PSYCHOLOGY
Responsibility and commitment
The terms of ‘responsibility’ and ‘commitment’ are abstract in nature, having something to do with psychology and social interaction, but their usage from ethical and religious point of view adds sacred meanings to them. In order to investigate the proper place of these terms, one is supposed to analyse them from scientific perspective. In this regard, I find three angles to judge them:
i- Behaviouristic Approach
ii- Nativism
iii- Social interaction
Behaviouristic Approach
Behaviourists believe man’s attitude is developed in response to his relation with the environment he lives in and the people he interacts with (B. F. Skinner). They consider a human baby is born with a clean slate of brain, on which the senses write impressions in a thousand ways till he starts responding on the base of what he observes and perceives. There is a complex phenomenon of Stimulus-Response chains which help in developing a learner’s behaviour.
In this context, let us analyse the place of ‘responsibility and commitment’. Responsibility and commitment are the gifts man is born with. They are inculcated in him by the environment he lives in. if there is commitment and responsibility in the society, but not noticed in a particular individual or a group, it simply means the society lacks the force a Stimulus ought to have to invoke a proper response. In this regard the agents who want to create such a change ought to rethink their strategies and come up with novel ideas and romantic attitudes to cause the things they aim at.
Nativists’ Approach
Nativists, however, think differently on the point of developing an attitude. They are of the opinion that man is not born with a clean slate of brain. A human is pre coded with all the essential faculties of whom a few are displayed even at the time of birth and a few develop later on as the time passes (Naom Chomsky). They cited the examples of Language Acquisition and sexual maturity in this regard. If society does not have any language, the learner acquires it automatically at a certain age. Same is true in the general attitudes of man.
Theory of Social Interaction
theory of social interaction is not much different from what Behaviourists say. This theory discusses the impact of general attitudes on group and social levels. Collective human actions practiced on social levels tend affect the general attitudes of the people living there in a particular way.
Conclusion
There is a lot of stress being emphasised on the importance of responsibility and commitment on social, educational and spiritual levels. But I analyse the issue from strict academic points of view, I find nothing endorsing them. Once it is proved that these qualities are either inborn or created by the social general attitudes, it is better to compromise at the point that expectations are the real trouble-shooters. It is better to have an air trust and mutual understanding that if the partner has not shown any responsibility and has recoiled from the commitment, there would be a genuine reason behind that. Even if there is no apparent reason, not much I can expect from abstractions.
