Lindsay Lowe's Archive

Influential behaviorists like B.F. Skinner were interested in studying natural human reactions and testing them. Skinner believed that people have little control over how we turn out to be as adults, that we are ultimately a product of circumstances and children are extremely malleable. I would say that Skinner most belongs amongst Creationists because of his interest in the way humanity is- and why. Behaviorism generally studies how animals respond and react, and why their “personalities” reflect lessons learned (esp. humans).

Skinner is probably most famous for his work with operant conditioning. He was concerned with rewards and punishments that happened after the response of the experiment, which he called “reinforcements”. These dictated what responses would occur later after future trials because the subject was either more or less likely to repeat the same behavior after the reinforcement. Skinner was curious as to why we respond the way we do in different situations. He attempted to explain the production of behaviors. Many behaviorists argue that our personality is basically just a compilation of our learned behaviors and habits- in what situations an individual has been punished or rewarded. This view gives little credit to people as having free thoughts. Although Skinners contributions to psychology were considerably modern, therapists today still hold his techniques and research invaluable.

Ivan Petrovich Pavlov is well known for his research on animal digestion and responses. His likely most famous work included the discovery of the conditioned reflex, or the “Pavlov’s dog” experiment. The way he performed the experiment was to measure amounts of gastric juices excreted by a dog, paired with the stimuli associated with food powder. This experiment in animal instincts is easily paralleled to explain human behavior studies.

I would classify Ivan Pavlov in the Fall category. He has attempted to explain “quirks” of animal behavior, and what temptations we might give in to. By understanding simple reflexes or responses that can be induced within us, we can then begin to interpret how we respond. This is pertinent to the Fall because these principles are currently used in many forms of advertising research today in order to tempt people effectively. The Fall deals with innate human instincts that we have trouble controlling, I think Pavlov does a good job of delving into this. Conditioned reflexes even today are considered a cornerstone in the field of psychology.

Arguably, Creationism could embody Pavlov as well. I could see how someone might think that he is grasping how we were created and attempting to learn about humanity from the perspective of what makes us tick, rather than what breaks us.

William James was an influential psychologist and physician who began the movement towards modern American psychology. James studied many scientific fields before becoming a longtime professor of anatomy at Harvard. In his book, Principles of Psychology, James explains analysis, introspection, experiment, and comparison- the methods to his psychological approach. These points defined the extent of knowledge of the brain in the early 1900’s. Much of William James’ works focus on the principle of Free Will, although James was probably best known for his stance on Pragmatism and Functionalism. James could be classified under the Fall exploring the facets of the human body, explicitly the brain. I believe that his focus on the human condition is exemplified by what flaws and quirks that man possesses. We can never come out of our own body and this is a weakness discovered and explained by James.

Charles Darwin is the famous natural scientist accredited with the idea of ‘Survival of the Fittest’. On his voyage on the HMS Beagle, he observed the different traits of sparrows from island to island, how their diets and beak shapes were altered. His evolutionary theory revolutionized the way we look at ourselves as a species, as well as our role in the universe. Darwin researched the adaptive habits of many animals to determine how their feeding habits, mating habits, ecosystems and other factors affected their genetic makeup. Darwin specifically studied animals adapting to diet and climate changes to see how their species developed, in order to determine ideas about their origin. This is why I would categorize Darwin’s work under Creation.

Darwin’s goal was to explain where we came from and animals and plants descended, evolved, and mutated to become whatever they are today. I have read the book, “On the Origin of Species,” and drew conclusions that Darwin sought answers to creation-like questions; how are we different from other primates? Natural selection as an ecological principle is based on the branching pattern of evolution over time. Scientists (who accept this theory) believe that living organisms innately need their genes to prevail.

Extremely controversial, this principle is thought to deny the existence of a God in some ways, although it is not popularly believed that this was his intention. The immense theological implications of this theory of evolution were unparalleled. People could not believe that Darwin would deny divine creation. Still today, people have trouble distinguishing the difference between the theory of evolution and atheism.

Despite a tragic upbringing and delinquent adolescence, Rousseau found himself on a colorful journey to knowledge. What we know about this figure is a life of hard knocks. Rousseau was quoted as having said, “Man is born free and yet we see hum everywhere in chains.” This was intended to speak out about government control and give power back to the people but there are many alternative explanations for this. I consider his thoughts and others like it to be Redemption-esque. Moving forward, what are things we can change about ourselves, our culture?

Another interesting perspective from Jean-Jacques Rousseau was one of personal feeling as a motivator for action. This means that we often discount the importance of our feelings. This position may have been heavily influenced by his personal outsider experience with the church and their mandates that seem to not take human nature into consideration. Many of his closest colleagues were religious, and he once falsely entered the Catholic church to receive benefits from the church. The idea of appealing to one anothers sensitive side is mildly reminiscent of redemption to me also because, although he may have intended to be pointing out a flaw in humanity, we can draw a lot from this as counselors and psychologists. The bright albeit cynical philosopher Rousseau gave light to a perspective on how people should conduct themselves and how we should relate to one another with compassion and understanding.
One personal reflection I would like to submit relates to anxiety and social phobias. These are a metaphorical example of the “chains” brought on by ourselves. Fear is something very fictitious from the outside looking in, yet is real and impossible to the one experiencing it. The humanistic perspective is one that identifies personal experience as a truth and suggests that we always consider one anothers feelings.

I would categorize the works of Francisco Petrarch with the idea of redemption. “Petrarch was concerned with the freeing of the human spirit from the confines of medieval tradition.” (p.99) He was a revolutionist in his philosophy because he saw what was flawed with popular beliefs at the time, and sought to influence people.

Petrarch urged people to return to religion for personal reasons such as satisfaction and counsel. Similarly, encouraged the study of classics written by human beings for their outwardly reflective value. This supports redemption because Petrarch believed in living life on Earth now. Lastly, Francisco Petrarch’s “skepticism towards all forms of dogma paved the way for modern science.” (p.100) This shows that the petitions of this man encouraged the consideration of today. Not exclusively, “who are we?” but also, “what can we be doing?”

This is applicable to a psychology class because wecan apply the progressive thought process in our field of study to challenge ourselves and popular belief. The theory of Petrarch is imperative to Christianity to approach our personal reflection differently. This open-minded approach doesn’t act out of obligations but for personal gain.

This photograph shows Petrarch depicted as holding an unlabeled book. I included this graphic because I associate him with literature and embracing cultural works of art. He is considered the “Father of the Renaissance” for this reason.

didn’t upload the first time

I like to associate Aristotle with creation theory because it was typical of him to inquire of life and purpose. Many of his thoughts were primitive and basic questions simply delving into what human life means and what separates us from other life forms. At the completion of our life, have we accomplished our full function?

Other notable philosophies included other principles about our human condition. For example, he questions happiness and justice: virtues given to human life. Is this what separates us from other animal life? Also what makes the human mind complex? These are ways of asking why we are created this way. Asking about causation as Aristotle was known to do is like talking about our problems on terrestrial Earth. Essentially, like the philosophy of “everything happens for a reason” which is a facet of our physical state on Earth. All natural processes we know of can be traced back to a cause, and so forth. The thought process of Aristotle are things that are important in the here and now.

I believe he is most easily categorized as a creation theorist as opposed to fall, redemption or new creation because the content of what we know of Aristotle today was wonders of life on earth. Although we have a limited knowledge of Aristotle’s view of intelligent design and literally creationism, he attempts to explain big questions like, “what are we doing here?” http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/aristotle-causality/#FouCauSciNat