Current Usage of Term Instinct
L. L. Bernard · 2024
There is scarcely any concept employed in the social sciences about which there is so much diversity of usage and uncertainty of meaning as there is concerning the term instinct. The social sciences are at many points lacking in a definite terminology, since they have developed out of popular interest and are still largely determined by popular opinion and usage. There is, however, a strong realization of the need of greater definiteness in the employment of the concepts out of which the literary structures of these sciences are built. This search for definiteness has not left the term instinct untouched. The discussion of this term has in recent years been considerable. McDougall’s Introduction to Social Psychology in particular, and many other books of more recent date, represent attempts to bring order out of a chaotic field, attempts which have been only moderately successful. So numerous are the variations in the meaning of this term, as used by those discussing social relationships and origins, that it is difficult to classify them accurately. A considerable analysis of the literature dealing with social themes, however, suggests that the several fairly well-defined usages may be grouped under the following four general headings:—(i) a general and indefinite employment of the term instinct, not necessarily descriptive of a concrete act at all; (2) all cases covering automatic and habitual actions of any sort; (3) those more or less automatic stimulus-response activity processes which are supposedly inherited; and (4) acts which are definitely inherited and which may be properly termed instinctive. These usages may fittingly be described under the following categories and illustrated accordingly from the numerous examples at hand.