2. Illustrate "Human Nature". Critically discuss the challenge that anti-fundamentalists had offered. Do you agree with the challenge? If yes, why? If not, why not? Give justification of your argument

The concept of "Human Nature" is the believe that there are some naturally existing ways that human naturally think, feel and act. The idea is that some of these attribute are innate to the human species and that it defines humanity and what it means to be human. However, some of the challenges put forward by anti-fundamentalists like the philosopher David L. Hull is the temporal and contingent rarity of this "essential sameness of human being" in biology. Other scientific basis of the inherent human behavior like Instinctual behavior and other complex behavior as observed has also been known to be malleable and not fixed as opposed to the fundamentalist that argue that this inner human nature is the same and fixed.

Yes, I do agree with the challenges.

I agree with this challenges from the fact that the idea of what it means to be human is diverse and different across culture, people and even the individual. Some culture promote and encourage hostility as a way of defending and expanding itself, while others see this act as inhumane, and some people do not see themselves as deviants because of their believe that they are exercising their human nature. some other basis is upbringing. A child isolated from the rest of the world and groomed into a specific nature will retain that nature, which shouldn't be so if the internal human natures exists and is as dominant as fundamentalists of this idea claim.