فلسفه علم

تکامل و طبیعت انسان

نوع مقاله : پژوهشی

نویسنده

حسن میانداری

دانشیار، مطالعات علم، مؤسسه پژوهشی حکمت و فلسفه ایران، تهران، ایران

https://doi.org/10.30465/ps.2026.54880.1838
چکیده
«طبیعت انسان» از دیدگاه­های مختلف تکاملی مورد بررسی دانشمندان قرار گرفته است. ما آراء چند دانشمند را از دیدگاه­های جامعه­زیست­شناسی، روان­شناسی تکاملی، تکامل فرهنگی، ساختن کنام، بوم­شناسی رفتاری، و سازگان­های تکوینی طرح می­کنیم. بعد از دانشمندان فیلسوفان هم «طبیعت انسان» را تحلیل کرده­اند. ما آراء چهار فیلسوف را طرح می­کنیم. این آراء نشان می­دهند مفهوم «طبیعت انسان» با چالش تشتت نظریات و بحران تعریف روبه­روست به طوری که برخی خواستار حذف آن از ادبیات علمی شده­اند. ما نظریة «جامع مقید» را پیشنهاد می­دهیم. بر این اساس «طبیعت انسان» مفهومی فلسفی است. طبیعت­های توصیفی و تبیینی انسان مجموعه­های جامع مقیدی از صفات هستند. و علوم مختلف به توصیف و تبیین جوانب مختلفی از طبیعت انسان، اثر محدود کنندة آن و اثر فرهنگ بر آن می­پردازند.

کلیدواژه‌ها

طبیعت انسان
نظریة جامع مقید
تکامل
فرهنگ
تکوین
توصیف
تبیین
موضوعات

عنوان مقاله English

Evolution and Human Nature

نویسنده English

Hassan Miandari
Associate professor, Department of Science Studies, Iranian Institute of Philosophy, Tehran, Iran.
چکیده English

"Human nature" has been investigated by scientists from various evolutionary perspectives. We consider the views of some scientists from sociobiology, evolutionary psychology, cultural evolution, niche construction, behavioral ecology, and developmental systems perspectives. Philosophers after scientists analyzed "human nature." We consider the views of four philosophers. These views show that the concept of "human nature" is highly controversial, and some even defend its elimination. We propose "disciplined comprehensive" theory of human nature. According to this theory "human nature" is a philosophical concept. Descriptive and explanatory human natures are disciplined comprehensive sets of traits. Different scientific disciplines describe and explain different aspects of human nature, investigate its limiting function and examine cultural influence on it.
Key words: human nature, disciplined comprehensive theory, evolution, culture, development, description, explanation.
Extended Abstract
Introduction
Evolutionary scientists define "human nature" differently and some of them deny it. Wilson says innate behavioral predispositions are bases. Tooby and Cosmides say the set of universal innate psychological mechanisms and developmental programs are bases. Richerson says genes that explain human behavior and were under the influence of culture are bases. Laland and Brown say the term "human nature" should be abandoned. Cashdan says the norms of reaction are bases. Stotz and Griffiths say development is basis. Philosophers after scientists analyze "human nature." Machery says the properties that humans tend to possess as a result of the evolution of their species are bases. Ramsey says the pattern of trait clusters within the totality of possible life histories is basis. Kronfeldner says a pluralist account is basis. Lewens says reliable dispositions of our species are bases. I say disciplined comprehensive traits are bases.
Materials and Methods
This study adopts a philosophical-conceptual approach, employing critical and comparative analysis of selected scientific and philosophical accounts of human nature. On this basis, a disciplined comprehensive theory of human nature is proposed, encompassing diverse disciplinary findings while maintaining principled conceptual constraints.
Discussion and Result
I argue that "human nature" is a philosophical concept. Philosophy determines what conditions "human nature" should have. "Human nature" should be both descriptive and explanatory, should be such that different scientific disciplines could investigate different aspects of it, and should include both commonalities and differences among human beings. Philosophy determines what "human" in "human nature" refers to. "Human" refers to different sets of genus "Homo" according to different scientific disciplines. Philosophy determines whether "human nature" is one kind or different kinds. There are three different kinds of "human nature": classificatory, descriptive, and explanatory.
I argue that descriptive "human natures" consists of "comprehensive" sets of reliable traits. Traits include those that other animals could have, those that could vary, those that could have different evolutionary and non-evolutionary causes, those that could be actual or potential, those that could be individual or social, those that could belong to different ages, those that could be anatomical, physiological, behavioral, and psychological, and those that could be actual or possible.
I argue that these traits should have two probable constraints. First, changing them is probably difficult. There are three kinds of difficulties: epistemic, instrumental, and pragmatic. Second, traits are probably related to other traits and form clusters.
Conclusion
If we consider "human nature" a philosophical concept, then we can go beyond specific perspectives of different scientific disciplines and give a comprehensive definition of it. If we consider "human nature" a comprehensive concept, then we can be open to findings of different scientific disciplines to describe and explain different aspects of it, investigate its limiting function and examine cultural influence on it. And if we consider "human nature" a disciplined concept, then we can prevent it from being too inclusive and flexible.

کلیدواژه‌ها English

human nature
disciplined comprehensive theory
evolution
culture
development
description
explanation
Boyd, Robert, and Peter J. Richerson (2005). The Origin and Evolution of Cultures, Oxford University Press.
Buller, David J. (2006). Adapting Minds: Evolutionary Psychology and the Persistent Quest for Human Nature, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
Cashdan, E. 2013. "What is a human universal? Human behavioral ecology and human nature." In S. M. Downes and E. Machery (Eds.). Arguing About Human Nature, Routledge.
Cronk, Lee (1999). That Complex Whole: Culture And The Evolution Of Human Behavior, Boulder, Oxford: Westview Press.
Downes, Stephen M. (2016). "Human Nature: An Overview." In Richard Joyce (Ed.). The Routledge Handbook of Evolution and Philosophy, New York: Routledge.
Driscoll, C. (2017). "The Evolutionary Culture Concepts," Philosophy of Science, 84, 35-55.
Dupré, John (2001). Human Nature and the Limits of Science, Oxford University Press.
Dupré, J., (2012). Processes of Life: Essays in Philosophy of Biology, Oxford University Press.
Dupré, J. (2021). The Metaphysics of Biology, Cambridge University Press.
Fuentes, A. (2017). "Human niche, human behaviour, human nature," Interface Focus, 7: 20160136.
Griffiths, Paul Edmund (2011). "Our Plastic Nature." In S. Gissis and E. Jablonka (Eds.). Transformations of Lamarckism: From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology. Cambridge, Mass.: MIT Press.
Griffiths, P. E. and Karola Stotz (2018). "Developmental Systems Theory as a Process Theory." In Daniel J. Nicholson and John Dupré, Everything Flows: Towards a Processual Philosophy of Biology. Oxford, United Kingdom: Oxford University Press.
Henrich, Joseph Patrick (2016). The Secret of Our Success: How Culture Is Driving Human Evolution, Domesticating Our Species, and Making Us Smarter, Princeton: Princeton University Press.
Hull, D. L. (1986). "On Human Nature." Proceedings of the Biennial Meeting of the Philosophy of Science Association: 3–13.
Ingold, T. (2006). "Against human nature." In N. Gontier, J. P. Van Bendegem, D. Aerts, (Eds.) Evolutionary Epistemology, Language and Culture, Springer, Dordrecht.
Kitcher, Philip (1985). Vaulting Ambition: Sociobiology and the Quest for Human Nature, MIT Press.
Klasios, J. (2016). "Evolutionizing human nature." New Ideas in Psychology, 40: 103–114.
Kronfeldner, Maria. (2017). "The politics of human nature." In Michel Tibayrenc and Francisco J. Ayala (Eds.). On Human Nature: Evolution, Diversity, Psychology, Ethics, Politics and Religion, Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
Kronfeldner, M. (2018a). "Divide and conquer: The authority of nature and why we disagree about human nature." In Elizabeth Hannon and Tim Lewens (Eds.). Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Kronfeldner, M. (2018b). What’s Left of Human Nature? A Post-essentialist, Pluralist, and Interactive Account of a Contested Concept. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.
Kronfeldner, M., Neil Roughley, and Georg Toepfer (2014). "Recent work on human nature: Beyond traditional essences." Philosophy Compass 9 (9): 642-652.
Laland, Kevin N. and Gillian R. Brown (2018). "The social construction of human nature." In Elizabeth Hannon & Tim Lewens (Eds.).  Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lewens, Tim (2012). "Human Nature: The Very Idea." Philosophy & Technology, 25 (4): 459–474.
Lewens, T. (2015). Cultural Evolution: Conceptual Challenges. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lewens, T. (2017). "Human nature, human culture: the case of cultural evolution." Interface Focus 7: 20170018
Lewens, T. (2018). "Introduction: The Faces of Human Nature." In Elizabeth Hannon and Tim Lewens (Eds.). Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Lewontin, R. C. (1980). "Sociobiology: Another Biological Determinism." International Journal of Health Services, 10 (3), pp. 347-363.
Lumsden, C. J. and E. O. Wilson (2005). Genes, Mind, And Culture: The Coevolutionary Process. World Scientific Publishing Company, 25th Anniversary Edition.
Machery, E. (2008). "A Plea for Human Nature." Philosophical Psychology, 21: 321–329.
Machery, E. (2012) "Reconceptualising Human Nature: Response to Lewens." Philosophy and Technology, 25: 475–478.
Machery, E. (2016). "Human Nature." In D. Livingstone Smith (Ed.). How Biology Shapes Philosophy: New Foundations for Naturalism, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Machery, E. (2018). "Doubling Down on the Nomological Notion of Human Nature." In Elizabeth Hannon and Tim Lewens (Eds.). Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Oyama, Susan (2002). "The nurturing of natures." In Armin Grunwald, Mathias Gutmann, Eva M. Neumann-Held (Eds.). On human nature: Anthropological, biological, and philosophical foundations, Springer.
Pinker, S. (2003). The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Penguin.
Ramsey, G. (2013). "Human nature in a post-essentialist world." Philosophy of Science, 80, 983–993.
Ramsey, G. (2017). "What is human nature for?" In A. Fuentes and A. Visala (Eds.). Verbs, Bones, and Brains: Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Human Nature. Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press.
Ramsey, G. (2023) Human Nature. Cambridge University Press.
Richerson, Peter J. (2018). "The Use and Non-Use of the Human Nature Concept by Evolutionary Biologists." In Elizabeth Hannon and Tim Lewens (Eds.). Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Richerson, P. J., and R. Boyd (2005). Not by Genes Alone: How Culture Transformed Human Evolution, Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
Richerson, P. J., R. Boyd, and J. Henrich (2010). "Gene-Culture Coevolution in the Age of Genomics." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 107: 8985-8992.
Roughley, Neil (2011). "Human Natures." In Sebastian Schleidgen, Michael Jungert, Robert Bauer, and Verena Sandow (Eds.). Human Nature and Self Design, Paderborn: Mentis.
Sahlins, M. (2008). The Western Illusion of Human Nature. Chicago: Prickly Paradigm Press.
Samuels, Richard (2012). "Science and Human Nature." Royal Institute of Philosophy Supplement, 70: 1–28.
Segerstråle, U. (2000). Defenders of the Truth: The Sociobiology Debate, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Sewell, William H. (2005). "The concept(s) of culture." In M. Gabrielle (Ed.). Practicing History: New Directions in Historical Writing after the Linguistic Turn, Spiegel.
Stevenson, Leslie, David L. Haberman, Peter Matthews Wright, Charlotte Witt (2017). Thirteen Theories of Human Nature, ‎7th ed., Oxford University Press.
Stotz, Karola and Paul Griffiths (2018). "A Developmental Systems Account of Human Nature." In Elizabeth Hannon and Tim Lewens (Ed.). Why We Disagree About Human Nature. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides (1989). "Evolutionary psychology and the generation of culture: I. Theoretical considerations." Ethology & Sociobiology, 10(1-3), 29–49
Tooby, J. and L. Cosmides (1990). "On the universality of human nature and the uniqueness of the individual", Journal of Personality, 58: 17–67.
Tooby, J. and L. Cosmides (1992). "The Psychological Foundations of Culture”, in H. Barkow, L. Cosmides and J. Tooby (eds.), The Adapted Mind, New York: Oxford University Press, pp. 19–136.
Tooby, J., and L. Cosmides (2016). "Conceptual Foundations of Evolutionary Psychology." In D. Buss (ed.), The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology, 2nd ed., 3–87. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.
Tooby, J., L. Cosmides, and H. C.  Barrett, (2005).  "Resolving the debate on innate ideas: Learnability constraints and the evolved interpenetration of motivational and conceptual functions." In P. Carruthers, S. Laurence, and S. Stich, (Eds.).  The Innate Mind: Structure and Content,  NY: Oxford University Press.
Wilson, E. O. (1975). Sociobiology: The new synthesis. Harvard University Press.
Wilson, E. O. (1978). On human nature. Harvard University Press.
Wilson, E. O. (1994). Naturalist. Washington, DC: Island Press.
Wilson, E. O. (2004). On Human Nature. 2nd ed. Harvard University Press.
Wrangham, Richard (2019). The Goodness Paradox: The Strange Relationship Between Virtue and Violence in Human Evolution. Pantheon.
فلسفه علم
دوره 15، شماره 2 - شماره پیاپی 30
(پاییز و زمستان)
بهمن 1404
صفحه 251-284

صفحه اصلی

راهنمای نویسندگان

ارسال مقاله

داوران

تماس با ما