Trusted, Automoderated users
25,837
edits
Social constructionism: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
no edit summary
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
'''Social constructionists''' believe that human characteristics like gender, race, class, and disability are mostly determined by socialization. They take a hard-line nurture stance in the nurture vs. nature argument of human behaviour. They may claim that very few biological drives cannot be overridenn and that humans are often ''blank slates'', i.e. malleable. This is typically accompanied by a notion that once we accept this, we can achieve a more harmonious society, even utopia. | '''Social constructionists''' believe that human characteristics like gender, race, class, and disability are mostly determined by socialization. They take a hard-line nurture stance in the nurture vs. nature argument of human behaviour. They may claim that very few biological drives cannot be overridenn and that humans are often ''blank slates'', i.e. malleable. This is typically accompanied by a notion that once we accept this, we can achieve a more harmonious society, even utopia. | ||
Scientific consensus rejects any hard-line nature vs. nuture stance. that the blank slate of human nature is false. | ==Criticism== | ||
Scientific consensus rejects any hard-line nature vs. nuture stance, including social deconstructionism and [[biological essentialism]] respectively. that the blank slate of human nature is false. Humans are both malleable and have natural impulses/behaviours. Many emotions, tendencies and traits are universal and fixed, while others are not universal across cultures. E.g. humans all have basically the same facial movement in response to emotional stimuli, across all cultures. This falls in line with [[biological essentialism]]. Cltures vary wildly in violent behavior, which falls in line with social construction theory. | |||
== See also == | == See also == | ||