Course name: Cultural Psychology

Student name: Bakhodir Alayorov

Student number: 12194850

Final exam
Question 1: Evaluate the basic difference of viewing psychology as a physical science,
biological science, and humanities science.

To evaluate the essential differences between considering psychology to be a physical science,

biological science, or humanities science, it is important to explore the unique perspectives and
research methodologies that each field employs.

Psychology as a Physical Science: The goal of the physical sciences, which include physics,
chemistry, and astronomy, is to understand the natural world via the use of scientific techniques.
They generally depend on empirical data, experimental findings, and mathematical analysis to
explain natural processes. For instance, although Newtonian physics offers a mechanical
explanation of the world around us, chemistry employs the study of fundamental components to
explain the construction and growth of complex objects. Psychology would need to place a
similar emphasis on objective measurement and empirical data, focusing on the observable and
measurable aspects of mental processes and human behavior, if it were to be considered a
physical science.
Psychology and other biological disciplines provide a physiological foundation and an
understanding of many life forms. This psychological point of view emphasizes the biological
foundations of mental and behavioral functions. It examines how biological factors such as
neurochemistry, genetics, and brain function impact behavior and mental processes. With this
approach, the biological and physical underpinnings of psychology are given more attention.

Psychology as a Humanities Science: The cultural sciences tradition acknowledges this point of
view. It emphasizes changing oneself, one's environment, and other people strongly. Psychology
as a humanities discipline emphasizes the subjective experience more than the physical and
biological sciences, which emphasize the objective and detached viewpoint. Included are agency,
meaning, intention, and first-, second-, and third-person viewpoints on how humans operate.
This approach recognizes individuals as change agents, the topic and object of investigation, and
highlights the importance of discourse analysis, discussion, and communication.

In summary, the physical and biological sciences focus on objective measurement, empirical
data, and biological underpinnings, while the humanities discipline in psychology emphasizes
the subjective experience, agency, and complex interactions between individuals within their
cultural and social environments.

Question 2: How did humans overcome our basic instinct to survive through creativity
and innovations and using wood, stones and clay.

Humans, a species not initially gifted with the physical capacity to reign in the wild, have
remarkably transcended fundamental survival instincts via the deft application of creativity and
innovation. I'll describe how prehistoric humans exploited clay, stone, and wood as natural
resources to not only live but also to establish civilization.

Humans were always at risk from predators since they were a physically inferior species. But
they were quite good at manipulating their environment. This was first seen in the way they
interacted with fire. Even though most animals are naturally afraid of fire, early humans
discovered how to control it and used it for defense, warmth, and cooking. The ability to control
fire was a significant advancement in human history since it allowed for a significant expansion
of both nutrition and survival skills.
Moreover, fire was a major factor in the transformation of natural resources. Humans learned
how to form amorphous materials like clay with fire and forge metal. The ability to create
artifacts from raw materials was a crucial step in the history of human societies. Fire could turn
clay into pottery, which is needed to transport water and store food. Similarly, humans gained an
edge over other human groups and predators when they fashioned metals into tools and weapons.

Wood and stone were among the earliest materials that humans used to construct tools and
shelter. Because of its versatility, wood was used to build houses, create hunting gear, and even
create the first boats and rafts, which served as modes of transportation. On the other hand, stone
was carved into swords and other sharp objects. These tools not only simplified hunting and
gathering but also allowed for the construction of more elaborate buildings and the cooking of
food.
The evolution of human awareness and cognitive abilities is reflected in the way these materials
are employed. Unlike other animals, humans could envision and construct things that were not
found in the natural world. This ability to reflect and create is a hallmark of human evolution. It
represents the transition from just existing to forging a civilization and a culture.

Not only have humans employed creativity to work with inanimate objects, but they have also
utilized it to creatively engage with other living beings. The domestication of animals, such as
pigs, chickens, and cows, was a significant accomplishment. It provided a consistent supply of
food and developed agricultural organizations. In addition to serving as a survival tactic,
domestication revealed humans' potential for reasoning, empathy, and peaceful cohabitation with
other animals.

Human evolution is distinguished by our singular capacity to transcend innate survival

tendencies via creativity and innovation. Early people were able to create the groundwork for
later generations as well as defend themselves from threats by using materials like wood, stones,
and clay. These resources, together with the capacity of the human intellect, made it possible for
cultures and civilizations to develop as opposed to existing only for survival. This life-changing
experience highlights the fundamental aspects of what it is to be human.
Question 3: How did the hunting and gathering tribes overcome their basic instinct and
used creativity and innovation to adapt to the environment and survive.

There has been a significant deal of interest in the survival of early human groups, particularly
hunting and gathering tribes, in order to understand human development. Despite their innate
proclivities and physical limitations, these early humans were able to adapt and survive in hostile
environments. This essay investigates the ways in which hunting and gathering tribes overcame
their natural inclinations to adapt and thrive by using creativity and inventiveness.

Darwinian theory states that humans evolved and survived as a species because of their capacity
for environmental adaptation. In the meanwhile, this adaptation resulted from both physiological
and natural tendencies as well as human abilities to control these inclinations. Cultural shifts
have taken place during the last 7,000 years, but there haven't been any significant biological or
genetic changes in humans. This implies that biology cannot fully account for the cultural
processes that have occurred and are documented outside of a single human's physical body.
Significant cultural changes over the past seven millennia have changed how people see and
engage with their environment.

For humans to survive, they needed to be able to exploit the elements and natural resources.
Early humans were constantly vulnerable to predators due to their physical fragility. They
learned how to defend themselves from natural instruments, the most significant of which was
fire. People have learned to utilize fire to their advantage in order to live, despite the fact that
they are naturally scared of it. Their knowledge of fire allowed them to prepare food, increasing
the variety of foods they could eat. Additionally, fire allowed for the creation of useful things
like utensils, cups, dwellings, and weapons out of materials like clay and iron. The ability to
shape amorphous clay into organized patterns is an illustration of how creative and introspective
early people were shown their capacity to build things that were not found in the natural world.
The domestication of animals is a notable example of human inventiveness and adaptability.
After being tamed by early humans, animals like cows, pigs, and chickens became dependable
sources of food. The ability of humans to domesticate and govern animals transformed the
natural tendency of predators into partnerships where animals functioned as human companions,
guides, and guardians. A consistent supply of food was made possible by this transformation,
which was crucial to the development of agricultural societies.

Hunting and gathering societies used ingenuity and imagination to overcome natural inclinations
and survive by adjusting to their environment. This flexibility resulted from both physiological
changes and significant cultural transformations. By domesticating animals and making use of
natural components like fire, early humans demonstrated an incredible capacity for creativity and
inventiveness. Their existence and the advancement of human society depended heavily on this
skill.

Question 4: Evaluate Albert Bandura’s moral disengagement theory and how Korean
results on delinquency and school violence achievement support his theory.

Albert Bandura's concept of moral disengagement offers a framework for understanding how
people rationalize morally reprehensible behavior. This theory is especially relevant when
considering the growing incidence of school violence and delinquency in Korean society. This
paper evaluates Bandura's theory in the context of Korean social and educational dynamics,
examining the ways in which these dynamics support or refute important ideas in his theory.

People "disconnect" their moral self-sanctions from their harmful behavior, which results in
moral disengagement, in accordance with Bandura's thesis. This disengagement makes it simpler
for people to engage in harmful behaviors without feeling bad about it, which encourages them
to behave against their moral convictions. Dehumanization, placing blame, transferring
responsibilities, spreading duties, labeling with euphemisms, moral defense, drawing positive
comparisons, and downplaying or manipulating the consequences are all part of it.

Rising rates of violence, criminality, and school rejection have been linked to Korea's rigorous
educational system and severe academic pressure. There is a lot of pressure on youngsters to
succeed academically, and when they don't, they often behave in delinquent ways. This situation
has the potential to lead to moral disengagement due to the high levels of stress and rigid
structure. Pupils may explain away their abnormal actions by blaming them on an unjust system.
However, there is no explicit link made in the textbook between these behaviors and Bandura's
argument.

More background is provided by contrasting and comparing American and Korean perspectives
on raising children. Korean youth generally view parental control as a sign of love and care,
rather than as something burdensome. This frame of view is linked to lower rates of delinquency
among Korean students, suggesting a cultural context in which moral engagement is encouraged
by strong familial ties and respect for authority. This finding could imply that parental authority
in the Korean setting is associated with positive outcomes as opposed to negative ones,
indicating that the family unit serves as a barrier against moral disengagement.

Although Bandura's theory of moral disengagement offers a valuable perspective on delinquency

and school violence, its relevance in the Korean context is not straightforward. Strong family
values and respect for parental authority seem to combat the tendency toward moral detachment
that the demanding educational system may encourage. As a result, while many aspects of
Korean culture align with Bandura's theory—particularly when it comes to the educational
system—cultural and familial norms serve as a check to maintain Korean teenagers' moral
engagement.
Question 5: Evaluate Korean economic growth and how it is different from the USA model
of focusing on individualism and competition.

Korea's economic growth trajectory provides a unique case study that contrasts sharply with the
competitive and individualistic American model. This article evaluates the ways in which
Korea's economic development deviates from the US approach and identifies its distinctive
aspects.
There are significant differences between the economic growth models of the USA and Korea,
particularly with regard to cultural values and the significance of education. Korea has accepted
business and modernization, but it hasn't sacrificed its ancient values—which strongly emphasize
communal connection and interconnectivity. In contrast, individuality and competition are more
common in the United States.

In Korea, the capacity to learn scientific and technological knowledge is a key indicator of
success, and getting into school is quite competitive. In Korean culture, community and
collaboration are strongly prized, and educational advancement is highly esteemed. Korea is able
to develop swiftly without losing its sense of cultural identity or social cohesion because it
combines modern economic practices with traditional values.

Korean Economic Transformation

After 1965, there was a substantial change in the Korean economy. From a low-income, agrarian
nation with a per capita Gross National Product (GNP) of barely $82 and high infant mortality
rates, Korea has become a global economic powerhouse. By 2004, the per capita GNP had risen
to $14,100 and the infant mortality rate had drastically decreased. This phenomenal expansion,
which grew by more than 8% year on average, was mostly driven by improvements in education.
The rate of enrollment in middle and high schools had nearly reached universal levels by 1985, a
major rise. This drive for education had a major role in driving Korea's economic prosperity.

Cultural Values and Economic Growth

Beyond only copying Western industrialization and capitalism, the Korean economy expanded.
Without compromising its traditional values, Korea welcomed science, technology, industry,
urbanization, capitalism, and other facets of life. These ideas, which placed a strong emphasis on
communal cohesion and the interconnection of all individuals, endured. Unlike the US model,
which focuses more on individual accomplishment and competition, the Korean model
incorporated Western economic ideas to fit its cultural ethos. This adaptation has made change,
advancement, and environmental control more important than preserving the status quo and
coexisting peacefully with the environment. Education is the primary determinant of success in
Korea, where knowledge of science and technology is valued highly.

Comparison with the US Model

The US economic paradigm is centered on individuality, competition, and free markets. Success
in this approach is often measured in terms of personal achievements, ingenuity, and
entrepreneurial spirit. Conversely, the Korean model blends modern economic practices with
traditional values, emphasizing community, collaboration, and a purposeful drive for academic
excellence. Korea has rapidly modernized without compromising social cohesion or cultural
identity as a result of this merging.
Korea's economic growth is fundamentally distinct from the competitive and individualistic
American model. Even as it embraces these qualities, Korea has managed to successfully blend
aspects of Western economic systems with its cultural ideals of interconnection and communal
solidarity. This integration, which offers a distinctive counterweight to the individualistic
mindset that is most prominent in the United States, has been primarily credited with the
country's phenomenal economic progress.