What Do We Call Instincts? US Edition

The United States, influenced by the work of prominent figures such as William James, has historically contributed significantly to the understanding of behavioral sciences. Ethology, the scientific study of animal behavior, provides a framework for examining such actions, while the nature versus nurture debate, often discussed in academic settings, frames the discussion around the origins of these behaviors. The question of what do we call biologically determined innate patterns of behavior is addressed through various terms and conceptual models, each offering a unique perspective on how we define and categorize these inherent tendencies.

Unraveling the Threads of Instinct: A Foundational Element in Understanding Behavior

Instinct, a term often used colloquially, represents a cornerstone in the scientific exploration of behavior. It delves into the realm of innate tendencies that shape how organisms interact with their environments. Understanding instinct requires a nuanced appreciation of its historical context and ongoing relevance in contemporary scientific disciplines.

A Historical Glimpse at Instinct

The concept of instinct has traversed through various intellectual landscapes. Initially, it was a broadly applied term to explain a wide array of behaviors, particularly in the absence of apparent learning or reason. Early philosophers and naturalists observed patterns of behavior in animals that seemed pre-programmed, leading to the conceptualization of inherent, instinctual drives.

However, the rise of experimental psychology in the late 19th and early 20th centuries brought forth more rigorous scrutiny. Figures like William James explored human instincts, proposing a vast repertoire of innate tendencies. Yet, with the advent of behaviorism, the emphasis shifted dramatically towards learned behaviors and environmental conditioning.

This paradigm shift led to a period where the concept of instinct was often marginalized, viewed as an oversimplification of complex behavioral patterns. Despite this, the underlying phenomena of seemingly pre-programmed behaviors persisted, fueling continued inquiry into their origins and mechanisms.

The Resurgence of Instinct: Modern Perspectives

Today, instinct has found renewed significance through the lenses of Ethology, Sociobiology, and Evolutionary Psychology. These fields, while distinct, share a common thread: the recognition that evolutionary history has sculpted the behavioral repertoires of organisms, including humans.

Ethology, pioneered by researchers like Konrad Lorenz and Niko Tinbergen, emphasizes the observation of animal behavior in natural settings. It has provided invaluable insights into Fixed Action Patterns (FAPs), which are stereotyped, instinctive behaviors triggered by specific stimuli.

Sociobiology extends evolutionary principles to the study of social behavior, positing that many social interactions are rooted in genetic predispositions that enhance reproductive success. This perspective sparked considerable debate, particularly in its application to human societies.

Evolutionary Psychology takes a similar approach, focusing on the human mind and its evolved psychological mechanisms. It suggests that many of our cognitive and emotional processes are adaptations that have served our ancestors in navigating their social and physical environments.

Thesis: The Enduring Significance of Instinct

Despite ongoing debates and refinements, the concept of instinct remains a crucial element for understanding innate behaviors. It is inextricably linked to fields such as Ethology, Sociobiology, and Evolutionary Psychology. While the simplistic notion of instinct as an all-encompassing explanation for behavior has been rightfully challenged, its fundamental role in shaping behavioral predispositions cannot be dismissed. Understanding the interplay between instinct and learning, nature and nurture, is essential for a comprehensive understanding of behavior across species, including our own. The exploration of instinct offers a window into the deep-seated biological roots of behavior, reminding us that we are, in part, products of our evolutionary past.

Defining Instinct: Core Concepts and Characteristics

Unraveling the complexities of instinct requires a precise understanding of its defining features and how it differs from other forms of behavior. This section aims to clarify the core concepts associated with instinctual behavior, setting a foundation for further exploration. It will define instinct, distinguish it from learned behavior, and introduce key concepts such as Fixed Action Patterns (FAPs) and drives.

Instinct: A Genetically Programmed Blueprint

At its core, instinct can be defined as a genetically programmed pattern of behavior that is relatively fixed and species-typical.

This means that the behavior is largely determined by an organism's genes and is exhibited in a similar manner by all members of the same species.

Instinctual behaviors are often present from birth or develop in a predictable manner as an organism matures, without requiring specific learning experiences.

Think of a newly hatched sea turtle instinctively moving towards the ocean. This is a prime example of a genetically encoded behavior driving survival.

Instinct vs. Learned Behavior: Disentangling Innate and Acquired Actions

A critical aspect of understanding instinct is differentiating it from learned behavior. While instinct is primarily driven by genetic factors, learned behavior results from experience and environmental influences.

Learned behaviors are flexible and can be modified based on individual experiences, whereas instincts are generally more rigid and less susceptible to change.

For example, a bird's ability to build a nest is largely instinctual, but its specific nest-building technique may be refined through experience.

The distinction is not always clear-cut. Many behaviors are a product of both innate predispositions and learning, reflecting a complex interplay between nature and nurture.

Fixed Action Patterns (FAPs): The Building Blocks of Instinct

One of the most intriguing aspects of instinctual behavior is the concept of Fixed Action Patterns (FAPs). FAPs are specific, predictable sequences of instinctive behaviors that, once initiated, run to completion regardless of external feedback.

A classic example is the egg-retrieval behavior of geese.

If a goose notices an egg has rolled out of its nest, it will instinctively use its beak to nudge the egg back into the nest.

Even if the egg is removed mid-way through the sequence, the goose will continue the motion as if the egg were still present. This all-or-nothing characteristic is a hallmark of FAPs.

Sign Stimulus (Releaser): The Trigger for Instinct

What triggers a FAP?

The answer lies in a Sign Stimulus, also known as a Releaser.

A sign stimulus is a specific external cue that activates a particular FAP.

For example, the red belly of a male stickleback fish acts as a sign stimulus, triggering aggressive behavior in other males during mating season. The red color acts as a trigger, initiating the FAP of aggressive display, essential for territory defense and courtship.

Drives: The Internal Motivators

While FAPs describe the behavior itself and sign stimuli trigger it, drives represent the internal states that motivate organisms to engage in instinctual behaviors.

Drives are often linked to basic needs such as hunger, thirst, or reproduction.

These internal states create a sense of motivation, pushing an organism to seek out stimuli that will satisfy the underlying need and trigger the associated FAP. For example, hunger (the drive) might motivate a predator to actively search for prey, increasing the likelihood of encountering a sign stimulus that triggers a hunting FAP.

Nature vs. Nurture: The Interplay of Genes and Environment

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual differences in behavior and traits. This section delves into the intricacies of this dichotomy, examining the dynamic interplay between genetic predispositions and environmental influences and introducing the concept of heritability as a measure of genetic contribution.

The Dichotomy in Behavioral Science

The nature versus nurture debate has historically been framed as an either/or proposition. Are we primarily products of our genes, or are we shaped predominantly by our experiences?

However, modern behavioral science increasingly recognizes the fallacy of this stark dichotomy. It acknowledges that both genetic inheritance and environmental factors play crucial, intertwined roles in shaping behavior.

The real question is not which factor is more important, but how they interact and influence each other. This requires a shift from a simplistic either/or view to a more nuanced understanding of complex interactions.

The Interaction of Genes and Environment

Genetic predispositions provide a foundational blueprint for behavior, influencing everything from temperament and cognitive abilities to physical characteristics. These predispositions, however, are not deterministic.

Environmental factors, encompassing everything from early childhood experiences and social interactions to cultural norms and educational opportunities, act as crucial modifiers of this genetic blueprint.

The concept of gene-environment interaction highlights this dynamic interplay. Genes can influence an individual's sensitivity to environmental factors, and conversely, environmental factors can influence gene expression.

For example, an individual with a genetic predisposition for anxiety may only develop an anxiety disorder if exposed to significant stressors during childhood.

Epigenetics: A Bridge Between Genes and Environment

Epigenetics provides a compelling mechanism for understanding how environmental factors can alter gene expression without changing the underlying DNA sequence.

Environmental stimuli, such as diet, stress, or exposure to toxins, can trigger epigenetic modifications. These modifications can then influence the activity of genes, leading to changes in behavior and physiology.

Epigenetic changes can even be heritable, meaning that environmental experiences can potentially influence the traits and behaviors of future generations. This adds another layer of complexity to the nature versus nurture debate.

Heritability: Quantifying Genetic Influence

Heritability is a statistical measure of the proportion of variance in a trait within a population that is attributable to genetic factors. It is expressed as a value between 0 and 1, with higher values indicating a greater genetic contribution.

It is crucial to understand that heritability does not indicate the degree to which a trait is genetically determined in an individual. Instead, it reflects the extent to which genetic differences account for variations in a trait across a population under specific environmental conditions.

For example, a heritability estimate of 0.6 for intelligence suggests that 60% of the variation in intelligence scores within a particular population can be attributed to genetic differences among individuals. The remaining 40% is attributed to environmental factors and measurement error.

Limitations of Heritability

Heritability estimates are population-specific and can change depending on the environment.

A trait may have high heritability in one population but low heritability in another, due to differences in environmental factors.

Heritability estimates also do not provide information about the specific genes involved in a trait or the mechanisms by which genes and environment interact. They offer a statistical overview, not a detailed causal explanation.

Despite these limitations, heritability remains a valuable tool for understanding the relative contributions of genes and environment to complex traits. It prompts further investigation into the specific genes and environmental factors involved and how they interact to shape behavior.

A Historical Journey: From Early Theories to Behaviorism

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual differences in behavior and traits. This section delves into the historical context of instinct within psychology, tracing its evolution from early theoretical frameworks to the influential rise of behaviorism, a school of thought that fundamentally challenged the prevailing emphasis on instinct.

Early Psychological Theories of Instinct

The concept of instinct held a prominent position in early psychological theories, particularly during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. Psychologists sought to explain the underlying drivers of human behavior through the lens of innate predispositions. These early theories often posited a multitude of instincts, each corresponding to a specific behavioral pattern or motivational force.

William James and the Proliferation of Instincts

William James, a pivotal figure in American psychology, significantly contributed to the understanding of human instincts. In his seminal work, The Principles of Psychology, James proposed that humans possess a far greater range of instincts than animals. He argued that these instincts, while present from birth, were often modified or overridden by experience and reason.

James cataloged an extensive list of human instincts, encompassing everything from basic survival mechanisms to complex social behaviors. This included, but was not limited to, curiosity, imitation, sociability, and even moral sentiments. While James acknowledged the plasticity of human behavior, he firmly believed that instincts formed the bedrock upon which our actions and motivations were built.

The sheer number of instincts proposed by James and his contemporaries, however, became a point of contention. Critics argued that the concept of instinct was being applied too broadly, lacking both precision and empirical support. This proliferation of instincts ultimately paved the way for alternative perspectives that emphasized the role of learning and environmental influences.

The Rise of Behaviorism and its Critique of Instinct

Behaviorism emerged as a dominant force in psychology during the early to mid-20th century, offering a radical departure from the instinct-based theories that had previously prevailed. Led by figures such as John B. Watson and B.F. Skinner, behaviorists championed the idea that behavior is primarily shaped by environmental conditioning and learning processes, rather than innate predispositions.

Emphasis on Learned Behavior and Environmental Conditioning

Behaviorists vehemently rejected the notion of instinct as a primary determinant of behavior. Instead, they focused on observable actions and the environmental stimuli that elicited them. Central to the behaviorist perspective was the concept of learning through association, as demonstrated by classical and operant conditioning.

Classical conditioning, famously illustrated by Pavlov's experiments with dogs, involves learning through the association of stimuli. Operant conditioning, on the other hand, emphasizes the role of reinforcement and punishment in shaping behavior. Behaviorists argued that through these conditioning processes, individuals learn to associate specific behaviors with specific consequences, thereby shaping their actions.

Watson, a staunch advocate of environmental determinism, famously proclaimed that he could take any infant and, through the principles of conditioning, mold them into any type of person he desired, regardless of their innate talents or predispositions. While this statement was undoubtedly an oversimplification, it underscored the behaviorist belief in the power of environmental control.

The behaviorist movement had a profound impact on psychology, shifting the focus from internal mental states and innate drives to observable behavior and external stimuli. This emphasis on empirical research and rigorous methodology led to significant advances in the understanding of learning processes and behavior modification. However, the behaviorist dismissal of instinct also drew criticism from those who argued that it neglected the crucial role of genetics and innate predispositions in shaping behavior.

Ethology: Observing Instinct in the Wild

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual differences in behavior and traits. This section shifts our focus to ethology, a field that provides invaluable insights into the role of instinct by observing animals in their natural habitats.

Ethology offers a rich perspective by examining how behaviors evolve and function within the context of an animal's environment. By studying animals in the wild, ethologists have been able to identify and understand complex instinctual behaviors, shedding light on their adaptive significance.

Defining Ethology: A Naturalistic Approach

At its core, ethology is the scientific study of animal behavior, with a strong emphasis on observing animals in their natural settings. This naturalistic approach distinguishes it from other fields that may focus on laboratory experiments or controlled environments.

Ethologists seek to understand the adaptive value of behaviors. They explore how these behaviors contribute to an animal's survival and reproductive success. By observing animals in their natural habitats, researchers can gain a more complete understanding of the factors that influence behavior. This includes social interactions, environmental challenges, and the complex interplay between instinct and learning.

Key Figures in Ethology and Their Contributions

Ethology owes its development and prominence to the groundbreaking work of several key figures, each of whom has contributed unique insights into the study of instinct.

These scientists laid the foundation for modern ethological research. Their contributions continue to shape our understanding of animal behavior today.

Konrad Lorenz: Imprinting and Instinctual Behavior

Konrad Lorenz is best known for his work on imprinting, a form of rapid learning that occurs during a critical period in early life. His experiments with greylag geese demonstrated that young birds will follow the first moving object they see after hatching, regardless of whether it is their biological mother.

This phenomenon highlights the powerful role of instinct in guiding behavior during sensitive periods. Lorenz's research revealed that imprinting is an innate predisposition. It is triggered by specific environmental stimuli, leading to a lasting bond between the young animal and its caregiver.

Lorenz’s work also explored the concept of fixed action patterns (FAPs), which are complex, stereotyped behaviors that are triggered by specific stimuli. His work showed that these behaviors are innate and species-specific.

Niko Tinbergen: The Four Questions

Niko Tinbergen made significant contributions to ethology through his emphasis on the four questions that should be asked when studying any behavior. These questions provide a comprehensive framework for understanding the causes and consequences of behavior.

Tinbergen's four questions are:

1. Causation: What are the immediate mechanisms that trigger the behavior?
2. Development: How does the behavior change over the lifespan of the individual?
3. Function: What is the adaptive purpose of the behavior?
4. Evolution: How did the behavior evolve over time?

By addressing these questions, ethologists can gain a more complete understanding of the behavior's underlying mechanisms. This also helps understand its developmental trajectory, adaptive significance, and evolutionary history. Tinbergen’s framework remains a cornerstone of ethological research.

Karl von Frisch: Animal Communication

Karl von Frisch is renowned for his work on animal communication, particularly his studies of honeybee behavior. He discovered that bees use a complex dance language to communicate the location of food sources to other members of the hive.

Von Frisch's research revealed that bees perform two main types of dances: the round dance, which indicates that food is nearby, and the waggle dance, which conveys information about the distance and direction of the food source. The waggle dance is particularly remarkable. Bees use the angle of the waggle run relative to the sun to indicate the direction of the food. They use the duration of the waggle run to indicate the distance.

His work highlighted the sophisticated communication abilities of animals and underscored the role of instinct in facilitating social interactions and cooperation.

Modern Evolutionary Perspectives: Sociobiology and Evolutionary Psychology

Ethology: Observing Instinct in the Wild

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual differences in behavior and traits. This section shifts our focus to modern evolutionary perspectives, specifically sociobiology and evolutionary psychology, which offer compelling frameworks for examining the influence of evolutionary principles on social behavior and the human mind.

Sociobiology: Evolution and Social Behavior

Sociobiology represents a paradigm shift, applying evolutionary principles to the understanding of social behavior in both animals and humans. At its core, sociobiology posits that social behaviors, like any other trait, are subject to natural selection.

Therefore, behaviors that enhance an individual's reproductive success, or the reproductive success of their relatives, are more likely to be passed down through generations.

This approach seeks to explain a wide range of social phenomena, from altruism and cooperation to aggression and competition, through the lens of evolutionary fitness.

The Controversial Legacy of E.O. Wilson

Edward O. Wilson's seminal work, Sociobiology: The New Synthesis, published in 1975, is widely credited with popularizing sociobiology.

However, it also ignited considerable controversy, particularly when Wilson extended his analysis to human behavior.

Critics argued that Wilson's approach was overly deterministic, potentially justifying social inequalities by attributing them to genetic predispositions.

These criticisms underscore the ethical complexities inherent in applying evolutionary explanations to human social structures.

Evolutionary Psychology: The Evolved Mind

Evolutionary psychology extends the principles of evolutionary biology to the study of the human mind. It proposes that the human brain, like any other organ, is a product of natural selection, shaped by the challenges and opportunities faced by our ancestors.

Evolutionary psychologists seek to identify the psychological adaptations that evolved to solve specific problems in ancestral environments.

These adaptations may manifest as cognitive biases, emotional responses, or behavioral tendencies that were advantageous for survival and reproduction.

Key Figures in Evolutionary Psychology

Several prominent figures have shaped the field of evolutionary psychology. Steven Pinker, through his accessible writing, has popularized the idea that the mind is composed of specialized modules designed to solve specific adaptive problems.

Leda Cosmides and John Tooby have made significant contributions by emphasizing the importance of understanding the ancestral environment in which the human mind evolved.

Their work has helped to clarify how seemingly irrational or maladaptive behaviors in modern society may have been adaptive in the past.

Cosmides and Tooby founded the Center for Evolutionary Psychology at the University of California, Santa Barbara, a major hub for research and collaboration.

The Biology of Instinct: Neural Pathways and Epigenetics

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual and species-specific traits. Examining the biological underpinnings of instinct reveals the intricate ways in which genes, neural circuits, and epigenetic mechanisms orchestrate these complex behaviors.

Neural Pathways and Instinctual Behavior

At the core of every instinctual action lies a network of interconnected neurons, meticulously wired to produce a specific behavioral output. These neural pathways represent the physical infrastructure upon which innate behaviors are built. Specific brain regions and circuits are activated in response to relevant stimuli, triggering a cascade of events that ultimately result in a pre-programmed action.

For example, the amygdala, a brain structure associated with emotional processing, plays a crucial role in fear responses, which are often instinctual.

Similarly, the hypothalamus is involved in regulating motivated behaviors, such as feeding, mating, and aggression, all of which have significant instinctive components.

These circuits are not static entities; they can be modulated by experience. However, their foundational structure is largely determined by genetic inheritance, providing a reliable template for consistent behavioral responses.

The consistency of the template ensures survival for organisms.

The Role of Specific Genes

Specific genes encode the proteins and molecules essential for the development and function of these neural pathways. These genes operate much like instructions for building the neural circuits that perform the instinctual task.

Variations in these genes can alter the strength or efficiency of these circuits, leading to differences in behavior. Studies of animal models have identified numerous genes that influence instinctual behaviors such as mating rituals, parenting, and predator avoidance.

These genes often code for neurotransmitter receptors, signaling molecules, or structural proteins involved in synaptic transmission. Through these molecular mechanisms, genetic inheritance shapes the neural landscape that dictates instinctive responses.

Epigenetics: Beyond the Genetic Code

While genes provide the blueprint for instinctual behavior, epigenetics offers a layer of complexity, revealing how environmental factors can influence gene expression without altering the underlying DNA sequence.

Epigenetic modifications, such as DNA methylation and histone modification, can switch genes "on" or "off," thereby affecting the production of proteins that regulate behavior.

These epigenetic changes can be induced by environmental stimuli, such as stress, nutrition, or social interactions, and, in some cases, can be transmitted across generations.

This means that the experiences of ancestors may indirectly shape the instinctual behaviors of their descendants through epigenetic inheritance.

For instance, studies have shown that maternal care in rodents can alter the methylation patterns of genes involved in stress response in offspring, leading to long-lasting changes in behavior. This demonstrates the power of the environment to mold innate tendencies via epigenetic mechanisms.

Implications and Future Directions

Understanding the biology of instinct has profound implications for various fields, including medicine, psychology, and conservation biology.

Identifying the neural pathways and epigenetic mechanisms underlying instinctual behaviors can provide insights into the causes of behavioral disorders and inform the development of targeted therapies.

Moreover, this knowledge can be used to improve animal welfare by creating environments that better meet the instinctual needs of captive animals.

Further research is needed to fully elucidate the complex interplay between genes, neural circuits, and epigenetics in shaping behavior. Advances in genomics, neuroscience, and molecular biology are providing new tools to unravel these intricate mechanisms.

By continuing to explore the biological basis of instinct, we can gain a deeper appreciation for the rich tapestry of life and the remarkable ways in which organisms are adapted to their environments.

Researching Instinct: Methods and Tools

The enduring debate surrounding nature versus nurture continues to shape our understanding of behavior. It is an inquiry into the relative contributions of innate qualities (nature) and environmental factors (nurture) in determining individual and species-specific traits. Examining the biological underpinnings of instinct reveals intricate neural pathways and epigenetic influences, yet the empirical study of these phenomena requires robust research methodologies. This section explores the methodologies and tools employed to investigate instinctual behaviors. We will look at experimental designs aimed at isolating innate responses and comparative studies used to identify behavioral patterns across diverse species.

Experimental Designs for Unveiling Innate Behavior

The experimental study of instinct hinges on carefully designed methodologies to isolate and observe innate behaviors under controlled conditions. The goal is to minimize the influence of learning and environmental factors, thereby highlighting the genetically programmed aspects of behavior.

Controlled Environment and Deprivation Experiments

One common approach involves creating controlled environments where subjects are deprived of specific learning opportunities. For instance, young animals might be raised in isolation from conspecifics to prevent social learning.

If these animals still exhibit species-typical behaviors in the absence of prior experience, it provides strong evidence for the innateness of those behaviors.

Manipulation of Sign Stimuli

Another powerful experimental technique involves manipulating sign stimuli, also known as releasers. These are specific sensory cues that trigger fixed action patterns (FAPs).

By systematically altering the characteristics of a sign stimulus, researchers can identify the precise features necessary to elicit an instinctive response.

Niko Tinbergen's work on the red belly of male stickleback fish is a classic example. He demonstrated that the red color, rather than the shape of the fish, was the critical stimulus for triggering aggressive behavior in other males.

Genetic Manipulations

With the advent of modern genetic techniques, researchers can now directly manipulate the genes thought to underlie specific instinctive behaviors.

Gene knockout studies, for example, involve disabling specific genes to observe the resulting effects on behavior. This can provide definitive evidence for the role of particular genes in mediating instinctive responses.

Optogenetics, which allows for the control of neuronal activity using light, offers another powerful tool for investigating the neural circuits underlying instinct.

Comparative Studies: Identifying Patterns Across Species

Comparative studies offer valuable insights into the evolutionary origins and functions of instinctive behaviors. By examining behavioral similarities and differences across species, researchers can identify patterns that reflect shared ancestry or convergent evolution.

Phylogenetic Analysis

Phylogenetic analysis involves mapping behavioral traits onto a phylogenetic tree, which depicts the evolutionary relationships among different species.

This approach can help determine whether a particular behavior is ancestral (inherited from a common ancestor) or derived (evolved independently in different lineages).

The prevalence of similar mating rituals across related bird species may suggest a shared genetic basis for these behaviors.

Cross-Species Comparisons

Comparing the instinctive behaviors of closely related species can reveal how environmental pressures have shaped behavioral adaptations.

For example, comparing the foraging strategies of different finch species on the Galapagos Islands, as famously studied by Darwin, reveals how natural selection has favored different beak shapes and feeding behaviors in response to varying food resources.

Universality of Human Behaviors

In humans, cross-cultural studies can shed light on the universality of certain behaviors, suggesting a possible instinctive basis.

For example, the widespread expression and recognition of certain facial expressions, such as happiness, sadness, anger, and fear, across diverse cultures, point to an innate component in these emotional displays. However, one must be wary of ethnocentric bias in such research.

So, next time you're wondering why you suddenly crave sweets or feel that urge to protect your family, remember it might just be those good old instincts kicking in. What do we call biologically determined innate patterns of behavior? Well, in the US, we often just call them instincts – a simple word for a complex part of what makes us, well, us.