Notes Toward a Human Nature for the Third Millennium

  • Walter Goldschmidt†
Part of the Developments in Primatology: Progress and Prospects book series (DIPR, volume 36)


Every society needs to come to an understanding of what makes humans tick. For millennia, religion was the primary frame societies had for finding the answers. Theology assigned an outside influence on all behaviors; evil was the work of the devil or the consequences of sin, good was the result of purity and piety. During The Enlightenment, this quest left the hands of religious institutions and gradually turned to scientific enquiry, leaving to the field of anthropology this particular quest. Early seekers turned first to biology, ideas of inheritance, and soon to the new genetics. These led to such ideas as “criminal types,” Kretschmer’s body types and, above all, race. These ideas faded within the field because they did not stand close scrutiny, and anthropologists turned to culture, the customs, and mores handed down by oral tradition. But how to explain culture? The cultural anthropologists tried to account for humanity’s quirks through Freud, Durkheim, and evolutionary ecology with interesting findings but had little success at seeing the whole. Anthropologists were sure that biology was not the answer and some thought it not even relevant. The generation that came out of the dissidence of the Viet Nam war simply walked away from the issue as if it was of no importance, declaring that no scientific paradigm would work. They settled for saying that it was the nature of man to have culture—an empty phrase.


Human Nature Scientific Paradigm Walk Away Prefrontal Lobe Social Mammal 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Depue, R. A. and J. V. Morrone-Strupinksy. 2005. A neurobehavioral model of affiliative bonding: Implications for conceptualising a human trait of affiliation. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 28:313–395.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. Goldschmidt, W. 1959. Man’s Way: A Preface to Understanding Human Society. New York, Holt, Rinehart and Winston.Google Scholar
  3. Goldschmidt, W. 2005. The Bridge to Humanity: How Affect Hunger Trumps the Selfish Gene. New York, Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  4. Kummer, Hans. 1971. Primate Societies; Group Techniques of Ecological Adaptation. New York, Aldine.Google Scholar
  5. Solms, M. and O. Turnbull. 2002. The Brain and the Inner World; An Introduction to the Neuroscience of Subjective Experience. New York, Other Press.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of AnthropologyUniversity of CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations