Carl Andrei King BS Psychology-

2B

MY THOUGHT PAPER ON “HUMAN NATURE AND INDIVIDUAL DIFFERENCES” BY

DAVID M. BUSS

"What does one do if you are stuck within a crack at the bottom to a lower place of an enormous
boulder that you just cannot move, with no hope of rescue. bear in mind however lucky you're that up to
currently life has been booming for you. or else, if life has not been smart for you to date, that gives
additional doubt given your current circumstances, think about however lucky you're that it'll not disturb
you for much longer "(Adams, 1995). Survival has always been an interesting concept to tackle. How do
certain species live longer than others? Why do some vanish from existence? What are the factors that led
to some species standing tall and continue living? Or maybe even, evolving? A certain thought has
crossed over my mind when I was still young. I thought that maybe one day, if human beings cease to
exist, are we going to have an age where the new breed of species dominating the earth have human or
even higher intellect and has the ability to fly or other kinds that what we know today as, superpowers?
Or maybe even a time where we created our own extinction and basically created a more superior specie?
All of these thoughts have crossed my mind and I believe that it will never be answered at least at my
own lifetime. But it’s a thought that will be kept minding about by certain people generations from now.
Osho once said that, “One thing: you have got to steer, and build the means by you walking; you
may not notice a ready-made path. it's not therefore low cost, to achieve the last word and the realization
of truth. you may get to produce the trail by walking yourself; the trail isn't ready-made, lying there and
looking ahead to you. it's rather like the sky, the birds fly, however they do not leave any footprints. you
can't follow them; there aren't any footprints left behind.” David Buss’ theory of Human Nature and
Individual Differences, tackles the broad perspective of Personality Psychology. It differentiates the
concept of the “human nature” and the “individual differences” but also insists that these ideas should
coexist and not be separated in studying personality itself. Buss’ own words state that “Although there has
been a lot of dialogue regarding the definition of temperament, 2 major themes have pervaded nearly all
efforts at grand temperament theorizing: attribute and individual variations” (Buss, 1984). Human Nature
can be defined as “basic traits and dispositions that makes us human”. So, in turn it’s the entire make up
of a human being, composed of the biological make-up and the intellect, minus the various differences of
behavior or even physiologically, like being fat or slim. Anything that separates ourselves with our fellow
human beings is excluded in human nature. In which the concept of “individual differences” comes in. It
emphasizes the difference of each human being, how they behave, height differences, sex, etc. As long as
it has a difference. But the thing about this concept is that it doesn’t explain or conclude, which difference
is necessary in a specie’s survival or evolution. That’s why both concepts should be joined when studying
the personality of a human being. Because without “human nature”, we won’t recognize his or her acts as,
“human-like”, while not studying “individual differences” won’t help us identify the subject’s uniqueness
that separates himself from his fellow human beings.
I love how this theory or perspective tackles the importance of these concepts when studying
personality. It gives importance on what are we, and who we are so it balances it out by pointing our
differences while still recognizing what we are all about. Emotions and intellect are one way that
separates us from other species, but it is also distinguishing from each other. Yes, we are all superior than
other living creatures, but among ourselves, there are emotionally and mentally unstable people and there
are also normal ones, with difference in ideologies and goals. As from the words of Albert Camus, “ Man
is the only creature who refuses to be what he is.” We are ambitious beings. We have different ideas and
outlook about life itself and that’s what makes us human. Similar, but different at the same time. A
complicated thought, but a clever one when we think about it. “I don't have any belief in human
perfectibility. I feel that human labor doesn’t have any considerable result upon humanity. Man is
currently solely a lot active - happy nor smarter, than he was 6000 years ago.” These are from the words
of Edgar Allan Poe which is a great representation of what human nature could be. Evolution is a big part
in the theory as well, which is in the form of “Natural and Sexual Selection”. These concepts tackle the
various differences of the human being and how some are heritable and some are based on reproductions
and survival of the fittest. These could also explain our current state biologically with the science of
Evolution which is not easy. The concept itself could cause many deaths because of survival.

Another center component of nature proposed by transformative brain science includes all-
inclusive systems of feeling (Buss, 1989; Nesse, 1990; Tooby and Cosmides, 1990). An enormous
assortment of culturally diverse proof as of now exists to recommend that specific types of enthusiastic
articulation are widespread (Ekman, 1973). These is a great way to showcase that this would be good
theory to add in counseling psychology as it usually tackles about reproduction and how it affects the
daily life of a human being and how it is a crucial step in survival and evolution. It would help couples in
their marital life especially those who need clearance in guidance in this matter. Although there are
studies that suggest that the Evolutionary theory is not enough in explaining marital matters. According to
the study of Victoria Cabrera Garcia and Viviana Aya Gómez, “Albeit different investigations represent
diverse conjugal directions and, from the point of view of Evolutionary Theory, have looked to clarify the
agreement between the genders, none of these viewpoints independently, offered a full comprehension of
conjugal soundness. Future research endeavors should keep on considering other individual and
interactional components identified with conjugal dependability, and simultaneously, other related
factors, for example, the more distant family, work settings, and social networks in which the thoughts
and standards in regards to couple connections may advance or prevent conjugal steadiness. This is the
reason future investigations ought to think about these different settings that may emphatically or
adversely influence the fulfillment and steadiness of couple relations” (Garcia and Gómez,2014). Also,
Evolutionary Psychology has a great impact in the clinical psychology field. According to Siegert and
Ward, Evolutionary Psychology is a significant improvement in contemporary psychology that has been
generally overlooked by Clinical Psychology. The historical backdrop of CP shows that Darwin's
thoughts were very powerful in the early history of the field, especially the psychological testing
development however both the early Freudian and behaviorist speculations also (Siegert and Ward, 2002).
These shows that it would be a beneficial theory in certain fields of Psychology and should be studied
more.

Although the concepts of the theory had good points and emphasis on its subjects, there are still
parts that make this theory not perfect. What I noticed is that this theory primarily focuses on the
biological factors and the means of human nature itself but does not necessarily give emphasis on social
influences that could also affect the behavior of a person. It also fails to explain the accountability of a
person’s sexual behavior. This is contrary to the Social Impact Theory of Bibb Latané in which tackles
about different social influences in the psychology field. According to Latané and Wolf, impact might be
characterized as any of the incredible assortment of changes that happen in a person because of the
genuine, suggested, or envisioned nearness of others. Social impact theory portrays these impacts
regarding social power fields practically equivalent to in certain regards to the physical power handle that
administer the transmission of light, stable, gravity, etc. (Latané and Wolf, 1981). All in all, still this
theory is a great example of the importance of understanding that there are certain differences of people’s
action or biological make-up being made of out of choice and certain things that makes us human, or what
a human being would do. I have two questions I have thought and reflected about with this theory. First is
that, “Am I aware of my actions if they are from human nature or by individual differences?” and second
is, “How did Human Nature affected my personality? Is it on a good way or bad?”. This was an eye-
opening theory and it was a great experience to tackle this concept.
 REFERENCES:
Adams, D., & Perkins, G. (1995). The Original Hitchhiker Radio Scripts. New York: Harmony Books.
Buss, D. M. (1984). Evolutionary biology and personality psychology: Toward a conception of human
nature and individual differences. American Psychologist, 39, 1135–1147
Buss, D. M. (1989). Conflict between the sexes: Strategic interference and the evocation of anger and
upset. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 735–747.
Ekman, P. (1973). Cross-cultural studies of facial expression. In P. Ekman (Ed.), Darwin and facial
expression: A century of research in review (pp. 169–222). New York: Academic Press.
Evolution Quotes (1832 quotes). (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/evolution
García, V. C., & Gómez, V. A. (2014). Limitations of evolutionary theory in explaining marital
satisfaction and stability of couple relationships. International Journal of Psychological
Research, 7(1), 81. doi: 10.21500/20112084.669
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (1997, June). Errors in mind reading: Design flaws or design features?
Paper presented at the ninth annual meeting of the Human Behavior and Evolution Society,
University of Arizona, Tucson.
Haselton, M. G., & Buss, D. M. (2000). Error management theory: A new perspective on biases in cross-
sex mind reading. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 78, 81–91
Human Nature. (n.d.). Retrieved from https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/human nature
Human Nature Quotes (1993 quotes). (n.d.). Retrieved from
https://www.goodreads.com/quotes/tag/human-nature
John, O. P., Robinson, R. W., & Pervin, L. A. (2008). Handbook of personality: theory and research.
New York: Guilford.
Latané, B., & Wolf, S. (1981). The social impact of majorities and minorities. Psychological Review,
88(5), 438–453. doi: 10.1037/0033-295x.88.5.438
Siegert, R. J., & Ward, T. (2002). Clinical Psychology and Evolutionary Psychology: Toward a Dialogue.
Review of General Psychology, 6(3), 235–259. doi: 10.1037/1089-2680.6.3.235
Tooby, J., & Cosmides, L. (1990b). The past explains the present: Emotional adaptations and the structure
of ancestral environments. Ethology and Sociobiology, 11, 375–424.