In reference to the Freud, the term 'instinkt' (I think that is the
german) appears at times, particularly in the early Freud, but Freud
generally uses the word trieb or (to use Laplanche's translation)
drive when the standard edition uses the word 'instinct'. This is
one of a number of translation issues that came up cuz the folks
writing the standard edition wanted to sound more 'scientific.'
robert wood
>
> Maureen had some great commentary on this topic, but she wisely spent her
> energy on more rewarding things than educating LOB!
>
> --
>
> "Scientific definition
>
> The term "instincts" has had a long and varied use in psychology. In the
> 1870's, Wilhelm Wundt established the first psychology laboratory. At that
> time, psychology was primarily a branch of philosophy, but behavior became
> increasingly examined within the framework of the scientific method. This
> method has come to dominate all branches of science. While use of the
> scientific method led to increasingly rigorous definition of terms, by the
> close of the 19th century most repeated behavior was considered
> instinctual. In a survey of the literature at that time, one researcher
> chronicled 4000 human instincts, meaning someone applied the label to any
> behavior that was repetitive. As research became more rigorous and terms
> better defined, instinct as an explanation for human behavior became less
> common. In a conference in 1960, chaired by Frank Beach, a pioneer in
> comparative psychology and attended by luminaries in the field, the term
> was restricted in its application. During the 60's and 70's, textbooks
> still contained some discussion of instincts in reference to human
> behavior. By the year 2000, a survey of the 12 best selling textbooks in
> Introductory Psychology revealed only one reference to instincts, and that
> was in regard to Freud's referral to the "id" instincts.
>
> Any repeated behavior can be called "instinctual." As can any behavior for
> which there is a strong innate component. However, to distinguish behavior
> beyond the control of the organism from behavior that has a repetitive
> component we can turn to the book "Instinct"(1961) stemming from the 1960
> conference. A number of criteria were established which distinguishes
> instinctual from other kinds of behavior. To be considered instinctual a
> behavior must a) be automatic, b) be irresistible, c) occur at some point
> in development, d) be triggered by some event in the environment, e) occur
> in every member of the species, f) be unmodifiable, and g) govern behavior
> for which the organism needs no training (although the organism may profit
> from experience and to that degree the behavior is modifiable). The
> absence of one or more of these criteria indicates that the behavior is
> not fully instinctual. Instincts do exist in insects and animals as can be
> seen in behaviors that can not be changed by learning. Psychologists do
> recognize that humans do have biological predispositions or behaviors that
> are easy to learn due to biological wiring, for example walking and
> talking.
>
> If these criteria are used in a rigorous scientific manner, application of
> the term "instinct" cannot be used in reference to human behavior. When
> terms, such as mothering, territoriality, eating, mating, and so on, are
> used to denote human behavior they are seen to not meet the criteria
> listed above. In comparison to animal behavior such as hibernation,
> migration, nest building, mating and so on that are clearly instinctual,
> no human behavior meets the necessary criteria. And even in regard to
> animals, in many cases if the correct learning is stopped from occurring
> these instinctual behaviors disappear, suggesting that they are potent,
> but limited, biological predispostions. In the final analysis, under this
> definition, there are no human instincts."
> --
> http://cleandraws.com
> Wear Clean Draws
> ('coz there's 5 million ways to kill a CEO)
>
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>
>