Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login
Human Universals (2002) (depaul.edu)
54 points by NoRagrets on Feb 15, 2020 | hide | past | favorite | 12 comments





“overestimating objectivity of thought”


It's a weird mix of human universals and animal universals. For instance, "abstraction in speech and thought" is human, but "males more aggressive" and "females do more direct childcare" are true for most animals. But as a list of animal universals it's very incomplete -- "hunger" isn't listed, for example.


Human universals means the traits shared by humans across societies, cultures, etc. It's not trying to differentiate humans and animals. It's trying to show the commonality amongst humans.

> "females do more direct childcare" are true for most animals.

Also this isn't an animal universal. By a large margin, most animals ( male/female ) don't raise their young or even birth their young - fish, insects, etc are animals too.

> But as a list of animal universals it's very incomplete -- "hunger" isn't listed, for example.

Because it isn't a list of animal universals.


Hunger is certainly a human universal. People exhibit typical behavior patterns when they are hungry. So I think this wants to be a list of human universals over other animals.

While not all animals specialize child rearing and aggression, most mammals and all primates do. So it’s still unclear to me what this is a list of.


> So it’s still unclear to me what this is a list of.

The context behind the list is that huge swaths of the academy believe that humans are born as blank slates and culture is purely a result of socialization. Hunger isn’t on the list because even the blank slatists believe that all humans experience hunger, so there’s no need to point it out. But plenty of people believe that child rearing arrangements are merely an accident of history, so pointing out that there are child rearing patterns that are universal across cultures which have no plausible way of influencing each other is a strong argument against that explanation.


> Hunger is certainly a human universal.

Superficially, like breathing, having a heart beat, etc. Saying hunger is a human universal isn't interesting because it is well understood to be true. Also, it's instinctual/physiological/etc rather than behavioral or intellectual.

> People exhibit typical behavior patterns when they are hungry.

Yes, that's why cooking is on the list.

> So I think this wants to be a list of human universals over other animals.

Then why would you claim "It's a weird mix of human universals and animal universals." Why would you claim "but "males more aggressive" and "females do more direct childcare" are true for most animals." If what you say were true, the list wouldn't contain it?

> While not all animals specialize child rearing and aggression, most mammals and all primates do.

So not animal universal?

> So it’s still unclear to me what this is a list of.

Human universals. The list is a list of shared human traits. Just because some of those traits happen to be something other animals share doesn't change the fact that it is also shared amongst humans across societies and cultures. Like weaning and crying.


Hunger is a physiological reaction, not a human universal.

[..] Brown says human universals, "comprise those features of culture, society, language, behavior, and psyche for which there are no known exception."[..]


They're not feelings. Anger isn't on the list either but "facial expression for anger" is.


Doesn't mention masturbation. Is that because of Catholics?


I'm guessing because wanking is not actually a human universal. Shocking as it may seem to modern Western (WEIRD[1]) urbanites.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Psychology#WEIRD




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: