Bahá’í Philosophy of Human Nature

Abstract

At the beginning of The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature, cognitive scientist and philosopher Steven Pinker asserts that[e]veryone has a of nature. Everyone has to anticipate the behavior of others, and that means we all need theories about what makes people tick. A tacit of nature-that behavior is caused by thoughts and feelings-is embedded in the way we think about people. . . . Rival theories of are entwined in different ways of life and different political systems, and have been the source of much conflict over the course of history. (1; emphasis added)For millennia, the major theories of have come from religion... every society must operate with a of nature. (3; emphasis added)A theory of nature, as Pinker conceives it, refers to the intrinsic or ways of thinking, feeling, and acting that distinguish beings from other forms of life and, according to him, is inescapable for individuals and societies. Such theories are present whether they are held consciously or unconsciously in the mind, communicated explicitly or implicitly in a text, expressed in traditional customs and folktales, or embedded in religious beliefs and ceremonies. They may be embryonic or fully developed. They may be embodied in myths and legends or expressed in philosophic treatises such as Plato's Republic, Augustine's The City of God, and Marx's The Communist Manifesto. However they may be couched, these theories tell us what to expect from people in regards to such vital issues as aggression, or even outright violence, helpfulness, reliability, good will, and spirituality. Beyond these, philosophies of consider meta-issues related to such as, for example, the role of intrinsic and extrinsic nurture, the different kinds of needs shared by all humans,1 personal and collective psychopathology,2 and the degree of universality of mankind's physical and mental constitution. Philosophies of also deal with the meaning and purpose of life in this world and the next, mankind's relationship to the supernatural or nonmaterial world, and the role, if any, of messengers and prophets. Finally, they set the basis for morality by providing a standard for deciding which behaviors we can expect from all humans, which can be considered natural for the kind of beings we are, which are acceptable, and which are not.One of the most vigorously debated issues about is the existence of an intrinsic, predetermined or essence. Is what we call human nature the product of environmental influences, a set of innate attributes and potentials, or a mixture of both? The terms of this controversy have been most famously formulated by John Locke, who maintains that the mind has no inherent ideas, attributes, capacities, tendencies, or potentials-a view that is now known as the tabula rasa or blank slate (2.1.2).3 According to this notion, everything in the mind is added after birth by worldly experience and the education provided by others. Locke's suggests that because beings are shaped entirely by their environment, the perfectibility of man is contingent on the manipulation of the social environment. This idea was taken up by others, among them JeanJacques Rousseau, who popularized the idea that can be improved by strictly natural, non-religious means.4 Marxism also holds that is shaped by the environment and concludes, therefore, that we must overthrow all the old social structures in order to create a new kind of being.5 Human environmentalism-the belief that it is possible to shape beings any way we like by controlling the kind of experiences people have-was an idea promulgated most famously by B. F. Skinner and other behavioral psychologists. Perhaps one of the most startling results of Locke's blank state is the claim that sexual identity is not intrinsically constrained and determined by biology but is, rather, a matter of preference because there is no particular to limit our choices. …