Reading Time: 4 minutes

For many years, human nature has been the domain of both philosophy, politics and
psychology. Humanist ideas, which began with the Renaissance, have created human-centered and
human nature systems, and even anthropocentrism, which peaked in the twentieth century
philosophers, created a huge system called existentialism. The main themes of these systems have
always been human nature because the evolutionary process dominated human life and needed to
explain human nature in order to explain the context of the period. But can human nature change or
not? Is this nature open to development or impossible to change? The variability of human nature
forms the basis of most personality theories. The purpose of this small paper is to focus on whether
human nature can change in the light of ideologies and philosophers and to come to a conclusion
with my own argument.
Before explaining my own thoughts, it is useful to remember the perspectives of some of the
ideologies we have learned so far about human nature. If we go through the two most basic
ideologies, realism and liberalism give us two opposite answers about human nature. First realism
extreme in this regard give pessimist understanding, human nature innate evil and selfish claim that
are moreover it never changes, and they believe cannot have a peaceful outcome of the dispute at
both international and the local level. This rigid view of the realists is extremely open to criticism
because the choice of human nature to generalize is one of the reasons that undermine this
ideology. In terms of liberal thinkers, they are a little more moderate and optimists about human
nature. According to the followers of this ideology, human nature is selfish and evil by nature, but
human nature is open to development and can move towards the good, so it is wrong to argue that it
will not change. In order to make better use of some resources, one has to waive his selfishness in
order to do things he cannot do on his own, and this waiver is the greatest evidence that human
nature can change. Apart from these ideologies, according to Freud, human nature is bad and selfish,
it is not possible to change it, but this savagery can be limited by some obstacles. However, it is a
temporary solution. Freud, who found an answer in the midst of both ideologies, has been criticized,
but it is possible to see many examples.
I want to put aside the in-class and extracurricular resources I have read so far and share my
own ideas, which, in a way, is a way of expressing thoughts that I am influenced by the people I read
in different words. First of all, the concept of human nature variability is too complex to reach a clear
decision on it. The reason for this complex structure can be related to the infinity of the human
brain. Moreover, when we consider external factors outside the organ called the brain, the answer to
our question becomes even more contradictory. Is human nature changeable? Yes, it is variable,
because man is a kind of animal that decides, analyzes, is social and influences those around
him. When all this is considered, a person affected by a pragmatic reason or the culture of the
environment in which he lives can make decisions far from his nature and these can be the harbinger
of change. Yes, human nature is variable, because the neo -korteks and thanks to stronger memory
taking any decision lectures given before may be forced to act contrary to the very nature could
change future behavior it still unity in the desire to live or herself to deny the essence to feel that
they belong to a group or change it to we can. Moreover, even if I ignore all my arguments based
on Heraclitus, who thinks that things are constantly changing and never remains the same, I believe
that there is change, especially in human nature. In addition, the evolutionary process when we
thought, our brain by weight of doubling, our thumb, begin to use our labor, becasue weapons
appliances, after the agricultural transition we also due to industrialization our labor became a
commodity… ironing them made it necessary to change human nature where the exchange word in
history it is an undeniable fact that there is a great change in the world, although it is not always used
for development. If we go further, human nature has been tried to be changed to reducing the
problems it creates in the community. When we think about it, by making the same movements like
robot, for hours, human nature has changed and even alienated from itself. In the light of all these arguments, I can give the same answer again, human nature has a changeable structure. I want to ask myself the same question again, and I ask: Can human nature change? My answer this
time is negative. No, human nature cannot change, because what we call the history of humanity in
the world consists of repetition, all the good, the evils, the events are repeated all the time, only the
subjects and places are changing. So what is unlikely to change in history is human nature. For
example, the great losses and sufferings caused by the First World War caused greater destruction
than WWI cannot preventing the outbreak of the Second World War. No, human nature cannot
change because human nature is selfish and prone to violence, which can sometimes be restricted
by culture, punishment, government, or law, but once these restrictions are lifted, one does not
hesitate to do the same. If we can take the things that make up our instincts under the name of
human nature, the fact that we do not act according to our instincts as long as we are not hungry
does not mean that our nature has changed, but that we dispose of our nature unconsciously in
order to be able to live in the community, we can better understand that change is not
possible.  No, I do not believe that human nature has changed, from the first human species
development there is a change the type of fishing method or period of our many old habits of human
nature but it does not prove that the change it shows that only changed the method. If we look at all
these arguments, it doesn’t sound right to use the word change for human nature. Instead, the
concept of bi-directional (positive / negative) development may be healthier.
As a result, different philosophers, politicians, psychoanalysts throughout
history have developed certain arguments, although they cannot decide whether human nature has
changed. Thanks to this, many ideologies and theories have been formed and even continue to be
formed. When I express my belief that human nature can change, the other side says it is not
possible. Therefore, although I do not have a specific answer in this articl , I wish to be able to
give healthy arguments in two answers. I don’t know if human nature is variable or not, but this issue
has been written and drawn for a long time and it seems to be on the agenda to be discussed in the

Recommended Posts

No comment yet, add your voice below!

Add a Comment