Steven
Pinker’s The Blank Slate centers on
the age-old argument of nature verses nurture. This book presents the argument
that both factors play a major part in the makeup of individuals. Along the
way, the author takes on what he contends is a pervasive but invalid view that
most human behavior is based upon culture and has almost nothing to do with biological
evolution.
First,
the book sets out to prove the point that biological evolution impacts human
behavior in a major way. Pinker outlines how human violence, cooperation,
family structure, sexuality and many other aspects of human behavior all have
their origins in survival strategies and thus evolution.
Pinker
is not arguing that culture is not an important factor. Instead, he is arguing
what he contends is a common belief that environment is the only driver of
human personality. The author presents evidence that human actions and cultures
are, to a great extent, driven by evolutionary biology. Furthermore, many
differences between people also stem from the particular sets of genes that we
posses. Pinker describes the tendency for biology and evolution to influence
behavior by the ubiquitous term “human nature.”
Pinker
describes the central augment of this work in a nutshell,
“about half of the variation in
intelligence, personality, and life outcomes is heritable— “
Next,
the author sets out to highlight how, throughout the twentieth century and even
earlier, various scientists, political movements and ideologies have advocated a
counter narrative. That alternate interpretation is that individuals and
society are one hundred percent malleable and can adopt any patterns or customs
based entirely upon the environment, particularly culture. Thus, the term “The
Blank Slate” is the book’s title.
Pinker
tries to paint a picture of the social sciences, political and social
movements, etc. that are dominated by folks hostile to the idea that human
evolution has had a great impact upon our culture. He attributes much of this
resistance to political and social motives that have overridden the scientific
method and rational thinking.
Pinker
highlights some of our worst policies and social theories propagated by both
the political Right and Left to be based on the Black Slate. He argues that
many pernicious ideologies, including Nazism and Communism, are based on it. He
contends that at the core of these thought systems is the belief that the human
mind is infinitely malleable.
Pinker
spends a lot of time addressing how certain scientists have perpetuated this
myth. He is particularly critical of the many who have done so for reasons that
he contends are political. He also highlights the unfair attacks on scientists
and philosophers who have tried to argue that many human differences as well as
activity stem from biology. The author also describes how certain scientists
who advocated for the validity of a biological evolutionary view have been
unfairly and outrageously stigmatized as racists and Nazi sympathizers.
Finally,
the author argues against what he contends is the false assertion that biological
causes of human behavior will allow folks to somehow excuse immoral acts. He
makes a strong defense of morality in a world where morality is part of our
genetic makeup.
Pinker
is very fair. He takes both the political and cultural Right and Left to task
for what he contends is untenable denial of the genetic origins of behavior. He
points out that, ideologically, both sides have expended a lot of energy in
pushing the validity idea of the Blank Slate to the detriment of society.
I am
very much with Pinker on his view of human behavior being influenced by
evolutionary biology. It seems clear for anyone who has studied evolution and human
behavior that human personality and actions are the result of a combination of
nature and nature. A lot of our culture as well as the things that humans do
can be linked to survival strategies that humans evolved with. I also agree
with him that such conclusions in no way invalidate the value of ethics,
morality and decency.
However,
as Rachel of Hibernator's
Library points out here, one question arises: does Pinker overstate how much
resistance there has been to this balanced view of human nature? Many books,
articles and popular opinions seem to support the notion that we are a
combination of nature and nature. Perhaps Pinker is trying a little too hard to
prove this point.
Yet,
Pinker has a point that we have a lot of ideologies, as well as scientific
thought, that seems to deny any connection between biology and behavior.
Furthermore, in recent decades, unfair and slanderous attacks have been
conducted on proponents of the theory of biological factors driving behavior.
Having
read Pinker’s The Better Angels of Our
Nature, I can describe
that book as a kind of follow up to this one. In it, the author outlines how
certain human characteristics that have roots in human evolution are expressing
themselves more and more as society progresses. Positive behavioral traits such
as cooperation, empathy, nonviolence, etc. are winning out as societies
throughout the world change. My commentary on that book is here.
This book is full of ideas. Though I have some disagreements with him, I
find that Pinker’s view of humanity is very close to my own. I believe that
this is one of the books that is important for anyone who wants to understand humanity
and our cultures. It helps us understand who we are and why we are the way we
are. I highly recommend it for folks who are curious about these subjects.