Human Nature According Descartes and Darwin - Essay Example

?Descartes & Darwin Human nature is a complex thing, comprising of a number of psychological, biological and philosophical elements that make it difficult to define and explain. Descartes, in Discourse on the Method, suggests that human nature is so complex that it cannot be explained fully by science. Darwin, in The Descent of Man, argues that human nature can be fully explained by science and a number of evolutionary processes provide evidence for this statement. The purpose of this paper is to explore the contrasting views of Descartes and Darwin on human nature to compare them and show why they are at odds with each other. Secondly, the paper will explore how history and modern science has added more weight to the views of Darwin which suggests that this view may be more ‘correct’ in its nature. The Debate on Human Nature One of the most well-known parts of Descartes’ philosophical views is the concept that to be human is to be composed of two incompatible pieces; the body and the soul. The body is full of the natural processes, whilst the soul contains all the information that we need to be ourselves, including all of our decision-making faculties and our personalities (Descartes, 2006). These two components, perhaps communicating through the pineal gland, are thoroughly different in composition and matter. Descartes would argue that human nature is partially comprised of the soul which cannot be explained by science and therefore there are elements of ourselves that science cannot explain. Descartes did, however, suggest that “the mind depends so much on temperament and the disposition of one's bodily organs that, if it is possible to find a way to make people generally more wise and more skilful than they have been in the past, I believe that we should look for it in medicine” (Descartes, 2006, p45), meaning that there are some elements of human nature which should look to science for explanation. Charles Darwin had very different ideas. Often known as the father of evolution, Darwin explored a great number of scientific concepts pertaining to human and animal behavior, often finding that these two concepts were linked and very similar. This view can be illustrated from Darwin’s words that “it has often and confidently been asserted, that man's origin can never be known: but ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science” (Darwin, 1871, p4). This just shows Darwin’s faith in science, and the power of science to explain even the inexplicable. Human nature is no exception from this rule, and as Darwin suggests, “there is no fundamental difference between man and the higher animals in their mental faculties” (Darwin, 1971, p34). Having studied a number of animal behaviors throughout his career, it is obvious that Darwin had more interaction with different creatures and therefore more information to draw his strong conclusion about human nature from. As the father of evolution, it is obvious that Darwin will favor an evolutionary perspective of human nature, one that suggests that all elements of our behavior and other aspects of being a human can be explained by science. Although there were some gaps in the evidence Darwin provided for this hypothesis, these have been slowly filled since the publication of The Descent of Man and are continually being updated as time goes on. It is perhaps the fact that Darwin’s work fits so neatly with modern science which makes it the more appealing hypothesis, as explained further below. These views are evidently at odds with each other. Although Descartes does alert the reader to the importance of science and medicine, it is evident from Discourse on the Method that there are some things that Descartes feels are inexplicable. This may seem like a feasible resolution to come to, as human nature and personalities appear to be extremely complicated and different from those of other mammals. Darwin, however, puts things differently, suggesting that all mammals (including humans) follow a very similar pattern of behaviors, this being proof that we are all biologically linked and therefore providing evidence of a scientific explanation of human nature. The following part of this paper explains why Darwin has the more feasible idea, particularly in the context of modern science. Explaining Human Nature Evidently, there are a number of parts of both Descartes’ and Darwin’s works that make both views about the science of human nature seem feasible. However, it should be noted that Discourse on the Method predated The Descent of Man by almost two centuries, which means that The Descent of Man benefited from current scientific knowledge and technologies. Bearing this in mind, it seems obvious that Darwin’s 1871 work would be more compatible with our current scientific views of human nature and this is the reason why this view perhaps seems more correct. There have been a lot of developments in genetics and evolution which have provided reasoning for a lot of aspects of human nature and behaviors, finding that Darwin’s assertion that all mammals have similar behaviors is correct. Current scientific knowledge has provided an explanation for most aspects of human nature, with developments being made almost daily that expand on this topic. This means that Descartes’ immediately seems wrong in the context of the modern world. This does not, however, mean that Descartes is completely wrong. Descartes did highlight the importance of medicine in determining human nature and this should not be ignored when analyzing his works. There are many parts of human nature that do depend on medicine, just as Descartes ascertains in Discourse on the Method. We should also acknowledge that some parts of human nature have not been explained by science, such as the reason why genetically identical twins should have different personalities. This means that there may still be some truth in the views of Descartes on science, although it seems increasingly unlikely that we are composed of two types of matter in the way that Descartes suggests. We should always be careful not to completely ignore these types of philosophies, particularly as they may only seem wrong in the current scientific and philosophical context. Conclusion From the current perspective, it seems that Darwin has been continually proved right in his views on human nature, as science keeps giving more and more reasons for different parts of our personalities and psychologies. This should not be ignored when trying to find a ‘correct’ explanation for human nature, although some parts have not been fully explained. It seems from the analysis above that Descartes is mostly wrong in his view, although we should be careful not to discount it completely for he does have some interesting ideas about the nature of science. References Darwin, Charles. 1871. The Descent of Man: And Selection in Relation to Sex. J. Murray. Descartes, Rene. 2006. Discourse on Method. ReadHowYouWant.com. Read More