ao espírito. Linguagem, como Chomsky tem constantemente defendido e fortemente aperfeiçoado, é um processo físico e biológico. Mas a maneira que sua noção de natureza humana deriva desse processo é complexa, pois ele parece desconsiderar a clássica delineação analítica da filosofia, entre o reino casual descritivo da natureza humana e as extensões axiológico-normativas do mesmo conceito. Neste artigo, nós procuramos examinar as implicações filosóficas e ontológicas da afirmação de Chomsky à qual a natureza humana deriva da dimensão inata da faculdade da linguagem. Chomsky, não só mantém a categoria da natureza humana, como também a indexa à questão da liberdade. Nós, portanto, argumentamos em favor da coerência de sua proposta e mostramos como ela opera para soldar a perspectiva de uma teoria modal da criatividade biologicamente enraizada, com condições inatas específicas de sua teoria da linguagem gerativa. Entretanto, nós questionamos se a restrição dessa somente aos humanos é sustentável a partir de uma perspectiva científica, ao apresentarmos a afirmação de que a ciência de Chomsky é na verdade uma ontologia radical de subjetivação social.Palavras-chave: Chomsky, Noam; natureza humana; faculdade de linguagem; programa biolinguístico; decodificando Chomsky; liberdade.

Author(s):  
Tim Lewens

Many evolutionary theorists have enthusiastically embraced human nature, but large numbers of evolutionists have also rejected it. It is also important to recognize the nuanced views on human nature that come from the side of the social sciences. This introduction provides an overview of the current state of the human nature debate, from the anti-essentialist consensus to the possibility of a Gray’s Anatomy of human psychology. Three potential functions for the notion of species nature are identified. The first is diagnostic, assigning an organism to the correct species. The second is species-comparative, allowing us to compare and contrast different species. The third function is contrastive, establishing human nature as a foil for human culture. The Introduction concludes with a brief synopsis of each chapter.


Author(s):  
Crisbelli Domingos ◽  
Sebastião Lourenço dos Santos

In the past decade or so, a small but rapidly growing band of literary scholars, theorists, and critics has been working to integrate literary study with Darwinian social science. These scholars can be identified as the members of a distinct school in the sense that they share a certain broad set of basic ideas. They all take “the adapted mind” as an organizing principle, and their work is thus continuous with that of the “adaptationist program” in the social sciences. Adaptationist thinking is grounded in Darwinian conceptions of human nature (2004, p. 6).


Author(s):  
Chelsea Drent

In Inuktituk, nuna means the land. It means the rocks, rivers, mountains and the forests. Nuna is everything, and all parts of the nuna have an inua, which means a living soul. There is a special, if not sacred relationship between members of northern communities and the nuna. However, these sacred relationships are all too often glossed over, if not forgotten. In the social sciences, author John Sorenson articulates a critical argument and evocative opinions about hunting in his article; Hunting is a Part of Human Nature (John Sorenson, “Hunting is a Part of Human Nature,” Culture of Prejudice, Arguments in Critical Social Science. Eds. Judith Blackwell, Murray Smith, John Sorenson, (Canada: Broadview Press, 2003).Sorenson demonstrates that hunting is an unnatural human activity which is linked to a cultural domination over animals. However, in these statements Sorenson neglects to consider the northern hunter in Inuit communities around the world. Cultural myths, social constructions and daily activities prove that hunting animals is a core value to how many Inuit peoples relate to each other and perceive themselves in the cosmos. This is a study that examines the relationship of people, land, animals and faith in order to understand the significance of hunting within Inuit cultures.


Open Theology ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 5 (1) ◽  
pp. 227-240
Author(s):  
David Mark Dunning

Abstract Existentialism centres reflection upon the bodily existence of the human person. Generally, however, theological anthropology has struggled to manage developments in biological and psychological sciences that have made clear the pluriformity of human embodiment. The work of the social sciences has also increased the visibility of minority, disadvantaged, or neglected persons. Theological anthropology must begin to conceive of an inclusive, non-static understanding of human nature that fully acknowledges the integrity and the diverse identities of the human subject. To riposte, this article utilises the interplay between phenomenology and theology in the work of the contemporary philosopher-theologian Jean-Luc Marion. Marion undeniably sees the root of the human in the concrete free person; he recognises an ever-receding, indefinable horizon towards which the incomprehensible existence of the subjective phenomenon is universally oriented. In this article I focus on how a combination of the theology of the subject and its existential orientation, realised through the freedom of incomprehensibility à la Marion, may provide a dynamic basis for understanding human nature at a time when subjective diversity is ever more asserted.


1994 ◽  
Vol 37 (3) ◽  
pp. 375-389 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alexandra Maryanski

Outside of sociology, evolutionary theory is once again commanding widespread attention in social science. Having sat out the spirited debates over sociobiology in the 1970s, most sociologists are largely unaware that the field has prospered and is now a respected, interdisciplinary science with a growing number of influential scholars within the social sciences. This article takes a critical look at sociobiology with a consideration of both its historical origins and its now modified theoretical stance, which is exemplified by Timothy Crippen's article “Toward a Neo-Darwinian Sociology.” In addition, this essay summarizes an alternative approach that might be called “evolutionary sociology.” While it also incorporates the Modern Synthesis, it uses established sociological methods and theory, along with primate data and the fossil and archaeological records, to consider the biological legacy of humankind.


2019 ◽  
Vol 0 (0) ◽  
Author(s):  
Olaf Kühne ◽  
Rainer Duttmann

Abstract The ecosystem services approach has attracted tremendous attention from policymaking, planning and interdisciplinary sciences over the last decades. Despite its broad acknowledgement worldwide, there are a number of well-known conceptual and methodological limitations that impair its use and practical operationalisation. A brief discussion of these deficits is conducted from the integrated perspective of natural and social sciences. The paper then critically addresses the question of whether and to what extent the diversity, complexity and hybridity of the human-nature context should be shaped into a uniform scheme, disregarding the differing scales of the social, economic and ecological processes, functions and the trade-offs between them.


2020 ◽  
pp. 095935432096775
Author(s):  
Diego Romaioli ◽  
Sheila McNamee

This article aims to review the main criticisms of social construction (SC) after its formalization as a “movement” in the social sciences. The critiques are organized into six dominant areas that define the relationship between SC and reality, truth, language, human nature, scientific enterprise, and society. For each one of these categories, the more frequent objections raised over time by scholars will be outlined and counterarguments will be offered, centering on common misunderstandings of SC. We show how the major difficulty in embracing SC principles is attributable to the use of incommensurate assumptions and misunderstandings of the aim of social construction.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document