Human development is the scientific study of age-related changes in behavior, thinking, emotion, and personality - the early roots of development. Many Western beliefs about human development are based on philosophers' explanations for differences they observed in individuals of different ages. Philosophers and scientists proposed several ideas about the philosophical and scientific roots of development.

Three of the early philosophies were: 1. Original Sin, 2. Tabula Rasa or Blank Slate, and 3. Innate Goodness

Original Sin: The Christian doctrine of original sin, often attributed to the 4th-century philosopher St. Augustine, taught that all humans are born with a selfish nature. To reduce the influence of this inborn tendency toward selfishness, Augustine taught that humans must seek spiritual rebirth and submit themselves to religious training. Developmental outcomes, both good and bad, are the result of each individual's struggle to overcome an inborn tendency to act immorally when doing so somehow benefits the self.

Tabula Rasa or Blank Slate: In the 17th century, English philosopher John Locke drew upon a broad philosophical approach known as empiricism when he claimed that the mind of a child is a blank slate. Empiricism is the view that humans possess no innate tendencies and that all differences among humans are attributable to experience. The blank slate view proposes that adults can mold children into whatever they want them to be. "Good" and "bad" differences among adults can be explained in terms of differences in their childhood environments.

Innate Goodness: Swiss philosopher Jean-Jacques Rousseau claimed that all humans have innate goodness, and all humans are naturally good and seek out experiences that help them grow. The goal of human development is to achieve one's inborn potential. Good outcomes result from growing up in an environment that doesn't interfere with the individual's attempts to do so. Poor outcomes are learned from others or happen when a person experiences frustration in his or her efforts to follow the dictates of the innate goodness with which he or she was born. Thus, the innate goodness and original sin approaches share the view that development involves a struggle between internal and external forces. In contrast to both, the blank slate sees the child as a passive recipient of environmental influences.

Discussion Question:

How might a parent who believes in the original sin view respond to and interact with a child differently than one who agrees with Rousseau about innate goodness?

How might the approaches of each of these parents differ from a parent who believes in Locke's blank slate idea?