Complete Test on Metaphysical ASAP

iloveelvisfan

G140-Segment1.pdf

Home >Applied Sciences homework help >Complete Test on Metaphysical ASAP

Thomas Francis University • Course G140 • Segment 1

THE NATURE OF HUMAN NATURE

—Douglas R. Kelley, PhD, CH, CSL

Updated: October 16, 2018

Upon Completion of this Segment, You Will Know:

• Metapsychology.

• What drives human nature? Common theories.

• The Nature versus Nurture debate.

• Nature via Nurture.

• Cultural relativism versus human universals.

The more one analyzes people, the more all reasons for analysis disappear. Sooner or later one comes to that dreadful universal thing called human nature.

—Oscar Wilde

he most fundamental question in psychology and the social sciences over the past 100 years has been,

“What is the nature of human nature?” A metaphysical question if there ever was one. Many men and

women have spent their lives and careers trying to figure out the human enigma. The whole of the

self-help industry is and has always been focused on understanding human nature. TFU courses and the degree

program are largely about better understanding human nature. Books and movies depend on the predictably

unpredictable nature of human nature, and the best ones have unexpected twists of human nature that hook

the audience. Corporations spend millions researching human nature to sell more products. The best sales-

people have an unusual knack for reading people and working with human nature. In short, virtually everything

about society is deeply involved with understanding and working with human nature to one extent or another.

Many fields of science including psychology, anthropology, and sociology deal with the questions associated

with human nature such as causation, distinguishing features, how fixed it is across cultures, and whether it

is genetically or environmentally rooted. The nature of human nature is a very real issue and plays a deciding

role in ethics, laws, punishment, theology, evolution, and perhaps every other area of human involvement.

When we go beyond empirical or objective psychology, we enter the realm of metapsychology. Metapsychology

is a term coined by Sigmund Freud and means “beyond” psychology. It is:

a systematic attempt to discern and describe what lies beyond the facts and laws of psychology,

such as the relations between body and mind or concerning the place of the mind in the uni-

verse. —Wikipedia.org, “metapsychology”

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

An online dictionary further defines metapsychology as “speculation about the origin, structure, function,

etc. of the mind and about the relation between the mental and the physical, regarded as supplemental to

psychology.”1 In short, metapsychology is the study of psychology within a metaphysical context.

Not only is metapsychology a dualistic (physical and spiritual) approach to understanding human nature, it

is also the primary focus of the TFU degree program in general, and this course on metaphysical psychology

in particular.

Perhaps what makes human nature so fascinating is that it is impossible to categorize. We all seem to know

what it is, but can’t define it. Just when you think you know what someone will do, they surprise you by doing

the opposite. Human nature is responsible for both the greatest acts of kindness and the most heinous acts of

cruelty. Indeed, it seems like everything imaginable is within human nature.

But is it correct to say that people do things because of human nature? The following video, Human Nature

is Tautological by G. Stolyarov II, addresses this question and others about human nature. By the way, “tau-

tological” essentially means “redundant” for our purposes. You may need to view the video more than once

to follow the reasoning presented.

Segment 1 Supplemental Video: Human Nature is Tautological

NOTE: Before proceeding to the next section, please watch the video above on the

Course Page for a supplemental discussion of this section. This video is part of the

course.

WHAT DRIVES HUMAN NATURE? COMMON THEORIES

What drives human nature? There seems to be a never-ending influx of psychological theories regarding

what drives human behavior. For example:

• In the early 20th Century, Sigmund Freud felt that sexual desire was the primary driver.

• Ivan Pavlov was a famous Russian physiologist of the early 20th Century who conducted research on

“conditioned reflexes.” He noticed that the dogs tended to salivate before food was actually deliv-

ered to their mouths when an external stimuli was used (such as a ringing a bell, although the use

of a bell is controversial) thus showing that dogs could be conditioned toward a specific outcome

via external stimuli. This also works in humans. Pavlov's research on conditional reflexes greatly

influenced not only science, but also popular culture. The phrase "Pavlov's dogs" is often used to

describe people who merely react to a situation rather than use critical thinking.2

• In 1943, Abraham Maslow taught that basic human needs were shelter, food, clothing, ego, and

belonging (this is discussed in the next segment).

• In the 1950’s, psychological theorist, David McClelland, outlined three basic human motivations:

the drive to achieve, the drive for power, and the drive to affiliate with others.

• In 1997, Viktor Frankl published his seminal work, Man's Search for Meaning, that explored logo-

therapy (meaning-based) psychology to explain why humans act the way they do. Frankl’s work is

1 http://www.yourdictionary.com/metapsychology. 2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ivan_Pavlov.

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

perhaps the greatest work of the last century in understanding human nature because it deals with

existential elements that consume many people.

• In the 2001 book, Driven: How Human Nature Shapes Our Choice, authors Paul R. Lawrence and

Nitin Nohria discuss four basic drives: the drive to acquire, bond, learn, and defend.

• In the October 2006 issue of Current Directions in Psychological Science, authors Sander L. Koole,

Jeff Greenberg, and Tom Pyszczynski discuss five existential concerns that link humans across race,

geography, and time: death, isolation, identity, freedom, and meaning.3

In a different context, other theories exist as to why humans behave the way they do.

• The Noble Savage. This concept was highly promoted by 18th Century romanticist Jean-Jacques

Rousseau. The concept essentially says that people are born good, but are corrupted by society.

Some believers futilely cite the case of Native Americans before and after European involvement

as an example of this concept, that is, Native Americans were getting along fine and dandy before

Europeans showed up. Other believers cite other cases involving primitive cultures in far-flung parts

of the world as examples. Unfortunately for believers, it is very easy to show that cultures un-

touched by Western society still engage in behavior that can be more ignoble than noble.

• The Ghost in the Machine. This phrase “is the British philosopher Gilbert Ryle's description of René

Descartes' mind-body dualism where our intangible spiritual nature is responsible for our behavior.

The phrase was introduced in Ryle's book The Concept of Mind (1949) to highlight the perceived

absurdity of dualist systems like Descartes' where mental activity carries on in parallel to physical

action, but where their means of interaction are unknown or, at best, speculative” (Wikipedia.org,

“Ghost in the machine”). Obviously, Materialist scientists discount the possibility of humans having

a dual nature of body and mind.

• Scarcity. Some say that scarcity primarily drives human nature, i.e. we do what’s necessary to

survive.4 This is certainly true with economics and commercial products in the marketplace. For

example, when a product is scarce or rare, it is usually more expensive. However, when it comes

to human nature, there are countless current and historical examples of people acting selflessly

and nobly during times of scarcity. This behavior provides an undeniable argument that humans are

not ruled by scarcity alone, but by who they are as people.

Of course, the theories in this section are not by any means complete for countless theories about human

nature exist or are being written about and researched at any given time. Let’s go a little deeper and explore

a few theories about how human behavior is created.

THE NATURE VERSUS NURTURE DEBATE

Is there really any “nature” in human nature? Some believe there is; others don’t. The “Nature versus

Nurture” debate has been underway for over a century. Those on the Nurture side believe that human behavior

is the result of one’s environment. The pro-Nature camp believes that human behavior is the result of one’s

genes or heredity.

3 http://cdp.sagepub.com/content/15/5/212.abstract. 4 The Doctor Now Show, Human Nature http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4zMVFcdUHvM.

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

Implicit in the Nurture side of the debate is the term, tabula Rasa (meaning “blank slate”). According to

Wikipedia, “Tabula rasa is the epistemological theory that individuals are born without built-in mental content

and that their knowledge comes from experience and perception. Generally proponents of the tabula rasa

thesis favour the "nurture" side of the nature versus nurture debate, when it comes to aspects of one's per-

sonality, social and emotional behaviour, and intelligence” (Wikipedia.org, “Tabula rasa”).

The Nature/Nurture debate is also directly related to the Determinism/Free Will debate. You will recall

this if you took Course G70: Metaphysical and Spiritual Self-Mastery. Determinism is the belief that our be-

havior and actions are essentially predetermined and thus beyond our control. It is based on the Materialist

view that all human processes, behavior, and brain functions can be explained solely by physiology. Material-

ists do not believe in a consciousness separate from the physical body.

The term “Nature versus Nurture” was coined by Francis Galton, a cousin of Charles Darwin,5 and the

concept has been the subject of ridicule. In practical terms, the concept of Nature versus Nurture is rather

simplistic and, frankly, absurd in many ways. This is clearly shown by the words of Psychologist Donald Hebb

who “is said to have once answered a journalist's question of ‘which, nature or nurture, contributes more to

personality?’ by asking in response, ‘Which contributes more to the area of a rectangle, its length or its

width?’"6

Few things in life—and especially something as complex as human nature—can ever be reduced to such a

simple causality. A much more tenable concept is “Nature via Nurture” promoted by genome researcher Matt

Ridley in his book, Nature via Nurture: Genes, Experience, and What Makes Us Human. Ridley makes a case

that nurture depends on genes, and genes need nurture. In other words, environment regulates genes and

learning can only happen if the right genes exist; humans are genetically prepared to learn certain things. For

example, a human baby will learn how to speak not only because it is taught (nurture), but because it has the

genetic makeup to support language (nature). A kitten will not learn to speak regardless of how much one

tries to teach it simply because it lacks the genes for speech. A Parrot, on the other hand, can learn words

due to its genetic makeup.

The concept of Nature via Nurture makes much more sense than the other two concepts in the light of

observable life experience. We can see this by putting the matter into perspective. For example, have you

ever wondered:

• Why some people like or dislike certain foods?

• Why some people are allergic to such things as bee stings or fire ants or shell fish?

• Why different people are interested in different hobbies or vocations?

• Why people prefer one style of car or house over another?

• Why people have different tastes in clothing, hair styles, and lifestyles?

• Why some people are stricken with certain diseases, while others are not?

Consider the area of tastes in food for example. I pretty much like just about everything I’ve ever tried

with one major exception—tomato juice. As a kid growing up, my family never drank tomato juice, but I

remember the first time I ever tried it. It was the summer of 1973, I was 14, and my family and I were returning

5 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nature_versus_nurture. 6 Ibid.

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

to Utah from a trip to see my grandparents in Idaho. En route, we stopped by the house of some long-time

friends in Pocatello to visit and have breakfast—which included tomato juice.

Now, to the best of my knowledge, I had had no previous experience with nor any preconceived notions

about tomato juice one way or the other. However, when I took that first taste… Holy Smoke! It assaulted my

entire being in a way I can’t describe; it was as if my body wanted to lunge into involuntary convulsions! As a

test, I even tried it again thirty-four years later with the same result.

Why is it, when I absolutely love tomatoes in every other known form, that I so abhor tomato juice? The

only answer I can come up with—and I am perfectly serious—is that I have a genetic predisposition to abhorring

tomato juice. I just don’t know how else to explain it. Inherently, we are the product of an infinite number

of genetic and environmental combinations that influence everything about us individually from lifestyles to

allergies, and tomato juice to whatever. These factors also determine how we approach and cope with life.

For example, why does one person deal with stress by immersing him or herself in a relaxing hobby, while

another overeats to compensate? Why does one person work out at the gym, while another turns to alcohol?

Why does one person both work out at the gym and abuse alcohol? Because an infinite combination of genetic

and environmental factors determine this, and thus make us who we are individually. In other words, Nature

via Nurture. “Genes and family may determine the foundation of the house, but time and place determine its

form.” —Jerome Kagan, Professor of Development Psychology.

Robert H. Wozniak, a Professor of Human Development, wrote, “The route through childhood is shaped by

many forces, and it differs for each of us. Our biological inheritance, the temperament with which we are

born, the care we receive, our family relationships, the place where we grow up, the schools we attend, the

culture in which we participate, and the historical period in which we live—all these affect the paths we take

through childhood and condition the remainder of our lives.”7

Thus, tabula rasa is true to an extent in that we are given a specific canvas upon which to paint our lives.

The structure and texture of the canvas is beyond our control, but the image we paint is ours to choose. This

being the case, we have a responsibility to choose right, to do no harm, and to evolve toward enlightenment

and self-completeness. The further we get toward enlightenment, the further we get away from barbaric,

animalistic behavior that is governed more by instinct (genes) than environment.

For more on the Nature-Nurture debate as well as on Nature via Nurture, please watch the video, Nature

or Nurture; How Do Genes, Environment and Free Will Affect Human Behavior? This two-part video presents

an outstanding and informative talk by Dr. Gregory Forbes, Professor of Biological Sciences at Grand Rapids

Community College in Michigan.

Segment 1 Supplemental Videos 1 - 2: Nature or Nurture

NOTE: Before proceeding to the next section, please watch the videos above on

the Course Page for a supplemental discussion of this section. These videos are part

of the course.

7 Childhood, a viewer's guide produced in collaboration with Thirteen WNET (1991).

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

CULTURAL RELATIVISM VERSUS HUMAN UNIVERSALS

One additional area that should be addressed for your broader knowledge is whether specific types of

human behavior are unique to certain cultures or whether human nature is universal across cultures (multi-

cultural). Two opposing views are presented here. As you will see, both positions directly affect morality and

ethics.

The first is Cultural Relativism, also known as Cultural Universals or Empty Universals,8 and is the “principle

that an individual human's beliefs and activities should be understood by others in terms of that individual's

own culture”9 rather than compared with other cultures. One website describes it in detail:

Cultural relativism is the view that all beliefs, customs, and ethics are relative to the individual

within his own social context. In other words, “right” and “wrong” are culture-specific; what

is considered moral in one society may be considered immoral in another, and, since no univer-

sal standard of morality exists, no one has the right to judge another society’s customs.

Cultural relativism is widely accepted in modern anthropology. Cultural relativists believe that

all cultures are worthy in their own right and are of equal value. Diversity of cultures, even

those with conflicting moral beliefs, is not to be considered in terms of right and wrong or good

and bad. Today’s anthropologist considers all cultures to be equally legitimate expressions of

human existence, to be studied from a purely neutral perspective.10

Another website puts it more directly:

Cultural relativism holds that "good" means what is "socially approved" by the majority in a

given culture. Infanticide, for example, isn't good or bad objectively; rather it's good in a soci-

ety that approves of it but bad in one that disapproves of it. Cultural relativists see morality as

a product of culture. They think that societies disagree widely about morality and that we have

no clear way to resolve the differences. They conclude that there are no objective values.

Cultural relativists view themselves as tolerant; they see other cultures, not as "wrong," but as

"different."11

The opposite of cultural relativism is the concept of Human Universals. Challenging the assumption that

human behavior is primarily determined by culture, Donald E. Brown, Anthropology Professor Emeritus and

author of Human Universals,12 contends that certain behavioral traits are common to human beings every-

where. Anthropologist, Greg Laden, PhD, defines “human universals” succinctly:

Most simply defined, a human universal is a trait, behavior or cultural feature that we find in

all human societies. Men are always on average larger than women. All humans see the same

exact range of colors because our eyes are the same. The range of emotions experienced by

people is the same, and appears in facial expressions and other outward affect[s], in the same

way across all humans.13

8 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_universal. 9 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cultural_relativism. 10 What is cultural relativism? http://www.gotquestions.org/cultural-relativism.html. 11 http://www.jcu.edu/philosophy/gensler/et/et-01-00.htm. 12 McGraw-Hill, New York, 1991. 13 http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2011/01/falsehoods_human_universals.php.

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

Review the chart on the next two pages of over 350 universals as compiled by Donald E. Brown, and then

read the articles listed below to gain a better understanding of human nature. Use your critical thinking skills

to determine your own perspective on the debate.

Segment 1 Supplemental: Human Nature -Intrinsic Similarities Shared By All Humans

NOTE: Before proceeding to the next section, please read the webpage(s) above on

the Course Page for a supplemental discussion of this section. This is part of the

course.

Segment 1 Supplemental: Human Universals

NOTE: Before proceeding to the next section, please read the webpage(s) above on

the Course Page for a supplemental discussion of this section. This is part of the

course.

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

Human Universals

Source: Published in The Blank Slate by Steven Pinker (2002, New York: Viking Press) as compiled by Donald E. Brown in Human Universals (1991, New York: McGraw-Hill).

Abstraction in speech & thought

Actions under self-control dis- tinguished from those not un-

der control

Aesthetics

Affection expressed and felt

Age grades

Age statuses

Age terms

Ambivalence

Anthropomorphization

Anticipation

Antonyms

Attachment

Baby talk

Belief in supernatural/religion

Beliefs, false

Beliefs about death

Beliefs about disease

Beliefs about fortune and mis- fortune

Binary cognitive distinctions

Biological mother and social mother normally the same person

Black (color term)

Body adornment

Childbirth customs

Childcare

Childhood fears

Childhood fear of loud noises

Childhood fear of strangers

Choice making (choosing alter-

natives)

Classification

Classification of age

Classification of behavioral pro- pensities

Classification of body parts

Classification of colors

Classification of fauna

Classification of flora

Classification of inner states

Classification of kin

Classification of sex

Classification of space

Classification of tools

Classification of weather condi- tions

Coalitions

Collective identities

Conflict

Conflict, consultation to deal

with

Conflict, means of dealing with

Conflict, mediation of

Conjectural reasoning

Containers

Continua (ordering as cognitive pattern)

Contrasting marked and non- marked sememes (meaningful elements in language)

Cooking

Cooperation

Cooperative labor

Copulation normally conducted

in privacy

Corporate (perpetual) statuses

Coyness display

Critical learning periods

Crying

Cultural variability

Culture

Culture/nature distinction

Customary greetings

Daily routines

Dance

Death rituals

Decision making

Decision making, collective

Differential valuations

Directions, giving of

Discrepancies between speech, thought, and action

Dispersed groups

Distinguishing right and wrong

Diurnality [opposite of noctur-

nal —Ed.]

Divination

Division of labor

Division of labor by age

Division of labor by sex

Dominance/submission

Dreams

Dream interpretation

Economic inequalities

Economic inequalities, con-

sciousness of

Emotions

Empathy

Entification (treating patterns and relations as things)

Environment, adjustments to

Envy

Envy, symbolic means of coping with

Ethnocentrism

Etiquette

Explanation

Face (word for)

Facial communication

Facial expression of anger

Facial expression of contempt

Facial expression of disgust

Facial expression of fear

Facial expression of happiness

Facial expression of surprise

Facial expressions, mask-

ing/modifying of

Fairness (equity), concept of

Family (or household)

Father and mother, separate kin terms for

Fears

Fear of death

Fears, ability to overcome some

Feasting

Females do more direct child-

care

Figurative speech

Fire

Folklore

Food preferences

Food sharing

Future, attempts to predict

Generosity admired

Gestures

Gift giving

Good and bad distinguished

Gossip

Government

Grammar

Group living

Groups that are not based on family

Habituation

Hairstyles

Hand (word for)

Healing the sick (or attempting to)

Hope

Hospitality

Husband older than wife on av- erage

Hygienic care

Identity, collective

Imagery

Incest between mother and son unthinkable or tabooed

Incest, prevention or avoidance

In-group distinguished from out-group(s)

In-group biases in favor of

Inheritance rules

Institutions (organized co-activ- ities)

Insulting

Intention

Interest in bioforms (living things or things that resemble them)

Interpolation

Interpreting behavior

Intertwining (e.g., weaving)

Jokes

Judging others

Kin, close distinguished from distant

Kin groups

Kin terms translatable by basic relations of procreation

Kinship statuses

Language

Language employed to manipu-

late others

Language employed to misin-

form or mislead

Language is translatable

Language not a simple reflec-

tion of reality

Language, prestige from profi-

cient use of

Law (rights and obligations)

Law (rules of membership)

Leaders

Lever

Likes and dislikes

Linguistic redundancy

Logical notions

Logical notion of "and"

Logical notion of "equivalent"

Logical notion of "general/par-

ticular"

Logical notion of "not"

Logical notion of "opposite"

Logical notion of "part/whole"

Logical notion of "same"

Magic

Magic to increase life

Magic to sustain life

Magic to win love

Making comparisons

Male and female and adult and child seen as having different natures

Males dominate public/political realm

Males engage in more coali- tional violence

Males more aggressive

Males more prone to lethal vio- lence

Males more prone to theft

Males, on average, travel greater distances over life- time

Manipulate social relations

Marking at phonemic, syntac- tic, and lexical levels

Marriage

Materialism

Meal times

Segment 1: The Nature of Human Nature

Meaning, most units of are non- universal

Measuring

Medicine

Melody

Memory

Mental maps

Mentalese

Metaphor

Metonym

Mood- or consciousness-altering techniques and/or substances

Moral sentiments

Moral sentiments, limited ef- fective range of

Morphemes

Mother normally has consort during child-rearing years

Mourning

Murder proscribed

Music

Music, children's

Music related in part to dance

Music related in part to reli-

gious activity

Music seen as art (a creation)

Music, vocal

Music, vocal, includes speech forms

Musical redundancy

Musical repetition

Musical variation

Myths

Narrative

Nomenclature (perhaps the same as classification)

Nonbodily decorative art

Normal distinguished from ab- normal states

Nouns

Numerals (counting)

Oedipus complex

Oligarchy (de facto)

One (numeral)

Onomatopoeia

Overestimating objectivity of

thought

Pain

Past/present/future

Person, concept of

Personal names

Phonemes

Phonemes defined by set of minimally contrasting fea- tures

Phonemes, merging of

Phonemes, range from 10 to 70 in number

Phonemic change, inevitability of

Phonemic change, rules of

Phonemic system

Planning

Planning for future

Play

Play to perfect skills

Poetry/rhetoric

Poetic line, uniform length range

Poetic lines characterized by repetition and variation

Poetic lines demarcated by

pauses

Polysemy (one word has several

meanings)

Possessive, intimate

Possessive, loose

Practice to improve skills

Precedence, concept of (that's how the leopard got its spots)

Preference for own children and close kin (nepotism)

Prestige inequalities

Pretend play

Pride

Private inner life

Promise

Pronouns

Pronouns, minimum two num-

bers

Pronouns, minimum three per- sons

Proper names

Property

Proverbs, sayings

Proverbs, sayings - in mutually contradictory forms

Psychological defense mecha-

nisms

Rape

Rape proscribed

Reciprocal exchanges (0f labor, goods, or services)

Reciprocity, negative (revenge, retaliation)

Recognition of individuals by face

Redress of wrongs

Resistance to abuse of power, to dominance

Rhythm

Right-handedness as population norm

Risk-taking

Rites of passage

Rituals

Role and personality seen in dy- namic interrelationship (i.e., departures from role can be

explained in terms of individ- ual personality)

Sanctions

Sanctions for crimes against the collectivity

Sanctions include removal from the social unit

Self-control

Self distinguished from other

Self as neither wholly passive

nor wholly autonomous

Self as subject and object

Self-image, awareness of (con-

cern for what others think)

Self-image, manipulation of

Self-image, wanted to be posi-

tive

Self is responsible

Semantics

Semantic category of affecting things and people

Semantic category of dimension

Semantic category of giving

Semantic category of location

Semantic category of motion

Semantic category of other physical properties

Semantic components

Semantic components, genera- tion

Semantic components, sex

Sememes, commonly used ones are short, infrequently used ones are longer

Senses unified

Sex differences in spatial cogni- tion and behavior

Sex (gender) terminology is

fundamentally binary

Sex statuses

Sexual attraction

Sexual attractiveness

Sexual jealousy

Sexual modesty

Sexual regulation

Sexual regulation includes in- cest prevention

Sexuality as focus of interest

Shame

Shelter

Sickness and death seen as re-

lated

Snakes, wariness around

Social structure

Socialization

Socialization expected from

senior kin

Socialization includes toilet training

Spear

Special speech for special occa- sions

Statuses and roles

Statuses, ascribed and achieved

Statuses distinguished from in-

dividuals

Statuses on other than sex,

age, or kinship bases

Stinginess, disapproval of

Stop/nonstop contrasts (in

speech sounds)

Succession

Sucking wounds

Sweets preferred

Symbolism

Symbolic speech

Synesthetic metaphors

Synonyms

Taboos

Tabooed foods

Tabooed utterances

Taxonomy

Territoriality

Thumb sucking

Tickling

Time

Time, cyclicity of

Tools

Tool dependency

Tool making

Tools for cutting

Tools to make tools

Tools patterned culturally

Tools, permanent

Tools for pounding

Toys, playthings

Trade

Triangular awareness (assessing relationships among the self

and two other people)

True and false distinguished)

Turn-taking

Two (numeral)

Tying material (i.e., something like string)

Units of time

Verbs

Violence, some forms of pro-

scribed

Visiting

Vocalic/nonvocalic contrasts in

phonemes

Vowel contrasts

Weaning

Weapons

Weather control (attempts to)

White (color term)

World view