alcuizar and macopial rrl (comments in parentheses in between sentences)

This chapter is divided into three topics that will help in understanding the study’s objectives. The first part focuses on defining what the nature of man is in psychological perspective. This is followed by the relationship of man’s nature to William Golding’s novel, Lord of the Flies. This will also discuss how the author of the book expresses Freud’s concept of personality. Lastly, this chapter will emphasize how social interaction and social deviancy affects human behavior.
The nature of man has always been an ambiguous topic that is strained by psychologists in their effort of defining it. For centuries, psychologists and theorists had debated on man’s true nature. Some claimed that man is basically good while some argues (argue) that man is innately evil.
Religion shares the same argument about human nature. Take for example Confucianism, though Confucius “didn’t define human nature in any detail” (Stevenson, 1998), two of his great followers, Mencius and Hsun-tzu, blurted out their concepts about the nature of man. Mencius (as cited in Stevenson, 1998) says that man is naturally “good”; he only becomes evil because “he loses his original nature.” Further, Mencius believes that every man is born with these four seeds: “benevolence, dutifulness, observance of the rites, and wisdom.” On the contrary, Mencius’s fellow Confucian writer, Hsun-tzu (as cited in Stevenson, 1998), believes that man and “desire” are entwined. If by chance these man’s “desires” are not satiated, man would find ways to “satisfy them himself”, even though these ways are evil (Stevenson, 1998). From this point of view, Hsun-tzu says that man is naturally “evil” and goodness is the outcome of “conscious activity”. In addition, he believes that every man is born with these four seeds: “strife, violence, crime, and wantonness”, a very opposing notion to Mencius’s theory.
According to Coleman (1960), people in the late eighteenth and early nineteenth century strongly believed that man is naturally good. Coleman (1960) further added that even romantic poets and philosophers at that time believed and expressed the same belief in their writings and works. Jean Jacques Rousseau (as cited in Fromm and Xirau, 1968) was among the men who strongly asserted that man is basically good. Rousseau was mainly famous because of his doctrine of man’s natural goodness.
Allport (as cited in Coleman, 1960) is another person who argued that man is naturally good. He illustrates man as follows:
Normal men everywhere reject, in principle and by preference, the path of war and destruction. They like to live in peace and friendship with their neighbors; they prefer to love and be loved rather than to hate and be hated… While wars rage, yet our desire is for peace, and while animosity prevails, the weight of mankind’s approval is on the side of affiliation. (p.29)
(provide transition for smooth flow from one para to another) Sigmund Freud and other psychologists proposed that man is innately evil. Freud (as cited in Coleman, 1960), in his Civilization and Its Discontents, depicts man as follows:
[…] men are not gentle, friendly creatures wishing for love, who simply defend themselves if they are attacked, but […] a powerful measure of desire for aggression has to be reckoned as part of their instinctual endowment. The result is that their neighbor is to them not only a possible helper or a sexual object, but also a temptation to them to gratify their aggressiveness, […] to seize his possesions, to humiliate him, to cause him pain, to torture him […] (p. 26)
In addition to the argument that humans are innately evil, Morris (1994) in his book The Human Animal (italicize) stated that human beings will always be animals no matter how magnificent or monstrous one person can be. He further added that we are “risen apes” (Morris, 1994).
(Transition) The theory that humans are apes was first proposed by Charles Darwin. Charles Darwin’s Theory of Evolution was able to trace back the history on why man is innately evil. According to him (as cited in Coleman, 1960), due to the “universal struggle” or the concept of “survival of the fittest”, man’s primordial nature was formed which is mainly to survive and satisfy one’s needs.
(transition) Robert White (as cited in Dyal, 1967) in his paper titled Motivation Reconsidered: The Concept of Competence, wrote that man’s “survival” is directly proportional to his “achieved competence”. According to him, in order for man to take part in the life in his environment, he should achieve a quite impressive level of competence.
But as time passed by, when humans have already adapted to the environment and competition for food and shelter has been lessened, the idea of social order sets in. As society sets in, this primordial nature is slowly inhibited by the laws that attempt to protect the rights of each individual in the society.
In Freud’s determination to delineate man’s nature, he came up with a concept of man’s personality that involves the interrelating actions of the "psyche" (mental) and the "soma" (physical) of man (Rychlak, 1981). Focusing on what's in the mind, he was able to conceptualized (conceptualize) that interactions within the mind involves three parts that constitute to the nature of man: id, ego, and superego (Rychlak, 1981).
Rychlak(1981) explained that the id which is located in the "unconscious" area of the human mind, pursues the egoistic desire for "pleasure" and "satisfaction" that may be unreasonable or even barbaric. As Rychlak(1981) quoted Freud, "we call it a cauldron of seething excitations." (p. 48)
According to Rychlak (1981), unlike id, which is innately with us at birth, ego on the other hand (faulty, remove on the other hand) came to be as "conscious awareness" gradually sinks in man's life. It tells apart (confusing?) what is real and what imaginary is (Hall, 1970). Ego originated from the id, wanting the same lust but differ on the "means" to achieve it. (fragment) Freud’s definition of ego was redefined by Jacobson (as cited in Tishkowski, 2005), a psychoanalyst who contributed largely to the study in psychology. She proposed that feelings have a significant role in molding a person’s ego. Furthermore, when a child is properly nourished with love and care, a “contented child” is created, meaning the wants of the id will not be primarily focused because the feelings of contentment had been reached. However, if the child experience less care and love from parents, the feeling of neediness from contentment may set in giving more importance to satisfying one’s wants (Jacobson as cited in Tishkowski, 2005).
Rychlak (1981) stated further that if ego represents good intention and id denotes wild urges, then the superego characterizes our conscience. It is like a "voice" in our heads that's telling us what is right from wrong (Rychlak, 1981). He added that when id wants to do something bad, the superego that desires to reprimand id for thinking such, the superego is the nemesis of id. The "hedonistic", "sociocultural" and "common sense" characteristics of the mind define what human nature truly is (Rychlak, 1981). The superego’s main goal is to hinder the wants of the id especially those condemned by the people in a certain place (Hall, 1970). Hall (1970) also added that superego encourages the ego from performing moral activities and aims.
Furthermore, Jacobson (as cited in Tishkowski, 2005) stated that superego relies deeply on the social interactions of a person with others wherein the actions of the person is determined to be right or wrong depending on the reaction of the people he/she is with (Tishkowski, 2005).
As Freud believed that humans are naturally evil, William Golding had a 180 degrees turn on his perception on humans after the Second World War and began to realize that humans are "innately evil"(McClean, 2010). (please clarify! 180 degrees turn from freud’s belief? They are almost the same) Human beings had always pointed out others for being immoral but never examined oneself of being evil himself/herself. In Golding's book,Lord of the Flies, Golding showed how humans, without society, turn barbaric because of their fears in the island (McClean, 2010). On the first part of the novel the boys who were trapped in an isolated island tried to create their own rules and their own society in order to survive.
(relation to the previous paragraph? Provide transition) In every group there will always be a leader. The leader acts (as) the supreme person who has the final say on things in a group. Monnig (2005) discovered in her research that humans choose a leader who is dependable, honest, firm on what he/she believes in, loyal, and supportive on the people's needs. To be a leader is to be someone who is able to have the members of the group attracted to him/her in order to persuade everyone and follow him.
( transition from the previous paragraph to this) McCroskey and McCain (1974), in their research, explained that being able to attract other people makes the person influential to their actions. Physical appearance plays an enormous role in human’s social environment. Good-looking individuals are viewed “more positively” compared to the less-attractive ones (Collins, Dutta, & Zebrowitz, 1998). The former were recognized as “more sociable, socially skilled, more popular, more competent, and more dominant than the latter (Collins, Dutta, & Zebrowitz, 1998).
However, this “interpersonal attraction” is “multidimensional” in which physical appearance, being fun to be with and attitude are vital in determining the person’s influence unto others (McCroskey & McCain, 1974).
Since the dawn of man, humans have already started imitating or following other people in order to survive (Goldstein, 2006). Like animals, to increase the chances of survival, humans formed groups that would help them from hunting, gathering food and protecting themselves from the dangers of wild animals (Goldstein, 2006). Up to the present time, people have been trying to belong to a group not because of the threat imposed by the animals around them but by people themselves (Goldstein, 2006). To be socially alienated is like living in a desert wherein neither no one can help you nor no one wants to aid you (Goldstein, 2006).
With how belonging to a group is important in survival and self-esteem, humans try to “conform” to other people’s beliefs, attitude and language because fitting into a crowd does not only imply that the person have (check) other people he/she can count but also he/she can have someone in that group that could be his/her “mate” (Goldstein, 2006).
Humans always yearn to belong to a so called "society" of humans. But belonging to such is not that simple to acquire because people from the social framework tends to scrutinize the person and look for a "stigma" that inhibits that person from joining them. This "stigma" refers to any aspect of a human being that can be considered uncool or undesired by other people, thus making such person a "social deviant" of the community (Nash, 1985).
Man's "nature" varies and deviates depending on time and place and what the "society" and oneself wants (Tiryakian, 1962). "Human nature" always takes consideration the expectations of the "society" from the person and the needs and satisfaction of the person (Tiryakian, 1962). What the person wants to do may be in contradiction to what the society imposes on him (Tiryakian, 1962). For example, being angry at someone make you want to kill that person but since society sees killing as a big crime, the person would constrain yourself from ending the other person's life in exchange for not being an outcast in the society (Tiryakian, 1962).
Any person considered abnormal by a crowd would likely try to belong and be liked by the others. Nash (1985), author of the book Social Psychology, stated that what is acceptable in one "group" can differ in another. When someone is "cool", it can mean different things. Coolness, in the point of view of a religious person can be defined as someone who is charming, smart and kind; on the other hand, it can mean to a different person to be bad ass, knows how to fight and is not afraid of danger. Thus, what is normal is bounded by how the "society" in a particular area sees it.
In relation to the novel Lord of the Flies, Kopp (as cited in Fowler, 2000) stated that the novel depicts the idea that humans’ savagery is more deeply rooted to man’s nature than his humanizing nature. When the person’s life, whether in contentment or satisfaction, is endangered, the will to survive will always outdo the instinct to help another person. The characters are symbolism of different aspects of human nature that Golding tries to emphasize in his novel.
(transition) McClean (2010) explained how “madness" overruns the young boys' concept of society. He also stated that the human mind always seeks for an "external enemy", on which case the beast in the novel. Moreover, their fear of the beast fires up the motivation to fight it bringing gradually "violence" into their mindset. This "violence" brought about savagery at first to the killing of pigs, later to the bullying of kids on the island and further more atrocity to the killing of the school boys on the island -- Simon and Piggy.
In studying the action or reaction of the characters in the novel, there are five elements to consider. According to Wertsch(1998), in his book, Mind as action, the first element refers to the incident that happened or the "act". The "scene" on one hand refers to the environment the action that occurred. The one who made the "act" is called the "agent" and the paraphernalia used by the "agent" refers to the "agency". Lastly, purpose is the component that answers the question why the agent did it.
McClean (2010) also stated that as the story progresses, we can see how the school boys who at first were obedient to the rules and couldn't even harm a pig for their survival, turned into hedonistic creatures that only care about themselves.
Thomas Hobbes (as cited in Fromm & Xirau, 1968), in his book The Leviathan, explained why man can’t live in accordance with each other; why man can’t achieve peace and harmony. According to Hobbes (as cited in Fromm & Xirau, 1968), man finds happiness by “comparing himself with other men.” Man thinks that he is cleverer than the others; hence, he is capable of “overseeing the public much better.” (p.37) Further, Hobbes says that man is “most troublesome when at ease; for then it is that he loves to show his wisdom.” (p. 37) Man loves to be in a complex situation so that he can brag his peculiar intelligence. Lastly, he says that humans are “continually in competition for honor and dignity”. Man worships power. As a result, “envy, hatred, distraction, and war” rises.
The related researches (no such word; research studies), articles and books mentioned above clearly show that many psychologists believe that man is by nature evil. Even though humans can also be good, there is a greater possibility of turning one good person into a cruel man when subjected to situations that threatens the person’s biological satisfaction like food, water and shelter. Another way to affect the person psychologically is through frustrations to unachieved goals and fear on unknown entities. Conflicts between other people may also trigger dispute and much worse –violence.
The book Lord of the Flies is a very good example of how humans that we perceive to be good can turn into savages. The boy’s in the novel felt the need to unite in order to survive in an unfamiliar island wherein danger lurks everywhere. To be able to unite is synonymous to sharing the same beliefs and goals; nevertheless there will always be outcasts in a group. These outcasts strive to relate or to belong to the mob that’s why the person’s behavior is affected or one’s freedom is mitigated in order to survive.