They look at man as a blank state wherein environment dictates what would become of that blank. In this perspective, a man on a harsh or violent environment would end up a bad person; on the other hand, being on a peaceful environment would make him a good one. With little regards on heredity, they viewed psychology as primarily dependent on nurturing. This supports their stand that a man's experience molds him to a person he ought to be regardless of his nature. It implies that conditioning determines what a person would become. May that person be an artist, a doctor or a criminal; his genes have least thing to do with it. That a man's development is solely based on what he had experienced.
Cognitive psychology, on the other hand, focuses on man's mental capability. It regards man as the highest form of creature that is biologically equipped with logic and rationality. A man's intelligence is attributed to his innate genetic makeup. For them a man's recognition between good and evil lies naturally with his own. Man being able to comprehend life and its intricacies would certainly manage to distinguish a much simpler matter such as recognizing good and evil. His life's experiences influenced by its underlying factor such as people whom he encountered, hardships and joy, he learn to act accordingly. ...Show more