1. Why did the Science of Human Relation Slow to Develop ?
Human relations have commanded people's attention from early tomes. The way of people
have been recorded in innumerable myths, folktales, novels, poems, plays, and popular or
philosophical essays. Although the full significance of a human relationship may not be
directly evident, the complexity of feelings and actions that can be understood at a glance is
surprisingly great. For this reason psychology holds an unique position among the sciences.
(Commonsense understanding of human relations can be incisive and usually sufficiently
accurate to facilitate interactions with others.)
" Intuitive " knowledge may be remarkably penetrating and can significantly help us understand
human behavior whereas in the physical sciences such commonsense knowledge is relatively
primitive.
If we erased all knowledge of scientific physics from our modern world, not only would we not have cars and televisions sets, we might even find that the ordinary person was unable to cope with the fundamental mechanical problems of pulleys and levers.
On the other hand, if we removed all knowledge of scientific psychology from our world, problems in interpersonal relations might easily to cope with and solved much as before. We would still " know " how to avoid doing something asked of us and how to get someone to agree with us; we would still " know " when someone was angry and when someone was pleased.
One could even offer sensible explanations for the " whys " of much of self's behavior and feelings.
In other words, the ordinary person has a great and profound understanding of the self and of
other people which, though unformulated or only vaguely conceived, enables one to interact with
others in more or less adaptive ways.
Kohler in referring to the lack of great discoveries in psychology as compared with physics,
accounts for this saying that " people were acquainted with practically all territories of mental
life a long time before the founding of scientific psychology."
Paradoxically, with all this natural, intuitive, commonsense capacity to grasp human relations,
the science of human relations has been one of the last to develop. Dt answer " about the problem of the human behavior.
Human behavior is the complicated activity, dependileasing
illusions people have about themselves; but we might ask why people have always loved to
read pessimistic, debunking writings, from Ecclesiastes to Freud. It has been proposed that
just because we know so much about people intuitively, there has been less incentive for
studying then scientifically : why should one develop a theory, carry out systematic observations,
or make predictions about the obvious ? In any case, the field of human relations, with its vast
literacy documentation but meager scientific treatment, is in great contrast to the field of
physics in which there were relatively few nonscientific books.
2. A Peculiar Dilemma that Social Sciences are in
The social sciences are less likely than other intellectual enterprises to get credit for their
accomplishments. Arguably, this is so because the theories and conceptual constructs of thesocial sciences are especially accessible : human intelligence apprehends truths about
human affairs with particular facility. And the discoveries of the social sciences, once isolated
and labeled, are quickly absorbed into conventional wisdom, whereupon they lose their
distinctiveness as scientific advances.
This under-appreciation of the social sciences contrasts oddly with what many see as their
over-utilization. Game theory is pressed into service in studies of shifting international alliances.
Evaluation research is called upon to demonstrate successes or failures of social programs.
Models from economics and demography become the definitive tools for examining the
financial base of social security. Yet this rush into practical applications is itself quite
understandable : public policy must continually be made, and policymakers rightly feel that
even tentative findings and untested theories are better guided to decision-making than no
findings and no theories at all.
3. What Determined Human Behavior
Some modern anthropologists hold that biological evolution has shaped not only human
morphology but also human behavior. The role those anthropologists ascribe to evolution is
not of dictating the details of human behavior but one of imposing constraints - ways of feeling,
thinking, and acting that " come naturally " in archetypal situations in any culture.
Our " frail ties " -- emotions and motives such as rage, fear, greed, gluttony, joy lust, love-may
be a very mixed assortment, but they share at least one immediate quality : we are, as we
say, in the grip of them. And thus they give us our sense of constraints. Unhappily some of
those frailties - our need forever-increasing security among them - are presently maladaptive.
Yet beneath the overlay of cultural detail, they, too, are said to be biological in direction, and
therefore as natural to us as are our appendixes. We would need to comprehend thoroughly
their adaptive origins in order to understand how badly they guide us now. And we might
then begin to resist their pressure.
Three articles excerpted from GRE Reading Comprehension.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Basically, we can not find the " right answer " about the problem of the human behavior.
Human behavior is the complicated activity, depending on different scenarios, we changes
our principle to adapt and solve the problem. Like the physical world, the engineering designed
the automobile depending on the different mission or condition. The truck is used for
transporting, Jeep or SUV can be drove on the tough terrain, the Ferrari and Lamborghini
built for speed which means there is not much comfortable for the driver and passenger.
About the Cover :
Les Miserables revealed the darkest of the society, it gave us the truth as well as destroy
our extraordinary dream. Human relations is closer than the scientific discipline, but we
prefer to spend more expenditure to research it. For human-being we like spend more budget
to research in the moon than on the earth. The following article would give us the different view
to reckon the psychology.
No comments:
Post a Comment