The Blank Slate

Whenever I come across a work--a game, a movie, a book, an idea--that I deem truly exceptional, I feel compelled to share it with others (for veterans, recall the days of "Buy Meteos!"). The internet in general, and Zelda Universe in particular, has long been my way of fulfilling this desire. The subject itself may be personally inspiring, but the interpersonal connections that follow from sharing it are especially rewarding.

Stephen Pinker's The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature is, for me, worthy of the title "masterpiece."



Often it seems that the best things are those we stumble upon organically, without any prior knowledge, even randomly. For me, this was certainly the case with my discovery of Meteos, the music of Enya, Dawkins's The Selfish Gene, even Ocarina of Time. I was fortunate enough to find these (in my opinion) transcendent products without any prior research or preconceived notions. I accepted them for what they were and became increasingly appreciative of their brilliance.

So it is with The Blank Slate. I have not been as engrossed with a book since I read The Selfish Gene. But Pinker's book has much broader appeal. While the The Selfish Gene is a fairly technical book that will only enthrall biology enthusiasts, I believe the Blank Slate can and should be read by everyone (with the possible exception of a particular chapter that is, admittedly, itself quite technical.)

Let me finally delve into what this book is about . . .

The first portion attempts to discredit three distinct but related concepts that are heavily ingrained into the collective human psyche. These are what Pinker refers to as "The Blank Slate," "The Noble Savage," and "The Ghost in the Machine." The first is that we have no innate tendencies and that it is exclusively culture and environment that shape our lives. The second is the myth that humans in their natural state are selfless, peaceful beings--that it is only the advent of civilization and institutions that brought us social ills and suffering. The third is the notion that we are immaterial spirits that inhabit a mechanical body.

Pinker explains the roots of these beliefs, why they are appealing, persist among intellectuals and laypeople alike, and why their alternatives are feared.

In later sections of the book, Pinker summarizes many aspects of human nature as they actually are--supported by evidence. He demonstrates that "the blank slate," is not, in fact, a morally superior doctrine--and that by taking biological realities into consideration, our decisions on public and moral policy can be better informed.

One characteristic that I think makes the book unique is how comprehensive it is. In exploring a topic as broad as "human nature," many ways of knowing should be considered, and that is just what Pinker does. His book blends twentieth century history (particularly Nazism and Marxism), the social sciences (which he is often critical of), evolutionary psychology, biology, and a heavy dose of philosophy throughout.

And he does it all with stunning prose. One hallmark of a great writer is that they make complex topics understandable through the use of elegant metaphors, relevant examples, and simple language. There were some passages that I couldn't help but think that what I was reading was incredibly profound. For this reason, The Blank Slate is not only enlightening but thoroughly enjoyable as well.

The final thing I want to touch upon is what a massive chord this book struck with me personally. It did not alter my perspective, but rather raised my consciousness to beliefs I already had. For example, "The Ghost in the Machine" is as concept that I think most people intuitively believe in: that is, they "feel" like their mind and body are separate entities. I have always perceived myself that way--it takes education to undo this belief. On the other hand, education often perpetuates the myth of the "Noble Savage." This was one specific subject where Pinker's book did change my mind. Further, I never believed in the Blank Slate and I obviously do not after reading the book.

I completely agree with Dawkins praise: "And how courageous to buck the liberal trend in science, while remaining in person the best sort of liberal."

I implore you all: Please read this book! It is enlightening, enjoyable, and very relevant for life in the 21st century.

This thread can be used for questions and discussion of the book.

Entertainment?

Well that's a strong recommendation!
Unfortunately, your review makes the book sound an introductory survey to the Philosophy of Mind. If a reader has already been through Locke, Descartes, Rousseau, and their common (/pre-Darwinian) criticisms, do you think they'll find much of value here? To what extent does Pinker explore Neuroscience and Evolutionary Biology as precursors to human behavior? How willing is he to explore theology and the supernatural in his discussion of Dualism (if Dawkins liked it, I'm assuming "not at all")?

Originally Posted by mmmmm_PIE

Well that's a strong recommendation!
Unfortunately, your review makes the book sound an introductory survey to the Philosophy of Mind. If a reader has already been through Locke, Descartes, Rousseau, and their common (/pre-Darwinian) criticisms, do you think they'll find much of value here? To what extent does Pinker explore Neuroscience and Evolutionary Biology as precursors to human behavior? How willing is he to explore theology and the supernatural in his discussion of Dualism (if Dawkins liked it, I'm assuming "not at all")?

Personally, I did not have a strong background in philosophy going into this book (although he does refer to all of the people you mentioned and a couple of others), so I thought it was a good overview. If you're already a philosophy buff, you might find those parts of the book somewhat basic.

Neuroscience and evolutionary biology are emphasized to a great extent, which is predictable given that Pinker specializes in neuroscience and language. He is not as crass as Dawkins, but he is an atheist and generally does not consider a theological explanation for dualism (hence his opposition to the ghost in the machine). In fact, he makes this clear within the first three pages before casting it aside to deal strictly with the "blank slate," which he believes is the theory of human nature that mainstream intellectuals are committed to.

This is a very broadly based book (it throws a net over a lot of topics rather than going deeply into any one), but if I had to reduce it to a single sentence, I would say it is about defining human nature and how knowledge of this nature should inform political debates.

It sounds enthralling. If his arguments against those three concepts do not revolve entirely around evolution or atheism (it will take me a while to explain why apart from my own views), I may consider the very much valid.

One that strikes me is the "Ghost in the Machine" one. There are many arguments for that, so an argument against it is something that needs to be weighed.

Also, the "Noble Savage" is mainly an excuse for people to criticize modern society.

Originally Posted by Captain Crusader

It sounds enthralling. If his arguments against those three concepts do not revolve entirely around evolution or atheism (it will take me a while to explain why apart from my own views), I may consider the very much valid.

One that strikes me is the "Ghost in the Machine" one. There are many arguments for that, so an argument against it is something that needs to be weighed.

Also, the "Noble Savage" is mainly an excuse for people to criticize modern society.

Evolution is invoked, but not his sole argument. He also draws arguments from the fields of psychology and philosophy.

And I agree with you on the "Noble Savage." It's one of those concepts that most people (myself included) accept without questioning, but it is not based on fact. The truth is, men in most hunter-gatherer societies (and very likely our ancestors) were much more likely to die of war than those in "civilized" societies (even this generation with WWI and WWII taken into account!)

One political lesson that can be taken from a knowledge of human nature (according to Pinker) is that Marxism is in fact a very flawed concept that is based on inaccurate assumptions. When you think about it, the myth of the Noble Savage is crucial for faith in a Communist Society.

Huh... the book's on public reserve at our Humanities library (meaning a prof is currently using it as a class text somewhere, also meaning that no student can have it for more than two hours at a time). Another nice recommendation, but I guess I won't be picking it up this winter.

One political lesson that can be taken from a knowledge of human nature (according to Pinker) is that Marxism is in fact a very flawed concept that is based on inaccurate assumptions. When you think about it, the myth of the Noble Savage is crucial for faith in a Communist Society.

Oh boy; if I had a nickel for every time I've made this point...
Actually, most Marxists I've met are familiar with this argument. Very often I've found that telling an informed red that "I'm not optimistic enough for communism" gets my point across instantly. Though... that doesn't always stop them from trying to make see the "inheirent nobility" of our species.
On the other hand (and if you don't mind me generalizing) in attempting to contrast my Canadian Socialism to true Communism for the benefit of an American, this is usually my central argument.

I finished the book yesterday.

I delayed reading the penultimate chapter because the title "The Arts" did not sound especially interesting to me. To my pleasant surprise, it was. Now I have at least a vague idea of what someone means when they say "postmodernism." One might be curious how "the Arts" and "postmodernism" (as I myself did) factors into a book on human nature. All I can say is read the book and it will make sense.

The Blank Slate was a joy. I don't think I've ever enjoyed a book so thoroughly from start to finish.

Politically engaged scientifically literate people must read it. It does not directly endorse any ideology, but it does question many of the assumptions that guide our collective psyche. Pinker is a hero for writing it and I will certainly check out his other magnum opus How the Mind Works.