Is our concept of Human nature a cultural construct?

Question

I'm doing an anthropology assignment and my thesis question is the what i have asked above.

Answer 1

Largely, yes. Trying to look at another culture without looking through the lens of your own is virtually impossible. That's why anthropologists live with and immerse themselves in other cultures for long periods of time in order to truly understand other people. You would have to strip away much of what you know in order to understand any universal nature. The only universal values to humans I can think of are the need for food and shelter, and a tendency to form relationships (whatever they may be) with other people. You need to think about what all people need, regarless of the culture they live in.

Answer 2

Well "human nature" is consistent through different cultures. So, no, I don't think it is a cultural construct. I mean there might be various degrees on the outer edges of how we define "human nature" but all the basic elements seem to be in all human cultures.

Answer 3

nope - avarice envy an greed are universal :(

Answer 4

Not totally.  It can be. Seperating the two is not possible. I construct my concept of human nature as our "id". It houses our survival skills. Culture results as a product of acceptable and utilized behavior and philosophy.

Answer 5

No, as our human nature constructed culture. Where did you think culture came from? Did it drop out of the sky? Typical social science incoherence. Humans nature is evolved from the phenotypes interaction with the environment. Culture is a part of the environment. It is nature via nurture, not nurture constructing nature.

Money is a cultural construct, through which it has shared reality. If human nature was constructed, why is it not arbitrarily different throughout the world, instead of a normally distributed human nature.

Social science really worries me. I suggest you invest more into science education, wherever you go to school.