- Why do humans have no instincts?
- What does a person have?
- The practical side of the issue
Perhaps, each of us has come across such concepts as “maternal instinct”, “instinct of self-preservation”, “instinct of reproduction”, etc. in relation to a person. But have you ever wondered whether humans really have instincts?
Spoiler: people do not have instincts (in the sense in which this word is usually used in everyday life).
Why this is so and what this should be in practice
, read in our article.
Human self-preservation instinct
A fundamental place in nature and human life is occupied by instincts, which are expedient actions without mental awareness of the goal and final result.
The basis of human life are two instincts: the instinct of procreation and the instinct of self-preservation, the latter will be discussed further. Human life is subject to the manifestation of instincts and continues due to them. But the manifestation of the instinct of self-preservation in the human environment is different for different people and is often dulled among the male sex - hence the love of men for extreme sports and entertainment, delicately balancing between life and death. Self-preservation is the fear of factors dangerous to the health and life of a person as a whole, and even suicidal tendencies do not indicate otherwise. A person in a state of depression, affect or psychological/nervous breakdown also experiences fear of death, but at some point other emotions are overwhelmed even by instinctive impulses.
Since the instinct of self-preservation in a person from birth becomes a direct source of life, it is as natural as breathing or eating, and, if necessary, is expressed in forms of behavior of varying degrees of complexity.
What does a person have?
Instead of instincts, a person has reflexes and vital (life) needs
.
Among the vital needs,
we note, for example, the need for safety, food, avoidance of pain, etc.
Reflexes
, as many remember, can be conditioned and unconditioned.
In the context of instincts, unconditioned reflexes are of more interest. The most common example of an unconditioned reflex is withdrawing your hand from a hot kettle.
You can also remember the sucking reflex of a baby. These are truly “innate” actions, performed automatically and often without conscious control. We have quite a lot of such reflexes, including sneezing, coughing, etc. Reflex and instinct have an important difference
. A reflex is a relatively simple action, a response to a specific stimulus. Instinct is a program of action, often pursuing a specific goal (reproduction, search or creation of shelter, etc.).
Self-preservation of an adult
Extreme situations in the life of an adult can arise at any time: representatives of risk-related professions, lovers of extreme recreation or sports are especially susceptible to this - in case of danger, the instinct of self-preservation gives commands to the brain to survive at all costs. Further, the success of solving the problem of survival depends only on the person and his ability to pull himself together, concentrate in a difficult situation, and think through further actions.
Fear and a sense of self-preservation are inseparable concepts: only fear for one’s own life can push a person to take decisive action. From the instinct of self-preservation come the subsequent ones associated with it - the feelings of thirst and hunger are aimed at preserving the physical health of the body, fainting and memory loss can become a protection of the human brain from psychological shocks.
The task of self-preservation of an adult is already defined by the name itself: at a specific moment, all a person’s forces are aimed at preserving his life activity or adapting to emerging conditions that are dangerous for a person.
In risky situations, when fear for one’s own life is manifested, the hidden reserves of the human body are revealed: physical muscular strength, endurance, speed, reaction speed, etc. increase. In exceptional cases, a hypertrophied instinct of self-preservation can transform into a delusion of security and a serious psychological problem that a person cannot cope with on his own - in such cases, an appeal to a professional psychologist or psychotherapist is required.
Instincts. And why do people not have them?
In the process of progressive evolution of the individuality of an animal among vertebrates, this matrix “thinns” and “destroys”, being replaced by acts of individual intelligence (for example, concepts of situations ), learning results and other elements of experience. The manifestation of instincts “goes into the shadows” and is increasingly limited to uncertain and non-specific situations.
Further, an “instinctive matrix” of patterns of species-specific behavior has been described in studies of the neural substrate of vocalizations of lower apes, but has not been found in anthropoids. By stimulating different parts of the brain of Saimiri squirrel monkeys using implanted electrodes, U. Jurgens and D. Plooge showed that each of the eight types of Saimiri sounds, identified by structural characteristics of the spectrum, has its own morphological substrate in the vocal areas of the brain. If the substrates coincided and two different types of sounds could be evoked from one point, they were evoked by different modes of electrical stimulation (in terms of intensity, frequency and duration of the stimulus, cited by Jurgens, 1979, 1988).
Similar results were obtained in other species of lower apes. The differentiation of alarm signals at the level of behavior corresponds to the differentiation of the neural substrate that mediates the issuance of a signal in response to signals from a partner and/or dangerous situations (these are areas of the limbic system, which includes the vocal zones of the diencephalon and forebrain). With a common morphological substrate, different signals are “triggered” by different modes of stimulation, that is, each species-specific signal corresponds to “its own” site and/or triggering mode of influence (Fitch, Hauser, 1995; Ghazanfar, Hauser, 1999).
On the one hand, all this exactly corresponds to the “release” of instincts after specific “injections” of key stimuli, as classical ethologists understood it. On the other hand, it proves the discreteness and differentiation of species signals in lower apes and other vertebrates that have signaling systems of the same type (Evans, 2002; Egnor et al., 2004). Thirdly, it confirms the presence of a biological basis for the traditional typological classification of animal signals, based on reducing the entire variety of changes in the structural-temporal spectrum of sounds produced in a given situation to a certain finite set of “ideal samples” (Current topics in primate vocal communication, 1995).
That is, in lower monkeys we see a strict “ triple correspondence ” between a signal, a situation and a pattern of behavior launched in response to a signal, with species-specific patterns, “automaticity” of triggering, innate “meaning” of situations by signals and innate response of other individuals to the signal. Physiological studies show that signals have isolated “patterns of output” in the brain, ethological studies of the same types show that there are isolated “patterns of perception and response” of different signals associated with different situations and differentiated on the basis of different signal shapes .
Alarm systems for all other vertebrates (rodents, lizards, birds and fish) are also organized. But in the phylogenetic series of primates, this “triple correspondence” weakens and is completely eliminated in anthropoids. Already in baboons and macaques, the accuracy of the correspondence between differentiated signals, morphological substrates from which the signal is evoked, and differentiated stimulation modes or classes of external objects responsible for the appearance of the signal is impaired (Current topics in primate vocal communication, 1995; Ghazanfar, Hauser, 1999).
Accordingly, many visual and acoustic demonstrations are non-specific, and are de-specialized to the level of individual pantomime. These entirely nonspecific signals are nevertheless quite effective in communicative terms, for example, the so-called “food cry” of Ceylon macaques ().
Having discovered a new type of food or a rich source of food, monkeys emit a characteristic cry lasting about 0.5 s (frequency ranges from 2.5 to 4.5 kHz). The emotional basis of the cry is general excitement, a kind of euphoria, stimulated by the discovery of new sources or types of food, where the level of excitement (reflected in the corresponding parameters of the cry) grows in proportion to the degree of novelty and “delicacy” of the food.
Evidence of the nonspecificity of the signal is the fact that individual differences in the reactivity of macaques significantly affect the intensity of sound activity and the frequency characteristics of the sounds themselves. In addition, the characteristics of the signal do not depend on the specific characteristics of food objects, that is, the macaque food signal is devoid of iconic meaning.
However, the food cry is an effective and reliable means of communication. In an adequate situation, a cry was recorded in 154 cases out of 169. A positive reaction of other individuals to a cry was found in 135 cases out of 154; members of the herd who hear the cry run towards it from a distance of up to 100 m (Dittus, 1984).
During the transition to higher primates, more and more signals become nonspecific, their form is determined by individual expression, which is influenced by the state and situation, with the complete lack of expression of “ideal samples” and, therefore, invariants of the signal form. The reaction is determined by an individual assessment of the situation, and not by “automatisms” at the species level; differentiated species signaling systems “such as vervet monkeys” are transformed into pantomime of individuals (ad hoc signals), which each animal emits to the extent of its own arousal and its specific assessment of the situation, and others interpret in the measure of one's own observation and understanding.
That is, in the phylogenetic series of primates, there is a despecialization of species signals: from a specialized “language” using symbolic signals, they turn into an individual pantomime, capable of conveying a mood, but not informing about a class of situations. This process has been recorded for both vocalizations and visual signals (facial expressions, gestures, postural demonstrations). It reaches its logical conclusion in the anthropoids. Their behavioral repertoire completely lacks elements of behavior corresponding to the “demonstrations” of classical ethologists.
Their place is taken by vocalizations, gestures, body movements and facial expressions, purely individual in nature, the synchronization and unification of which is achieved through mutual “copying” of the way of performing the “necessary” screams or gestures in the “right situation”. Thus, long-distance food calls of chimpanzees are purely individual, with some dependence also on the situation and the novelty of food (which is reminiscent of the food cry of M. sinica). However, when producing a cry together, male chimpanzees begin to imitate the acoustic characteristics of their partner's cry. This achieves a certain unification of calls, the more complete and stable the more often these animals cry together about similar types of food (that is, the closer the social connection between them, the more often they cooperate in searching for food in similar ways, etc.).
Since the nature of the cry and the degree of its unification with other individuals is a marker of the closeness of social interaction between animals, different males cry differently depending on with whom exactly. This leads, on the one hand, to a significant diversity of cries, on the other hand, to a unification that marks existing social alliances, but can be flexibly rearranged with any transformation of the group structure. Thus, individuals are informed about all significant restructuring of the structure of social connections (Mittani, Brandt, 1994).
As observations show, other individuals are well oriented to the structure of calls and the nature of gesticulations of individuals, using them as a marker of changes in the animal’s social connections with individuals from the immediate environment (strength, closeness, stability of connections, dominant or subordinate position, Goodall, 1992). Orangutans do the same thing. To resume interrupted communication: they accurately reproduce the partner’s signals if they “understand” its meaning and the situation in connection with which it was issued, but modify it if the meaning of the corresponding gestures and cries is incomprehensible (unknown), or ignorance of the circumstances in which it was reproduced (Leaves, 2007).
That is, an ethological observer, among the sounds or expressions of anthropoids, can always identify elements that in a certain period of time would be both “formalized” and “endowed with meaning” for all members of the group.
But these elements are not constant, their “endowment” changes purely situationally and dynamically throughout the life of the group, that is, “by themselves” they are “formless” and “semantically empty” (ad hoc signals). Although the plastic behavior of an animal (including vocalization) always breaks down into a certain number of relatively isolated elements, reminiscent of demonstrations, upon any long observation it turns out to be a kind of tabula rasa, on which the dynamics of the social structure of the group imprints this or that “structure of behavior” with a signal meaning ad hoc and quickly modifies them.
Apparently, the mirror neuron systems of great apes, which are currently being intensively studied, are developing as a replacement for the differentiated signaling systems of great apes. They make it possible to assign a signal value to any social action of an animal, a measure of its “typicality” and “typicality” of the circumstances in which it manifests itself, to bring the reproduced action to the level of a stereotype, indistinguishable in rigidity and form from a “real demonstration”, if the situation is unchanged, and to change the stereotype, if it changes. See Michael Arbib. Mirror system hypothesis.
Therefore, the second line of evidence for the absence of instincts in great apes is associated with the failure to find “vervet monkey-type” signaling systems. The latter are based on specific sets of differentiated demonstrations, “denoting” logically alternative categories of objects of the external world and thus, as it were, “naming” them. In addition to them, the same signal “denotes differentiated” behavioral programs that are launched upon interaction with a given external object and/or after receiving a signal about it (Seyfarth et al., 1980; Cheeney, Seyfarth, 1990; Blumstein, 2002; Egnor et al. ., 2004).
Thus, the meaning of the signals here seems to combine name and action, which allows us to call these signaling systems a “language”, given the purely “instinctiveness” of the signals and the “automaticity” of the start of the signaling process. Naturally, they tried to discover such a “language” among anthropoids, because it is so tempting to consider these simple, but already “sign” signals as the forerunners of human language! There have even been suggestions that both types of chimpanzees have a gestural or “acoustic” proto-language (built on the same principle as that of vervet monkeys, but unlike them, it is an open system of signs, with the possibility of creating new signs for a new situation by combining some basic elements, Mitani, Brandt, 1994).
With this hope, signal-symbol systems were actively sought in the acoustic and gestural communication of chimpanzees and bonobos. But all attempts to describe “something similar to vervet monkeys” were unsuccessful both in terms of vocalizations and gestures.
It is significant that in situations of danger and anxiety (as well as aggression, sexual arousal, and in all other situations), anthropoids are unable to inform their partners exactly what danger is threatening, where exactly it comes from, and what should be done in this situation . Their gestures and cries reflect only the degree of anxiety in connection with the situation, they can arouse a similar emotional state in others, force them to pay attention to the situation and, in the presence of relationships that involve social support, encourage them to provide it.
Thus, in groups of chimpanzees, cannibals periodically appear, stealing and eating the young of other monkeys. Sometimes these attempts are successful, sometimes mothers repel them, mobilizing support in the form of friendly males. One of these females was attacked by a cannibal several times and successfully repelled them due to social support. However, the nature of the attack target’s signaling shows that its intense signaling and gestures do not in any way inform the “support group” about what kind of danger is threatening and how best to repel it; it only conveys a state of anxiety and stress in connection with the situation. Arriving males are forced to evaluate the situation and choose actions themselves ( J. Goodall. Chimpanzees in nature. Behavior. M.: Mir, 1992 ).
In contrast, the simple signaling system of lower apes (3-4 differentiated calls instead of 18-30 vocalizations in chimpanzees, connected by continuum transitions) easily copes with the task of informing about alternative categories of dangers that are significant for their external world (Zuberbűhler et al., 1997; Zuberbűhler, 2000; Blumstein, 2002; Egnor et al., 2004). Apparently, precisely because it is impossible to accurately indicate the danger posed by cannibals, these chimpanzees calmly exist in groups and, outside of acts of attack on other cubs, are completely tolerated by other individuals. The latter fully recognize these subjects individually, but due to the absence of both species-specific instincts and a “protolanguage,” their actions remain “unnamed,” and, therefore, “unappreciated” by the collective.
That is, in the lower apes we see one state of stereotypical forms of behavior, one way of using ritualized demonstrations, exactly corresponding to the “classical” definition of instinct; in anthropoids and humans - another, directly opposite to the first. In fact, chimpanzees and bonobos (unlike vervet monkeys) do not have a specific “language” that solves the problem of “naming” significant situations and objects of the external world, and designating actions that are effective in a given situation. At the same time, in terms of the level of intelligence, ability to learn, to accurately reproduce someone else’s actions in a difficult situation (the same gestures of the “language of the deaf and dumb”), they are quite capable of learning language and using symbols. This has been proven many times by the famous experiments with “talking monkeys.”
Consequently, human language is not a species instinct of Homo sapiens, as Chomskyans believe (Pinker, 2004), but the same product of cultural evolution in communities of primates and ancestors, like tool activity. It has much in common with the latter, including the common neurological substrate of speaking, making tools according to a pattern, and throwing an object precisely at a target. But then even anthropoids (and especially humans) do not have patterns of behavior that correspond to the ethological definition of instinct.
The third line of evidence for the absence of instincts is associated with the radically different nature of facial expressions (possibly other elements of “body language”) of humans compared to the species-specific demonstrations of lower apes and other vertebrates, say, displays of courtship and threat. The latter represent a classic example of instinct, including because the accuracy of the correspondence between stimulus and reaction, the issued demonstration of the individual and the response demonstration of the partner is ensured automatically, due to the mechanism of stimulation of like by like.
The model of “stimulation of like by like” by M.E. Goltsman (1983a) arises from the need to explain the stability/direction of the flow of communication, its specific result in the form of social asymmetry, stable for a certain (predictable) period of time, as well as the differentiation of roles that stabilizes the system -society without any “too strong” statements about the presence of specialized sign systems. The well-known dialogue model of communication of classical ethologists is a variant of “stimulation of like by like” for the extreme case when the influences that individuals exchange with each other are specialized signals strictly associated with certain situations of the naturally developing process of interaction.
The nature of stimulation of like by like can be explained by the example of interactions between mother and child during the period of “baby babbling”, when there is definitely no sign communication (Vinarskaya, 1987). In the first months of a child’s life, some of the communication mechanisms are imprinted. Among them are those “which are a necessary prerequisite for any interaction”: quick and intent glances, approach movements, smiles, laughter, characteristic sounds of the voice. All these reactions are reinforced by the mother’s behavioral mechanisms, which turn on so unexpectedly and act so unconsciously for the mother herself that the author even makes a “potentiality error” by assuming their innateness.
This is a slowing down of the tone of the mother’s speech in response to the emotional manifestations of the child, an increase in the average frequency of the fundamental tone of the voice due to high frequencies, etc. If we were talking about the dialogue of adults, we could say that the mother translates the speech into the register “for a foreigner.” Actually, “stimulation of like by like” is as follows: “The more the physical characteristics of the mother’s emotional statements are similar to the infant’s vocal capabilities, the easier it is for him to imitate her and, consequently, to establish emotional social contact with her, which is characteristic of an early age. The more complete... the contact, the sooner the child’s innate sound reactions begin to acquire national specific features” (Vinarskaya, 1987: 21).
According to M.E. Goltsman (1983a), the main regulator of animal behavior in communities is based on two co-occurring processes: stimulation of behavior by similar behavior of a partner, or, conversely, blocking of this activity. First process : any behavioral act stimulates, i.e. initiates or strengthens exactly the same acts or complementary ones in all those who perceive it. The behavior of an animal has a self-stimulating effect on itself and a stimulating effect on its partners. This influence is carried out simultaneously at the entire set of possible levels of organization of animal behavior in communities. Although the main influence of each behavior parameter (the degree of ritualization of the form of acts, the intensity and expression of actions, the intensity of the rhythm of interactions) falls on the same parameter of behavior of the animal itself and its partners, it also extends to other forms of behavior that are physiologically and motorically related to this one. The second process is based on the opposite property: a behavioral act blocks the occurrence of similar acts in a social partner.
Therefore, the relationships between individuals of different ranks in a structured community are predominantly “competitive” in nature. The high frequency of presentation by dominant individuals of specific complexes of postures, movements and actions that make up the so-called “dominant syndrome” ensures a leading position in the group and at the same time creates a situation where the manifestation of identical forms of behavior in other members of the group is largely suppressed, so that they become into a subordinate position (Goltzman et al., 1977).
Further, the existence of a positive feedback is postulated, allowing both individuals to compare the parameters of their own activity with the parameters of the partner’s action and evaluate the “balance of forces” of opposing flows of stimulation created by the implementation of the behavior of one and the other individual (Goltsman, 1983a; Goltsman et al., 1994; Kruchenkova, 2002).
If the social activity of the partner is “weaker” than the activity of the individual itself, this stimulates the progressive development of the animal’s behavior towards the appearance of more and more expressive and specific elements that have a more intense and long-term impact on the partner. If the partner’s activity is “stronger” than the individual’s own activity, then it suppresses the manifestation of similar elements of behavior in the partner’s activity and “reverses” the development of the latter’s behavior in the direction opposite to the development of the behavior of the stronger partner (Goltsman et al., 1994; Kruchenkova, 2002). For example, in agonistic interactions, the defeated animal moves into submission postures, while the eventual winner continues to display threatening postures.
Further, every behavioral act stimulates in the perceiving individual exactly the same acts (initiating their appearance or enhancing the expression of existing ones) or complementary to them. Any implementation of a certain behavior, and especially ritualized demonstrations, specifically stimulates the partner and at the same time increases the sensitivity of the animal itself to the same type of stimulation from the outside, that is, a self-stimulating effect takes place. The processes of stimulation and self-stimulation turn out to be coupled: here these are two sides of the same coin.
In this case, for all instinctive reactions of the animal, a strong positive correlation is observed between the animal’s ability to perceive signals associated with the corresponding demonstrations and produce them itself.
In any population, there is polymorphism in the ability to encode outgoing signals (associated with the accuracy of reproduction of signal invariants in specific acts of animal demonstration, with the stereotypical performance of species-specific demonstrations), and in the ability to “decipher” the behavior of a partner, highlighting specific forms of signals against the background of a continuum of non-specific non-signal actions. In all species studied in this regard, the ability to produce stereotyped, easily recognizable output displays correlates with a greater ability to differentiate displays in the stream of actions of a partner at the input of the system-organism (Andersson, 1980; Pietz, 1985; Aubin, Joventine, 1997, 1998, 2002).
Human facial expressions, expressing different emotional states, are very similar to demonstrations of courtship and threat of lower apes: both are expressive reactions that have some species-specificity and are performed quite stereotypically. However, here there is no correlation between the ability to send and receive facial signals, and if there is, it is negative. For example, JTLanzetta and REKleck found that skilled facial senders were very inaccurate in decoding others' expressions, and vice versa. College students were filmed reacting to red and green lights, the former warning of electric shock.
The same group of students was then shown recordings of other participants' reactions and asked to determine when they were shown a red signal and when they were shown a green signal. Those subjects whose faces most accurately reflected the state they were experiencing were worse than others in identifying this state on the faces of other participants (Lanzetta, Kleck, 1970).
In animals, the execution of their own demonstrations is directly proportional to the sensitivity to similar stimulation of the partner and the ability to classify the opponent’s expressive reactions according to the presence/absence of the necessary demonstrations (to which the animal is ready to react). The positive correlation remains, even if the demonstration is reproduced with distortion, the performer is obscured by branches, foliage, etc., precisely due to the instinctive nature of the production and response of signals (Nuechterlein, Storer, 1982; Searby et al., 2004; Evans, Marler, 1995; Hauser , 1996; Peters and Evans, 2003a, b, 2007; Evans and Evans, 2007).
Therefore, the negative correlation in humans is associated with a non-instinctive socialization mechanism based on the communicative environment in the family and associated learning . In a highly expressive family environment, facial demonstration skills develop well, but since the highly emotional signals of all family members are extremely expressive and very accurate, decoding skills develop poorly due to lack of need. Conversely, in low-expressive families, the skills of expressive expression of emotional states are very poorly developed, but since the need for understanding objectively exists, learning is carried out to more accurately decipher weak signals (Izard, 1971, cited in Izard, 1980).
This assumption was fully confirmed when using the Family Expressiveness Questionnaire to assess the communication environment. The skill of encoding an emotional state in facial expressions correlates positively with the level of emotionality in relationships and emotional freedom in the family, while the skill of decoding correlates negatively (Halberstadt, 1983, 1986)
****
And in conclusion - why are people now looking for instincts with the same zeal with which they used to look for an immortal soul? The goal is one - to reconcile with the injustice of the structure of the world, which lies in evil and, despite 1789 and 1917, is not going to get out of there; on the contrary, it is plunging deeper and deeper into evil.
Self-preservation instinct in a child
The instinct of self-preservation, inherent genetically throughout the evolution of humanity, manifests itself in a child from the first moment of life: this is the newborn’s need for food, warmth and maternal care. But in some cases, insufficient awareness of their own actions, lack of life experience and a poorly developed instinct of self-preservation lead to the fact that children who are not afraid of anything risk causing serious harm to themselves and their health - climbing onto a windowsill, knocking over a hot bowl, sticking their fingers in the fire or socket, etc. The task of the parents is to explain to such a child the probable danger of the world around them, if possible, foreseeing in advance situations that are dangerous for the baby.
The child does not and cannot have suicidal tendencies: a highly developed self-preservation mechanism works at a deep level, not suppressed by emotions, and is entirely aimed at maintaining natural well-being. The lack of personal experience does not allow one to make decisions based on it, so the baby instinctively avoids danger, without even imagining that it could be any other way.
Genophilic type - what is it?
With the genophilic type, the instinct of procreation dominates. If from childhood a child grows up in a society where interests are focused only on the family, he will be calm only when the whole family is together, everyone is in good health and a good mood prevails. For such people, their home is considered a fortress, and the interests of each family member are above all. Very often, people of this type are ready to sacrifice themselves for the sake of their children and family. The survival instinct in this case does not work, because the genophilic type is focused not on himself, but on his family. You can observe this instinct in the example of saving people from a burning room. A person with a dominant instinct of self-preservation is unlikely to go to save people during a fire. People of the genophilic type will do this without thinking.
Self-preservation instinct disorders
However, the genetic instinct of self-preservation present in a person is subject to the influence of external processes of human existence, manifestations of his character, environmental conditions and environment. Therefore, a healthy childhood instinct often degenerates over time into one of the forms that lead to a change in the lifestyle of a particular person and his perception of the world around him:
Strengthening the instinct of self-preservation - manifestations of fear of novelty, unfamiliar faces, surroundings and situations. For adults, such intensification leads to fear of injury, death and a pathological desire to prolong existence on this earth. This can also include, as a special case, observed more often in men, “health hypochondria”: a person suffering from such a deviation is fixated on maintaining physical health, improving well-being and prolonging life. Severe forms of such a disorder lead to physical improvement that is endless in time and means - proper nutrition to the extreme, extreme hardening, physical exercise with critical loads, etc.
2. Weakening of the instinct of self-preservation is a not so rare syndrome among children and adults, which manifests itself in causing physical damage to one’s own health: cuts, self-harm, disfigurement and mutilation. In severe forms it is characteristic of schizophrenia. Some psychologists tend to include extreme multiple piercings and the introduction of metal objects into parts of the human body with the risk of disrupting the functioning of the body and possible complications.
3. Suicidal tendencies and actions, often of a demonstrative public nature, are an extreme case of point No. 2. Characteristic of individuals with a pathologically excitable character, prone to hysterics and unstable to external stimuli. Why are true suicides not included here? – psychologists are inclined to believe that the decision to commit suicide is not a consequence of the suppression of the instinct of self-preservation and has a different psychological basis.
4. Aggressive behavior for no obvious reason. Natural aggression aimed at protecting one’s own physical and psychological integrity, normal functioning and vitality is a healthy sign of a healthy instinct of self-preservation: if attacked, defend yourself! But the manifestation of aggression, when nothing threatens life, is noticeable in early childhood (gratuitous bites, hits, spitting, etc.) with development in adolescence into provoking conflicts with threats of physical violence and brutal fights. As in the previous case, such unmotivated behavior is typical for easily excitable, psychologically unstable people with sadistic tendencies.
The instinct of self-preservation is a necessary brick in the foundation of a person’s psychological and physical health; without it, life would be impossible. But speaking about it, it should be understood that people are susceptible to its manifestation to varying degrees: the male nervous system, which is more adapted than the female nervous system, is aimed at transforming the world around us and is less aimed at self-preservation.
Social (zoosocial, or role) instincts
Home Favorites Random article Educational New additions Feedback FAQThey are realized only through interaction with other individuals of their own species. These are sexual and parental instincts, herd instincts, instincts of territorial behavior, including migration instincts, these are instincts of emotional resonance, including instincts for the formation of a group hierarchy. In all these forms of behavior, the individual acts either as a mate, parent or child, master of the territory or alien, leader or follower. All types of this group of instincts are strictly species-specific and are closely related to the level of socialization.
Sexual instincts (instincts of reproduction, or instincts of preserving the species) are inherent in all organisms that have a nervous system.
These instincts are aimed at reproducing their own kind and ensuring the preservation of the species. Sexual instincts were most developed in mammals. These instincts, as a rule, include a number of stages: 1) sexual desire, or libido; 2) sexual ritual, or courtship; 3) sexual interaction (copulatory, or sexual intercourse); 4) the process of fertilization; 5) pregnancy; 6) childbirth; 7) lactation; raising offspring based on parental instincts. To organize sexual behavior, the animal must be in a certain hormonal state; In addition, for the realization of sexual instincts, it is necessary to have appropriate external stimuli, as well as individual experience of communication with individuals of their own species.
Parental instinct (the instinct of caring for offspring, the instinct of motherhood) is realized in the protection and nutrition of the offspring by the parents, which ensures the survival and development of the offspring. In animals, there are two forms of parental instinct - passive and active. In the passive form, the individual carries with it an egg or a baby in special folds of the body, pouches, and in the active form, the parental instinct manifests itself in actions aimed at arranging a home, heating, feeding and protecting the baby. In higher animals, the parental instinct is supplemented by various forms of training the young (searching for food, recognizing predators, etc.).
The herd instinct is a set of innate and acquired mechanisms that ensure an adequate form of behavior in a community of mammals (usually representatives of the same species). This community is a stable group whose members maintain intensive communication among themselves, exchanging socially significant information. They are in relatively constant relationships to each other in terms of territorial and rank (hierarchical) distribution. This form of behavior increases the likelihood of preserving a biological species by organizing a joint attack on prey, joint defense against enemies, joint search for food and its distribution among members of the community, joint regulation of reproduction and joint nursing of the young. The higher the evolutionary level of a community, the more complex the behavior.
Dominance instincts and territorial instincts. The organization of many vertebrate communities is based on dominance and territoriality. Dominance hierarchies are based on important biological tendencies. For example, the most viable offspring should be expected from the strongest and healthiest male; old females, protecting their herd, sacrifice themselves to preserve the lives of their younger relatives. Territoriality is associated with dominance and also determines the structure of the community: the owner of the territory within its borders enjoys complete dominance. The law of territoriality has a deep biological basis: the female chooses the male who owns the “good” territory, which will provide food for their future offspring.
Migration instincts are also an important adaptation mechanism. These instincts are characterized by the movement of animals over more or less significant distances. Movement is caused by changes in living conditions in their habitat or due to their development cycle. There are regular (daily, seasonal) and irregular migration instincts.
Self-development instincts
This group includes various manifestations of orientation-exploratory behavior, instincts of resistance (or the reflex of freedom, according to I.P. Pavlov), as well as instincts of preventive “weaponization” - imitation and play. Instincts of self-development are not associated with individual or species adaptation to the existing environment at the moment, but are directed towards the future; in addition, they are independent and cannot be derived from other needs of a living organism and cannot be reduced to the other previously mentioned groups of instincts.
Indicative-exploratory, or search-exploratory, behavior (information instincts) is driven by the need to continuously obtain new information from the external environment. The realization of this need is largely carried out thanks to individual experience - each animal is forced to independently learn external signals that are significant only for it. The prominent role of information instincts is proven by the dramatic consequences of “information hunger,” especially for a developing organism. Raising young animals in an “impoverished” environment, in isolation and under conditions of restricted movement, leads not only to disorders of their behavior, but also affects the weight of the brain, the thickness of the cortical substance and the level of metabolic processes. In general, search and exploratory behavior serves as the basis for the development of conditioned instrumental reflexes.
An independent group of self-development instincts includes instincts aimed at satisfying the need to acquire experience, skills, abilities necessary for individuals in a future independent life - imitative and play instincts.
Imitative instincts, which are mainly characteristic of primates, underlie imitative action. These instincts manifest themselves in the copying of behavioral acts that cannot arise in any other way, i.e. which are acquired only in the process of individual development. Thus, they ensure the transfer of experience from one generation to another and form the basis of “signaling”, i.e. non-genetic inheritance. Among the various forms of imitative behavior, one can distinguish species-specific forms in which the behavior of some animals is a motivating factor for others. For example, if one sheep from the herd, seeing and being frightened by something, rushes to run, then other members of the herd, who did not see the danger, also follow its example. A variant of instinctive species-specific imitation is panic. However, such blind imitation is invariably opposed by individually acquired experience.
Play instincts underlie play activity, which is a genetically transmitted set of exercises for training all body systems, especially the musculoskeletal system, for the development of complex movements, manipulation of objects, and for the development of the respiratory and circulatory systems. Due to play behavior, young animals learn complex motor acts that they need in relevant life situations - flight, fight, food acquisition, reproduction, etc. In the process of gaming activity, the individual trains vital behavioral stereotypes, is enriched with information about the environment, practices interaction with peers, and learns the norms of group behavior. Gaming behavior has a wide variety of manifestations and independent motivational mechanisms. As a rule, play instincts in the young of higher animals and in humans are realized in the early stages of ontogenesis, including in the juvenile period, i.e. before completion of puberty.
In conclusion of this section, it should be emphasized that the question of the mechanisms of inheritance of instincts (as well as unconditioned reflexes in general) remains open to this day. Since the genome contains information only about the structure of the body’s proteins, it can be assumed that for each species of animal and human there are specific proteins that organize reflex arcs in the prenatal and postnatal periods, including those necessary for the implementation of instincts.
Previous3Next
The instinct of self-preservation
The instinct of self-preservation is an innate form of behavior of living beings in the event of danger, actions to save themselves from this danger. The realization of this instinct is served by such feelings as pain and fear. Pain is usually felt as an abnormal condition of the body that must be eliminated in some way. Fear forces a living creature to seek shelter and sometimes provokes the release of adrenaline into the blood.
The term “self-preservation” is also used in a figurative sense, for example, to describe a person’s adaptation to society in order to avoid emotional and psychological trauma.
Examples of manifestations of the self-preservation instinct are:
- seasonal migrations in birds;
- hibernation in mammals;
- burying in silt when water bodies dry out in fish;
- identification of animals by smell by predators.
There is no single concept of the instinct of self-preservation in science. This term is used by various authors to refer to a wide range of biological processes - from elementary physiological reactions to complex behavioral programs. The concept of “instinct of self-preservation” is also often used in the literature on sociology, where it is considered in terms of disruption of the functioning of natural life processes.
Criticism
K. Lorenz expressed skepticism about the existence of the instinct of self-preservation as an independent biological impulse:
The activity of an organism, which can be named by its function - nutrition, reproduction, or even self-preservation - is, of course, never the result of only one single cause or one single impulse. Therefore, the value of such concepts as the “instinct of reproduction” or the “instinct of self-preservation” is as insignificant as the value of the concept of some special “automotive force”, which I could just as rightly introduce to explain the fact that my old the good car still drives... Anyone who is familiar with pathological violations of innate mechanisms of behavior - we call these mechanisms instincts - will never think that animals, and even people, are guided by some guiding factors that are understandable only from the point of view of the final result , but are not amenable to causal explanation and do not need it. Behavior that is uniform in terms of function - for example, feeding or reproduction - is always due to a very complex interaction of many physiological causes.
> See also
- Attraction to life
- Suicide
- Apoptosis
