Final answer:
The question addresses the concept of empiricism, popularized by philosophers like John Locke and David Hume, which states that humans are born without innate behaviors and that their minds are shaped entirely through experiences. Locke's philosophy of the mind as a blank slate (tabula rasa) and behaviorism's focus on learned behaviors as brain activities without an independent 'mind' support this view.
Step-by-step explanation:
The question pertains to the philosophical concept that humans are born without any innate behaviors, which is a belief central to empiricism. This viewpoint suggests that all knowledge comes from experience and that the mind at birth is akin to a tabula rasa, or blank slate. A major proponent of this idea was John Locke, who argued that the human mind is formed and shaped solely through sensory experience and reflective processes.
Variations of materialist philosophy such as behaviorism also align with this idea, emphasizing that all human thought is essentially brain activity shaped by learning and associations made through experiences. For behaviorists, the concept of a 'mind' separate from physical brain activity is a misnomer, reinforcing the belief that the human thinking process is grounded in tangible biological processes.
Some of the enlightenment thinkers, including David Hume, who was known for his skeptical and empirical views, agreed that knowledge is acquired through the senses, but also questioned the certainty and accuracy of this knowledge, due to the limitations of human perception. The existence of empirical evidence showing changes in behavior resulting from brain injuries or chemical imbalances adds weight to the argument that there are no innate behaviors, and that our minds are shaped exclusively through our experiences and interactions with the environment.