What ideas do you believe are innate?

[PinkPiranha]

I voted for "time and space" because it most closely matched my answer: "me" and "you".

I didn't vote for survival instinct because of Jackass and Johnny Knoxville. lol

I didn't vote for emotions or soul because even if you "felt" their presence, you might not have a quantitative name for it or the ability to label them. (How would you know what "fear" was beyond the feeling of it if someone didn't tell you "Oh that sensation in your stomach when those trilobites dragged you into a primordial ooze pool and stuck kelp up your nose, that wasn't hysterical hunger. That was fear.")

I didn't vote for God because I think that people DO have a sense of the numinous, but can't point a finger directly AT the source, regardless of their spiritual perceptions.

[nozflubber]

I didn't vote for survival instinct because of Jackass and Johnny Knoxville.

oh cmon on be fair! it's funny shit, because voluntary stupidity can overcome instincts. Plus they're professional stunt performers, so even though it hurts to watch, they're not ever in any more danger than walking down the street at night

[PinkPiranha]

Originally Posted by nozflubber

oh cmon on be fair! it's funny shit, because voluntary stupidity can overcome instincts. Plus they're professional stunt performers, so even though it hurts to watch, they're not ever in any more danger than walking down the street at night

I never said it wasn't fun to watch!

And I'm a J. We don't do "fair".

[kelric]

Originally Posted by Kiddo

What ideas do you believe are innate?

I'll note that some of the ones that I voted yes on, I don't necessarily believe are innate at birth, but are innately inevitable during various stages of growth and development (yeah, so it's a nitpick...)

a sense of causality (time and space) - yes: the basis for understanding cause and effect

basic emotions such as, disgust, surprise, fear, etc. yes, with qualifications: yes on fear, yes on surprise, no on disgust. Not necessarily innate are what triggers those emotions, but the ability to experience those emotions themselves.

face perception - yes. Again, not necessarily what individual expressions mean, but I do believe that we have an innate ability to recognize facial patterns with a high degree of accuracy.

how to acquire spoken language - yes: I'm not aware of any non-linguistic cultures.. ever.

I don't think any of the others are innate. Popular, maybe, but not innate. One I think could be added to the list is a desire to explain the unknown - of which several of the other options tend to grow out of (but not in everyone).

[aeon]

I tried posting this the other day, but the forum was no workie.

---

Based on my understanding of neurobiology, neuropharmacology, and fetal/child development, I would say that nothing is guaranteed to be innate.

Causality depends on subject-object awareness. In as much as other aspects of conscious awareness are possible in the human being, subject-object awareness is but one aspect of their presentation, and not all people have subject-object awareness itself.

The development of the basic emotions is certainly low-level in terms of neural pathways and limbic development, but not all people have these functions, and they develop after birth.

The neonate has no awareness of hazards, but learns them in time via pleasure-pain feedback.

Certain aspects of the physical structure of the optic system and brain topology facilitate facial recognition, but this is a developed response that occurs over time.

All the rest are things learned, not things innate. We may have a tendency toward their development based on our presentation - sensory, emotional, cognitive, and otherwise - but they are all things that we learn.

We are tabula rasa, so to speak. Many things shape and guide our development, and we perhaps have much potential, but at birth we are as blank slates neurologically.


cheers,
Ian

[Kiddo]

Originally Posted by aeon

We are tabula rasa, so to speak. Many things shape and guide our development, and we perhaps have much potential, but at birth we are as blank slates neurologically.

So that would mean you embrace both the empiricist view of tabula rasa and modularity of mind theory?

[The_Liquid_Laser]

I assume you are referring to an average (mode) human fetus with 9 months of development. The ones I voted for are:

a sense of causality (time and space) - I believe this is linked to our perception regardless of whether or not this is how the physical universe actually operates.

basic emotions such as, disgust, surprise, fear, etc. - Yes, that comes with having a cerebellum.

how to acquire spoken language - Most people learn the language of their culture, so yes.

notion of God(s) - In the sense of a specific deity (e.g. Yahweh) I would say no, but simply having a vague sense of the supernatural I would say yes. Part of believing in the divine is being filled with a sense of awe and wonder about the mysteries of the universe, and I believe that infants have the rest of us beat in that sense.

mathematical truisms (obvious mathematical truths) - The reflexive property is a mathematical truism, and I can't conceive any rational being not having a sense of the reflexive property on an intuitive level.

logical truisms (obvious logical truths) - Same as mathematical truths.

identity perceptions (archetypes) - I'm not entirely sure on this one, but I lean toward yes.

[placebo]

Well I can't say my opinion would mean much since I barely understand the concepts of... these words... but I think it's interesting input anyway for anyone who wants to see what an INFP might believe???

YES INNATE
a sense of causality (time and space)
basic emotions such as, disgust, surprise, fear, etc.
notion of altruism (concern for the needs of others)
mathematical truisms (obvious mathematical truths)
logical truisms (obvious logical truths)
identity perceptions (archetypes)

YES INNATE, MAY BE 'LOST' ?
face perception
how to acquire spoken language
notion of a soul -- (in a sense. I think we are born believing in the dualism of mind and body, in a sense, a soul)
a desire to subjugate or be subjugated

NO INNATE
avoidance of hazards (heights, disease, etc.)
face perception
notion of good and evil
notion of fairness
notion of God(s)

By some things being 'innate' I believe they are necessary for our existing in reality as humans and are things that are in our human programming, DNA. By some things being 'lost' I believe they are abilities or beliefs that we may lose awareness of this or devalue it through development. Not sure if that point makes sense. By some things not being innate I mean they are concepts acquired by growth and socialization.

I may be very confused.

But I think this type of question also relates to whether people believe in an ultimate truth/good or if they believe that everything depends on the environment/society we are in and things are created that way and many things are relative to each other in that case.

I had to rewrite this last part so now I'm even more confusedish on my points.

[aeon]

Originally Posted by Kiddo

So that would mean you embrace the empiricist view of tabula rasa...

No, as I do not think human awareness and experience are limited to the senses, as empiricism states.

Originally Posted by Kiddo

So that would mean you embrace modularity of mind theory?

No. I think it would be more accurate to say I value the idea of neuroplasticity.


cheers,
Ian