According to Huxley individuals are primarily determined by genetics and genetic manipulation. For Skinner, the behaviour is determined by the manipulation of the environmental variables. But for Huxley, legal drugs are the only way to provide a way out of the conflict. According to Skinner, there is no conflict between the way citizens think and act, as they are convinced that the life they lead is the best, given the possibilities available. A perfect society is achieved by regulating the genetic material and planning jobs according to their genetic abilities. However, according to Skinner, a harmonious society is achieved through the complete regulation of the external factors that cause a particular behavior. With this in mind human actions are highly predictable and therefore controllable. Huxley's utopia is all about the happiness of the citizens. As long as citizens live happily, they will avoid confrontation and war. Nevertheless, Skinner's utopia tries to persuade citizens to adopt patterns of behavior that promote peaceful coexistence. To this end, social factors are planned to promote this type of behaviour.
Similarities
In both utopias there is monitoring and social planning of the population for which abnormal or deviant behaviour is not known.
Both theories support the planned collectivism of society, and consequently the individual cannot act freely and without superior interference.
Both theories support the planned collectivism of society, and consequently the individual cannot act freely and without superior interference.
In their utopias, governments do not believe that concepts like individualism and freedom are positive for society.
Finally, both authors deny in their societies the possibility of an individual's cognitive development, which may differ from their actions. For them, a free will is just an illusion.
A life in Utopia
For me, the question arises whether we are not already in some way in this kind of society. Of course, if you look at this kind of society from the outside, it is easy to say that a life without free will and without the possibility to decide on one's own life with its shortcomings and mistakes is not desirable. I share Luckmann's position that human behaviour is always socially oriented. It doesn't matter if we want to rebel against the authorities or follow the rules. Both types of behavior always seek to relate to the other person.
However, as Freud claims, I believe that the cognitive and emotional development of the individual is always connected with a tension and a conflict between primary desires (the id) and externally defined social norms and values (the superego). I do not believe that governments can end the conflict Freud points out by promoting drugs or pleasure-oriented forms of consumption or by genetically manipulating human material. Nor do I think that by controlling the external variables of the environment one can predict the behavior of individuals. Although many of Skinner's postulates are based on animal experiments, we cannot transfer the results to humans. Furthermore, even though Skinner claims that individual will is an illusion, since the cause of a particular behavior is ultimately the variables that determine a particular reaction, I find it difficult to accept this thesis when I see Dali's works of art or hear Mozart's symphonies. If a behaviour in terms of its external and contextual variables were so easy to reproduce, why are there not more often people like Beethoven, Mozart or Picasso? Skinner even claims that this would be possible if psychologists continued to work on their science of behaviorism.
However, as Freud claims, I believe that the cognitive and emotional development of the individual is always connected with a tension and a conflict between primary desires (the id) and externally defined social norms and values (the superego). I do not believe that governments can end the conflict Freud points out by promoting drugs or pleasure-oriented forms of consumption or by genetically manipulating human material. Nor do I think that by controlling the external variables of the environment one can predict the behavior of individuals. Although many of Skinner's postulates are based on animal experiments, we cannot transfer the results to humans. Furthermore, even though Skinner claims that individual will is an illusion, since the cause of a particular behavior is ultimately the variables that determine a particular reaction, I find it difficult to accept this thesis when I see Dali's works of art or hear Mozart's symphonies. If a behaviour in terms of its external and contextual variables were so easy to reproduce, why are there not more often people like Beethoven, Mozart or Picasso? Skinner even claims that this would be possible if psychologists continued to work on their science of behaviorism.