www.ted.com Steven Pinker's book The Blank Slate argues that all humans are born with some innate traits. Here, Pinker talks about his thesis, and why some people found it incredibly upsetting.
I was adopted (I was 3.5 y.o.) too and all the time since my childhood I felt that I was different from my family....from the way I was perceiving my adopted family's "morals - behavior - ethical" norms and requirements. As a child I couldn't explain my difference the way I was looking at the world and the way it worked for me. But now I know....I got something "before" I came to this world which was leading and still leads me through my life in my own way.
"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free." Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
Over the course of thirty years I have delivered about three thousand babies and cared for many of them and their families as a Family Doctor as they grew up. I have found that it was easy to assign one of five personality types to each one within a minute or two after delivery and that these persisted. The types were Calm and Curious, Comfort seeking (cuddly), Angry, Fearful or Suspicious. Enjoy your parenthood. You're pretty much stuck with what you start with.
@@KingMinosxxvi well his name is 'Dr.RobMD' and he's saying he delivered babies, so I would assume is a medical doctor who specialized in Obstetrics and Gynecology by a residency and potentially a fellowship following. sometimes the context clues are right in front of ya dummy
@@jakebarnett8837 Um ..................NO that's not a substantiation. Pretty much anyone could the name doctor ROB. Do you think I am King? Furthermore, even if it were true that this dingle hopper was actually a doctor there would be know what to substantiate his claim that he somehow instantly new their personality from the start. Did he mark it down and then continue to not said personality as they grew up. Are these things say mentioned in a journal somewhere? So please DUMMY STF up
The research that's been done on family environment typically doesn't include extreme cases of abuse, neglect, etc. so the answer is we don't know what would happen to those babies (Pinker admits this in the Blank Slate). All psychologists have learned is that in the fairly normal range of family environments there appears to be only small effects on personality.
I am a therapist and incorporate evolutionary psychology in my work with people. In my field 90% of therapists treat the symptoms and will ask you "how do you feel about that.. but do we ever ask why are we predisposed to have severe emotional states like depression? What were the conditions of early humans which may have caused them depression and predisposed us? When people make these connections it can sometimes help them in their recovery. Evolutionary psychology should be mandatory in all psychology programs. Pinkert is my intellectual hero!!!!
Definitely true, but this would lead to inequality by nature. Which is something most humans can't accept due to our emotions. Read the Apology by Socrates (Plato), emotions and ideologies will get you killed for speaking the truth, despite any and all evidence
@@jabir5768 it means that she believed that a child was NOT born with a personality , and it was her job to instill one. If her child did not conform to her wishes, then the child must be defective If you believe that children are infinitely malleable, you’ll try to mold them into a shape that pleases you but does not fit them. That’s bad enough if your children somewhat resemble you, but if they’re adopted they’ll never be able to fit the mold and will suffer for that failure. Putting “tabula rasa” into the hands of a narcissist is giving them a tool of endless abuse.
@@fmapls You mother is nothing compare to my father, he is the believer too: there is no such thing as "I don't understand text books and teachers." The father of The Blank Slate: Bad scores in school doesn't mean you lack intelligence, because everyone can be anything, bad scores just mean you are lazy at study. What a nightmare.
Steven Pinker gives several reasons for the appeal of the 'blank slate' idea. I would add another (which I don't think he covered directly). The notion of the blank slate is very validating to those who work in the 'caring professions'. I include in that teachers, psychologists, welfare workers, 'social engineers', etc. - not to mention every mother (or primary parent) who ever lived. We all like to think that our interventions make a difference. But I suspect outcomes are more to do with nature - and less to do with nurture - than commonly thought. Perhaps parents of troubled youth could give themselves a break.
I followed James Demore firing closely and found it rather abhorrent. Now, after seeing Gemini AI disastrous release, I am looking forward to the downfall of Google. Their issues are deep and systemic at that company.
Blank slate: - Equal and Sameness. We are equal but not the same, we ought to judge each one as an individual not as a group. Inspired Topics : - Elite Arts, Criticisms and Parenting. Behavior: - Culture and Man's outcome. Thank you Stephen Pinker.
"the arts are in decline" ROFL, man people never cease to amaze me with their lack of perspective. I like Steven Pinker, he's got academic balls; unafraid to actual tell it how it is, and, especially, how it isn't.
How funny is this? I can't fall asleep because I'm reading his book The Blank Slate... and just as I decide TO TAKE A BREAK from reading him, he shows up on TED with this talk! Fascinating material, enough to keep anyone up at night trying to make sense of it all.
I think Pinker is one of the smartest researchers working today and one of the most intellectually honest. I don't have the background to know if he is right or wrong, but his braveness in studying things like, say race or gender, and calling it how the data shows rather than adhering to dear (but possibly wrong) cultural ideas is refreshing. In this sense, there is no predetermined result, but listening only to the data which I think yields much better science.
One of the interesting things I took away from this is that, although he says that genetics is a major factor in determining personalities, the wiring in the brain can be affected by the conditions in the womb, which means that nurture influences nature. There's is also plenty of evidence showing that nurture turns genes on and off that also impact personalities and that people with certain personalities are predisposed to certain lifestyles I think you can never discount the impact of nurture
I wish there were more of these talks available to us, on more topics. He discusses so many different things in his books--naming, for example, is fascinating. More from TED would be nice. The quality is surprisingly good in nearly all of their videos, and not just for Pinker.
Mr. Pinker's argument makes sense to me. My brother and I were born 19 months apart and raised in the same home yet we are now different people as adults. If we were blank slates we should have turned out more similar. I have recently been reading The Sense of Style for a technical writing course, and I am impressed by Mr. Pinker's writing skill. He is an excellent speaker as well. Thank you, TED, for hosting this video.
A lot can happen in 19 months and parents usually parent differently with each child and sometimes things aren't in the same place between the parents and then there are the life events for each of you that you don't even know about and,what happens at school etc. In other words don't be too sure.
I find the evidence against a blank slate to be very compelling. Siblings often are quite different in terms of personality, habits, hobbies and such despite their very similar upbringing. As opposed to separated identical twins who are raised separately but end up being very similar adults. The conclusion here is that nature definitely seems to prevail over nurture. Of course parents can direct their kids into certain paths of development but I think it's not much more than slight course adjustments. Parents often believe they imprint their personal values onto their kids but it seems much more likely that those values simply arise mostly from genetic inheritance. And that should actually be a relief to most people because it actually removes a lot of the pressure we often feel when raising our kids to be good citizens. They probably already are if you are. :) If genetics is the deciding factor then choosing the right partner in life is probably the best way to also later raise the kind of children that you want.
Everything humans does is essentially a part of their nature. You can't just cherry pick a certain aspect of their behavior and call that "natural" or "nature". It's all of it, both good and bad. Then you can argue that there are some bad traits to that "nature" or there are some good traits, and point them out, but essentially every little single thing we do is a part of our "nature". This is how we are designed, and it's very complex, it's something we won't understand anytime soon.
That means your experiences are different from your brother,have you been to all the places that he had been,have you talked to all the people that he talked?people and places influence us.
This is really excellent. I love the sheer common sense and good humour of this intelligent man. I love his observations about the decline of art convergent with the non recognition of human nature. Brilliant!
That information in regards to Book Sales it's something I'm a bit fascinated with. I was under the misconception that reading in general was on the decline. Thank you for that... That helps me make the decision I was toiling with for the past few years... I will indeed write a book, several perhaps.
I graduated in psychology and I have to say that at least where I studied we lack a lot of what steven pinker says. Really great presentation, this is closer to science over what social Science has been doing. All political and pettiness guiding everything.
Could you elaborate on your experience studying psychology? I'm interested in how & what they teach & Do you not consider Social Science Science or just generally poorer in quality
Sounds like you had a crappy program. Unfortunately that is common. I studied psychology at the University of Minnesota which is one of the best institutions for psychology research in the world, and outside of Psych 101, everything I learned more or less matches up with this video. Granted I did focus on cognitive psychology which dives much more in depth into nature vs nurture than a lot of other psychology subdomains.
Critters on a rock floating in an unimaginable nothingness as far as we are concerned. It's to damn far to go have any fun. We're stuck here on this rock looking at each other. And we don't like it.
Hugh Fathers thank you so much for sharing this! Steven Pinker is, as you mention, always interesting. As an artist and psychologist, I particularly enjoyed his comments on art and parenting.
That's exactly what Mr. Pinker is trying to say in this video. He suggests that we *inherit* much more from our birth parents which molds us into who we are, rather than the idea that we *learn* more from our parents/guardians which mold us into who we are, which is true to an extent, but we definitely inherit more personal traits than we learn.
Honestly I think both nature and nurture play a role in a persons development and personality. I’m not sure if it’s 50/50 for both nature and nurture, there’s so many different debates and opinions, and this argument has been going on for years. Plus, human behaviour is so complex that I don’t think we will ever know for sure how much of a person is nature and how much is nurture.
Chomsky made important contributions to understanding the nature of grammar, e.g. in "Language and Thought" and "Language and Mind," two books he published in the '60s. Although his universal grammar thesis is now viewed with skepticism, no one doubts that all human languages share many features and a common mechanism of childhood acquisition. It was his injection of Marxist politics into the mix which ruined things.
It is just obvious to me that we are born with some inbuilt individual talents and vices. The best we can do is to find as early of possible our individual strengths and weaknesses to see what endeavors goes "against our grain" and smoothing our natural rough edges. Comparatives with other people are almost always bound to be unfair.
Everyone is born with an individual talent, and I think the education system should be better at pointing them out, and then exploiting them for society to progress further towards the right direction.
@@Danskadreng Unfortunately that's just not true. It is enitrely possible to have no talents at all and there are millions of such people in our world. Now, technically, you could perform mental gymnastics to assign a talent to 100% of the global population, but definitions don't care about your own personal semantic interpretations. This is one of the many reasons why I believe a universal basic income should be a basic human right and is the only way to live in an ethical and fair society.
What Pinker says seems quite obvious to me. Is it really so controversial to say that people are born with certain innate abilities and dispositions? I do have reservations about his dismissal of the role of the parents in affecting the development of their children to this extent - that if parents are abusive to thier children, those children will probably be damaged in one way or another. They will have a greater tendency to suffer from depression, anxiety, and other psychological problems and will be more likely to engage in anti-social behavior than children who are not abused. Human nature is not just a matter of genetic programming. Genes play an active role in human behavior, they are not mere blueprints. Genes are activated and de-activated in response to environmental factors. Therefore, these environmental factors are very important in determining human behavior. I think it is misleading to talk about "human nature" as if it is something fixed and immutable when human behavior is so clearly dependent upon the interaction of genetic endowment and enviromental conditions.
I don't know if u really got the jist of it....your saying the negative morals of the parents affect the kids " negatively"... well duh ! Maybe watch it again ... that's not the point of what he is saying
Pinker says the contrary,environment has no effect on personality or intellect. 19:15 - 20:42 He really should have give more detail this.. I guess that's why he wrote a book.
And by "departmental", I'm not postulating or relegating it to any specific function but the overall neurological connections. PS: I mentioned the twins because it's an example of the subdivision that you and I were talking about. Other than bias, I'm not sure what you were trying to dispute that for or what you meant by the disputation. The twin studies are the method used for methodically studying such heritability on the genetic level.
I was reading about philosophy and humanity, and one of the chapters were about how the old art is dying, is like modern "popular" artists try to make things ugly and non sensical on purpose.
I think today's artists have a rapidly expanding set of mediums available to them. There is also an increase in techniques and tools available to create art. This expansion of what/where/how art can be produced is a possible explanation of why some of it seems less "great" - and consequently, artists photographing unique stains are simply getting comfortable with the medium right now. Given more exposure to and familiarity with the new tools/techniques will over time yield "greater" results.
We believed strongly in the blank slate as psychologists in the 70s onward...this is why we advised the Us government to poure billions of dollars into programs such as Headstart...we believed we could engineer IQ via such programs we soon found we couldnt. Social engineering has wasted huge amounts of money with almost no results. We meant well, we wanted all people to be equal ...they are not . Of course we knew people had varying IQs. But we wanted so much to buy into the ugly duckling theory ..that we could sprinkle education dust, self esteem affirmation training, everyone gets a prize cause no one special, certain children and adults are gifted due to reprehensabile "privilege"...fairy dust in front of children and they would blossom like flowers. Not so much. All those years I was a contrarian...speaming up about what I knew to be true re the measurement of IQ...guess what I was called? Classist, sexist (against my own gender), racist.....I retired early at 50 and never looked back...I had FREEDOM to speak my mind. I have grandchildren whomhave been told I am those things by their schools, teachers, amd scocoety...I must say THAT part of it was not fun. I have lost lifelong friends as wokeism has taken more and more hold of American society. I know what it must have felt ike to be Galileo. Sybil Francis PhD clinical.psychologist and professor
I meant which subject is movie and which is the tabloid and critique. Map it Ah, I see. In that case, if we're likening subjects to different forms of media: 1. **Physics** could be seen as the "movie" because it aims to uncover the fundamental laws governing the universe, presenting a structured and systematic understanding of natural phenomena. 2. **Humanities**, encompassing fields like literature, philosophy, history, and art, could be likened to "gossip columns and critiques." This is because humanities often involve subjective interpretations, diverse perspectives, and discussions that may not have clear-cut answers, similar to the exploratory and sometimes speculative nature of tabloid gossip and critiques. So basically as per your mapping can it be said literally that science movies like iron man or Jurassic park or avatar fit the bill for physics Yes, that's a fitting analogy. Movies like "Iron Man," "Jurassic Park," and "Avatar" often incorporate elements of science, technology, and physics into their storytelling, albeit sometimes with fictionalized or exaggerated aspects. These films can be seen as representations of scientific concepts and principles presented in a more accessible and entertaining format, akin to how physics seeks to understand and explain the natural world. ChatGPT 🌹
Finally the answer I required. Psychology is another imperial discipline like Economics. -- Memorizing facts like VIBGYOR or the planets aids in foundational understanding within astrophysics, while applying psychology might not offer relevant insights for these specific topics. Rote memorization supports clarity and focus within the realm of scientific inquiry, while psychology is more applicable within its own domain.
Pinker is right about the academic humanities. They tend to focus way too much on grey areas, and then generalise from those grey areas. They can't see the forest for the trees. Having said that, not all their work is useless.
In hindsight it wouldn't necessarily improve their chances of inheriting it anymore than if 2 members of the same had bred (& now that I've actually reread your statement, I remember why it was I agreed with you, it was because you were referring to heritability) but upon reviewing my last statements, it'd more likely make the offspring even more intelligent for the reasons Pinker is describing (50-0-50), plus there would be 2 sources as oppose to 1 leading to greater departmental intelligence.
The ideal experiment would involve feeding in the same simulated stimuli to multiple children from birth, and comparing their responses to over time. Anything short of that (like comparing siblings, twins, etc) is just not good enough to make a conclusion with significant confidence.
I went to college but am self educated. I spent all my time in the library and did till Internet came along. Library and inter library loans are what you need
Elite white folks like Pinker perpetuate the myth, the big lie about progress. That we could create a perfect society. That human endeavours can make the world a better place while all evidence shows that it's become far worse. Simple folks seem to love Steven Pinker and his bourgeois eloquence, in place of the facts, reality and the sufferings of millions of human being that rises every year every day. His analysis is unplugged from reality. And remember that Enlightenment gave Jacobians, Utopia and Fascism too.
Samrat B Samrat B That's true depending on the level of optimism bias, but then again there is also bias to just expecting the worst of everything before it shows that it's not as bad as it looks (personally I don't believe in a perfect society/utopian outlook either). At the end of the day, our worldview development, personal background, and the ability to absorb information into our brains are some of the ways that help define what our reality is, so personally I plan on looking at the world realistically and while recognizing that there is indeed a lot of bad, ignoring the good would end up being unrealistic too.
@@Scarshadow666 As you say "ignoring the good would end up being unrealistic too" I am in agreement. However, since 'The Bad' or the Worse has taken control much of humanity and human society - We cannot just Hope. Like the academic, writer Chris Hedges recently pointed out "You cannot use the word hope, if you are not going to resist" Adios Have A Nice Day!
Samrat B I agree that hope isn't the only thing to work with and that brainstorming solutions to problems is important, what I was talking about was the outlook on how humanity being taken over by the Bad or Worse would depend on what somebody's individual perspective of what Good or Bad is, and would fall into speculative territory that has been in the realm of philosophy debates for a long time (as most Good vs Evil debates/conflicts tend to be). Just suggesting to see if that outlook would be created based on any kind of fallacy and/or bias and whether it can be addressed as such. Most of this is coming off of what I've learned from various social science/neuroscience/psychology books and class courses (such as Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking: Fast and Slow") , but I'll admit I'm no psychology professional/major so I recommend doing any extended research with what I typed above. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
@MaxWeberz That's not the only thing he ignores. There's been criticism of computational theory of the mind for a long time. And he's still taken it in as the tacit hingepoint in his argument for theory of the mind, along with his language of thought.
when you exhaust everying single action and preference that someone does you are bound to find some similarities between any two person. The question is if these similarities listed in the beginning of the presentation are the rare ones that do match?
@mightyafrowhitey I think that's a misdirection. People often confuse 'open-mindedness'. It means open for consideration without pre-judgment, not open to acceptance without any judgment. If it doesn't please the senses via human nature, people will reject it: beauty, aesthetics, symmetry, meter, etc. Modern movements (elite, by definition) moved away from these themes to unconstrained ones, and nobody likes them. That's not closed-minded pre-judgment; it's legitimate post-judgment.
Pinker has balls to be treading this thin ice between science and philosophy. Respect....even if he's wrong on some things, his overall points are at least trying to make sense of the hard to tackle stuff of life.
He isn't trying to make any philosophical statements whatsoever. That's entirely the point. This talk is 100% grounded in scientific research. The fact that your mind is inclined to go in this direction after watching this lecture tells me that you may just not be in a place that is ready to accept these potentially harsh realities.
I'm saddened because his final statement is being quite ignored and rather people seem increasingly insistent on silencing unpopular views that are rooted in rigourous scientific studies.
@MaxWeberz, Epigenetics has the same conclusion as Pinker... not only genetics plays an important part of who you are but the development of cells will vary even among twins... which is what Pinker mentioned in this very precise video. Second, he never said we are all biologically-driven savages, he said heredity plays a huge role in our personality, but other things such as culture and peers also have minor effects ...., in essence there is no perfect copy of anything.
That's true, unless people find ways around their limitations, which is a another issue. For example, blind people have graduated from professional school because they can read braille. Without the invention of braille, this might not have been possible.
How did Stephen Jay Gould reconcile the identical twin studies with his belief that the human brain is capable of a wide range of behaviors but is predisposed to none?
20:25-20:42 Steven Pinker: "Identical twins or any siblings separated at birth are no less similar than if they had grown up together. Everything that happens to you at home in a given home in all of those years appears to leave no permanent stamp on your personality or intellect." Pinker then said a complimentary study proved the contraposition, that non-related siblings raised together do not exhibit similar traits. There is no scientific consensus on what personality is exactly nor are there any personality test backed up by scientific consensus. And there is without a doubt no agreement on what intelligence is or if any test has shown to prove it. Therefore, you, Steven Pinker, must tell what exactly is his definition is to a general audience for them to fully understand what is being covered. 21:01-21:30 Steven Pinker:...what it suggest is that children are shaped not by their parents over the long run, but in part by their genes, in part by their culture, the culture of the country of the children... and to extent by chance." Additionally, to state to a general audience or experts that the studies prove parenting has no influence but peer influence does--regardless of how intelligence personality is defined---requires that you provide evidence for the variables in the studies fully cover the claim that parenting isn't responsible for child's traits doesn't but genetics does. For example of traits, skills like emotional understanding, social competency, or skills in a sport/e-sport. On top of all of that, you skimmed over the studies' proof that the children's peers' and culture affect the studied children's traits, severely implying that changing the relationship between them and the peers and who peers they spend with can influence them, which parents or other authority figures can change, manipulate, or exploit To summarize, I am not doubting the claim that genetics may solely play a role in particular traits that you may construe as personality, nor doubting your intentions, I am doubting your generalizing of how genetics influence children compared to parenting, I am doubting the vague claim about the children's personality and intelligence being not left, and I believe you have yet considered how parents influence the culture and the peers' relationship. Nevertheless, more testing needs to be done to prove your claim before it's ready for a general audience
The answer says While psychological perspectives may offer insights into how individuals understand and interact with physical phenomena, ---- Once psychology can be used to understand the physical phenomena the physical phenomena become psychology. Sort of the finger pointing to the moon in which the moon is now the finger used to point at it.
So sad, it’s 14 years later and Blank Slate theory is gospel truth in Universities and even infecting the Biology department. Not a single University in America that issues a degree in Psychology requires even one course in evolutionary biology.
Human nature/Genetics is obviously a major factor in the outcome of someone’s life. The scientific method doesn’t care if nature hurts your feelings. You have to be able to separate scientific data from political implications. Many people are incapable of seeing the world in any way but ideologically, that goes for the left and the right. And no I’m not a centrist, I don’t see why anyone would put themselves into any political box when it comes to the intake of ideas and information. ESPECIALLY OBJECTIVE OBSERVATIONS AND RIGOROUS STUDIES WITH REPEATABLE RESULTS.
Species develop from unique traits being perpetuated, which then form the basis for future mutation. It's the mating pool's average traits, not the individual's, that fuel evolutionary change.
I am more than halfway through "The Blank Slate" and it is interesting. I do have a gripe with this statement on page 128: "anyone who believes in an immaterial soul is certainly not going to believe that thought and feeling consist of information processing in the tissues of the brain." This seems to sugguest that you have to either believe in neuroscience or an immaterial soul. However, the two are NOT mutually exclusive unless a person is an extreme Cartesianist, Anyone agree?
“Not only does the action of Governments not deter men from crimes; on the contrary, it increases crime by always disturbing and lowering the moral standard of society.” - The Meaning of the Russian Revolution (1906) Leo Tolstoy
@AndroidPolitician The Gabor Mate, James Gilligan and Robert Sapolski school of thought. Also the the most balanced because it recognises genetic predisposition but *not* predetermination. Behavior is cultivated by environment, and any abhorrent behavior can be dormant without stimuli or rectified by nurturing social conditions. Great section in Zeitgeist: Moving Forward on these men if you haven't seen it.
What a great talk and far too brief. To consider that all our actions or reactions are drived from genes is not the issue, it is a source, yes. In psychology we also have many other factors, as was stated, which are self moderating factors as well, which can influence behaviour or reactions as well. eg. the repression of gay tendancies, recent studies, show a 90% increase in the subject performing spousal abuse and homophobic reactions. The basis in which Stephen talks, fits humanity
Has anyone noticed that lately on youtube all commentors are not reply-able to? When one replies recently, his reply simply vanishes. But only sometimes. Is there a checkbox in one's youtube profile that disables "accept replies"?
It seems like the nature-nurture debate will never stop. It's only that, depending upon current findings and the general zeitgeist, one side will have the upper hand while the other will be subjugated for a certain amount of time. Huh
@@MrGold-lo6vc Yeah, the blank slate thesis is pretty much debunked but don't let us forget the genetical determinists/evopsych-tards on the right. The truth isn't always in the middle, but it seems as if here it is. They don't speak of the biopsychosocial framework for no reason. Genes express in an environment. Actually you can't separate one from the other.
You know why physics is movie and humanities are gossip and critique. ---- No I meant which subject is movie and which is the tabloid and critique. Map it Ah, I see. In that case, if we're likening subjects to different forms of media: 1. **Physics** could be seen as the "movie" because it aims to uncover the fundamental laws governing the universe, presenting a structured and systematic understanding of natural phenomena. 2. **Humanities**, encompassing fields like literature, philosophy, history, and art, could be likened to "gossip columns and critiques." This is because humanities often involve subjective interpretations, diverse perspectives, and discussions that may not have clear-cut answers, similar to the exploratory and sometimes speculative nature of tabloid gossip and critiques. -- ChatGPT Auto
I wish he would of defined what he meant by similar. He said they shared certain behaviors, but most people do. He probably defined those things in the book.
I was just talking about the part were he defined similar as behavioral traits separated twins shared, but if you go out intentionally looking for them, it would be easy to find in any two individuals of the same culture (I would imagine, but could be wrong)
I switched providers to Penrose. Steven Pinker tends to focus on traditional psychology explanations, which may lead to his lack of acknowledgment of quantum explanations, in contrast to Roger Penrose's theory involving quantum effects in consciousness.
Hi Tjosan The question was: "do you have tenure?" So it's a way of asking: "is your academic position contractually protected?" or, put more bluntly as an assertion, "you could lose your job because of these claims, good sir!" :-)
His mind is so structured, I can almost hear the clicks when he's talking. Each argument has logical steps going back to his view of the world. Very impressive
0:33 Blank Slate
1:27 Reasons to doubt blank slate
5:46 Political appeal of blank slate
11:27 Arts
18:27 Parenting
I was adopted and found out recently i have an older brother, him and i are very alike and have wives with similar personalities.
I was adopted (I was 3.5 y.o.) too and all the time since my childhood I felt that I was different from my family....from the way I was perceiving my adopted family's "morals - behavior - ethical" norms and requirements. As a child I couldn't explain my difference the way I was looking at the world and the way it worked for me. But now I know....I got something "before" I came to this world which was leading and still leads me through my life in my own way.
@@alecwolf1443 What do you mean? Because your comment is synonymous to the family I grew up in, as the last born.
"Human beings are born with different capacities. If they are free, they are not equal. And if they are equal, they are not free." Alexandr Solzhenitsyn
Over the course of thirty years I have delivered about three thousand babies and cared for many of them and their families as a Family Doctor as they grew up. I have found that it was easy to assign one of five personality types to each one within a minute or two after delivery and that these persisted. The types were Calm and Curious, Comfort seeking (cuddly), Angry, Fearful or Suspicious. Enjoy your parenthood. You're pretty much stuck with what you start with.
How bout some credentials to go along with this unsubstantiated lark?
@@KingMinosxxvi well his name is 'Dr.RobMD' and he's saying he delivered babies, so I would assume is a medical doctor who specialized in Obstetrics and Gynecology by a residency and potentially a fellowship following. sometimes the context clues are right in front of ya dummy
@@jakebarnett8837 Um ..................NO that's not a substantiation. Pretty much anyone could the name doctor ROB. Do you think I am King? Furthermore, even if it were true that this dingle hopper was actually a doctor there would be know what to substantiate his claim that he somehow instantly new their personality from the start. Did he mark it down and then continue to not said personality as they grew up. Are these things say mentioned in a journal somewhere? So please DUMMY STF up
UPS here, you're hired!
The research that's been done on family environment typically doesn't include extreme cases of abuse, neglect, etc. so the answer is we don't know what would happen to those babies (Pinker admits this in the Blank Slate). All psychologists have learned is that in the fairly normal range of family environments there appears to be only small effects on personality.
I am a therapist and incorporate evolutionary psychology in my work with people. In my field 90% of therapists treat the symptoms and will ask you "how do you feel about that.. but do we ever ask why are we predisposed to have severe emotional states like depression? What were the conditions of early humans which may have caused them depression and predisposed us? When people make these connections it can sometimes help them in their recovery. Evolutionary psychology should be mandatory in all psychology programs. Pinkert is my intellectual hero!!!!
Definitely true, but this would lead to inequality by nature. Which is something most humans can't accept due to our emotions. Read the Apology by Socrates (Plato), emotions and ideologies will get you killed for speaking the truth, despite any and all evidence
My mother firmly believed in the blank slate for all of her children, including the adopted ones. What a f’ing nightmare.
how does that turn into a nightmare ? Genuinely curious
@@jabir5768 it means that she believed that a child was NOT born with a personality , and it was her job to instill one. If her child did not conform to her wishes, then the child must be defective
If you believe that children are infinitely malleable, you’ll try to mold them into a shape that pleases you but does not fit them. That’s bad enough if your children somewhat resemble you, but if they’re adopted they’ll never be able to fit the mold and will suffer for that failure. Putting “tabula rasa” into the hands of a narcissist is giving them a tool of endless abuse.
@@fmapls I see. Sorry you had to go trough that
@@fmapls You mother is nothing compare to my father, he is the believer too: there is no such thing as "I don't understand text books and teachers."
The father of The Blank Slate: Bad scores in school doesn't mean you lack intelligence, because everyone can be anything, bad scores just mean you are lazy at study.
What a nightmare.
the moment he said "common sense" is the moment you know what kind of speech he's giving.
Steven Pinker gives several reasons for the appeal of the 'blank slate' idea. I would add another (which I don't think he covered directly). The notion of the blank slate is very validating to those who work in the 'caring professions'. I include in that teachers, psychologists, welfare workers, 'social engineers', etc. - not to mention every mother (or primary parent) who ever lived. We all like to think that our interventions make a difference. But I suspect outcomes are more to do with nature - and less to do with nurture - than commonly thought. Perhaps parents of troubled youth could give themselves a break.
Robert Plomin has a debate explaining how parenting matters but it doesn’t make a difference
Funny how TH-cam suggested this 2008 presentation now, 10 years later. Thank you, it was interesting and still holds truth to this day.
Actually, it's from *2003*, according to the title near the start of the video.
More important than ever with James Demore being fired for basically saying the same thing.
Yup. And he even provided ideas on how Google could attract more women, despite not thinking it was necessary from an ideological point of view.
More important than now?
I followed James Demore firing closely and found it rather abhorrent. Now, after seeing Gemini AI disastrous release, I am looking forward to the downfall of Google. Their issues are deep and systemic at that company.
Blank slate: - Equal and Sameness. We are equal but not the same, we ought to judge each one as an individual not as a group.
Inspired Topics : - Elite Arts, Criticisms and Parenting.
Behavior: - Culture and Man's outcome. Thank you Stephen Pinker.
"the arts are in decline" ROFL, man people never cease to amaze me with their lack of perspective. I like Steven Pinker, he's got academic balls; unafraid to actual tell it how it is, and, especially, how it isn't.
How funny is this? I can't fall asleep because I'm reading his book The Blank Slate... and just as I decide TO TAKE A BREAK from reading him, he shows up on TED with this talk!
Fascinating material, enough to keep anyone up at night trying to make sense of it all.
I think Pinker is one of the smartest researchers working today and one of the most intellectually honest. I don't have the background to know if he is right or wrong, but his braveness in studying things like, say race or gender, and calling it how the data shows rather than adhering to dear (but possibly wrong) cultural ideas is refreshing. In this sense, there is no predetermined result, but listening only to the data which I think yields much better science.
One of the interesting things I took away from this is that, although he says that genetics is a major factor in determining personalities, the wiring in the brain can be affected by the conditions in the womb, which means that nurture influences nature. There's is also plenty of evidence showing that nurture turns genes on and off that also impact personalities and that people with certain personalities are predisposed to certain lifestyles I think you can never discount the impact of nurture
nonchalantd Think you can't deny either at all. That's what he's arguing against. The total reliance on nature. But good comment
Nurture arises from nature more than vice versa
I wish there were more of these talks available to us, on more topics. He discusses so many different things in his books--naming, for example, is fascinating.
More from TED would be nice. The quality is surprisingly good in nearly all of their videos, and not just for Pinker.
That sentence by Judith at 17:12 is a work of art in and of itself.
The findings on twins is beyond interesting.
Mr. Pinker's argument makes sense to me. My brother and I were born 19 months apart and raised in the same home yet we are now different people as adults. If we were blank slates we should have turned out more similar.
I have recently been reading The Sense of Style for a technical writing course, and I am impressed by Mr. Pinker's writing skill. He is an excellent speaker as well. Thank you, TED, for hosting this video.
A lot can happen in 19 months and parents usually parent differently with each child and sometimes things aren't in the same place between the parents and then there are the life events for each of you that you don't even know about and,what happens at school etc. In other words don't be too sure.
I find the evidence against a blank slate to be very compelling. Siblings often are quite different in terms of personality, habits, hobbies and such despite their very similar upbringing. As opposed to separated identical twins who are raised separately but end up being very similar adults. The conclusion here is that nature definitely seems to prevail over nurture.
Of course parents can direct their kids into certain paths of development but I think it's not much more than slight course adjustments. Parents often believe they imprint their personal values onto their kids but it seems much more likely that those values simply arise mostly from genetic inheritance. And that should actually be a relief to most people because it actually removes a lot of the pressure we often feel when raising our kids to be good citizens. They probably already are if you are. :)
If genetics is the deciding factor then choosing the right partner in life is probably the best way to also later raise the kind of children that you want.
Everything humans does is essentially a part of their nature. You can't just cherry pick a certain aspect of their behavior and call that "natural" or "nature". It's all of it, both good and bad. Then you can argue that there are some bad traits to that "nature" or there are some good traits, and point them out, but essentially every little single thing we do is a part of our "nature". This is how we are designed, and it's very complex, it's something we won't understand anytime soon.
That means your experiences are different from your brother,have you been to all the places that he had been,have you talked to all the people that he talked?people and places influence us.
This is really excellent. I love the sheer common sense and good humour of this intelligent man. I love his observations about the decline of art convergent with the non recognition of human nature. Brilliant!
That information in regards to Book Sales it's something I'm a bit fascinated with. I was under the misconception that reading in general was on the decline.
Thank you for that... That helps me make the decision I was toiling with for the past few years... I will indeed write a book, several perhaps.
I graduated in psychology and I have to say that at least where I studied we lack a lot of what steven pinker says. Really great presentation, this is closer to science over what social Science has been doing. All political and pettiness guiding everything.
Could you elaborate on your experience studying psychology? I'm interested in how & what they teach
& Do you not consider Social Science Science or just generally poorer in quality
still over reliant on indirect measures, still lacking experimental design,
Sounds like you had a crappy program. Unfortunately that is common. I studied psychology at the University of Minnesota which is one of the best institutions for psychology research in the world, and outside of Psych 101, everything I learned more or less matches up with this video. Granted I did focus on cognitive psychology which dives much more in depth into nature vs nurture than a lot of other psychology subdomains.
@@philj9594 what jobs or what can you work as if you have a degree in psychology?
Mankind can never move forward until we come to grips with not who we are but what we are.
Critters on a rock floating in an unimaginable nothingness as far as we are concerned. It's to damn far to go have any fun. We're stuck here on this rock looking at each other. And we don't like it.
@@duster0066 Overpopulation is the biggest problem facing humanity at present. Well said.
Always interesting to hear Steven talk . . .
Hugh Fathers thank you so much for sharing this! Steven Pinker is, as you mention, always interesting. As an artist and psychologist, I particularly enjoyed his comments on art and parenting.
"Blank Slate" and "How the Mind Works" are two of my favorite books. "Stuff of Thought" was pretty good too. I tend to agree with Pinker's points.
Everybody gangsta til the TED logo blows out their eardrums.
lol
That's exactly what Mr. Pinker is trying to say in this video. He suggests that we *inherit* much more from our birth parents which molds us into who we are, rather than the idea that we *learn* more from our parents/guardians which mold us into who we are, which is true to an extent, but we definitely inherit more personal traits than we learn.
debatable 🤔
Honestly I think both nature and nurture play a role in a persons development and personality. I’m not sure if it’s 50/50 for both nature and nurture, there’s so many different debates and opinions, and this argument has been going on for years. Plus, human behaviour is so complex that I don’t think we will ever know for sure how much of a person is nature and how much is nurture.
Muy bueno, y al plantear la idea del cambio de perspectiva de la belleza me hizo recordar a Roger Scruton sobre el tema.
Thank you so much for your bravery. People like you help me realize I'm not insane. You're much better then Chomsky...
Doesn't take a lot to be better than Chomsky, but yes, Pinker is great.
+Dexter Lecter I don't think Steven Pinker would follow your logic, somehow.
***** In which way? I'd disagree on many grounds. His logic and reasoning is very similar to my own.
+Dexter Lecter he's a dummy lol Chomsky is an actual scientist
Chomsky made important contributions to understanding the nature of grammar, e.g. in "Language and Thought" and "Language and Mind," two books he published in the '60s. Although his universal grammar thesis is now viewed with skepticism, no one doubts that all human languages share many features and a common mechanism of childhood acquisition. It was his injection of Marxist politics into the mix which ruined things.
It is just obvious to me that we are born with some inbuilt individual talents and vices. The best we can do is to find as early of possible our individual strengths and weaknesses to see what endeavors goes "against our grain" and smoothing our natural rough edges. Comparatives with other people are almost always bound to be unfair.
Everyone is born with an individual talent, and I think the education system should be better at pointing them out, and then exploiting them for society to progress further towards the right direction.
@@Danskadreng Unfortunately that's just not true. It is enitrely possible to have no talents at all and there are millions of such people in our world. Now, technically, you could perform mental gymnastics to assign a talent to 100% of the global population, but definitions don't care about your own personal semantic interpretations. This is one of the many reasons why I believe a universal basic income should be a basic human right and is the only way to live in an ethical and fair society.
What Pinker says seems quite obvious to me. Is it really so controversial to say that people are born with certain innate abilities and dispositions? I do have reservations about his dismissal of the role of the parents in affecting the development of their children to this extent - that if parents are abusive to thier children, those children will probably be damaged in one way or another. They will have a greater tendency to suffer from depression, anxiety, and other psychological problems and will be more likely to engage in anti-social behavior than children who are not abused. Human nature is not just a matter of genetic programming. Genes play an active role in human behavior, they are not mere blueprints. Genes are activated and de-activated in response to environmental factors. Therefore, these environmental factors are very important in determining human behavior. I think it is misleading to talk about "human nature" as if it is something fixed and immutable when human behavior is so clearly dependent upon the interaction of genetic endowment and enviromental conditions.
Steven Yourke H
+Steven Yourke I agree, it's time to pull out the Astrology charts...
+Steven Yourke He would have to agree with you. Development is always a combination of genetics and environmental influences.
I don't know if u really got the jist of it....your saying the negative morals of the parents affect the kids " negatively"... well duh ! Maybe watch it again ... that's not the point of what he is saying
Pinker says the contrary,environment has no effect on personality or intellect.
19:15 - 20:42
He really should have give more detail this..
I guess that's why he wrote a book.
I am such a fan of Steven Pinker! I'm reading The Language Instinct right now and really enjoying it. Plus he's Canadian :).
Steven Pinkner is great. I really want to read more of his stuff.
Talks do not get any better than this. Perfect. Thank you, TED, and thank you, Dr. Pinker.
And by "departmental", I'm not postulating or relegating it to any specific function but the overall neurological connections.
PS: I mentioned the twins because it's an example of the subdivision that you and I were talking about. Other than bias, I'm not sure what you were trying to dispute that for or what you meant by the disputation.
The twin studies are the method used for methodically studying such heritability on the genetic level.
Can we have better updated resolution of the lecture? Please......
I was reading about philosophy and humanity, and one of the chapters were about how the old art is dying, is like modern "popular" artists try to make things ugly and non sensical on purpose.
A perfect example is the Buffer brothers. They were separated young but both of them ended up introducing fighters before fights.
Wow, its been over 20 years since the Blank Slate came out. Surely society has come to accept the conclusions put forth by Mr. Pinker.. Surely..
I think today's artists have a rapidly expanding set of mediums available to them. There is also an increase in techniques and tools available to create art. This expansion of what/where/how art can be produced is a possible explanation of why some of it seems less "great" - and consequently, artists photographing unique stains are simply getting comfortable with the medium right now. Given more exposure to and familiarity with the new tools/techniques will over time yield "greater" results.
We believed strongly in the blank slate as psychologists in the 70s onward...this is why we advised the Us government to poure billions of dollars into programs such as Headstart...we believed we could engineer IQ via such programs we soon found we couldnt. Social engineering has wasted huge amounts of money with almost no results. We meant well, we wanted all people to be equal ...they are not . Of course we knew people had varying IQs. But we wanted so much to buy into the ugly duckling theory ..that we could sprinkle education dust, self esteem affirmation training, everyone gets a prize cause no one special, certain children and adults are gifted due to reprehensabile "privilege"...fairy dust in front of children and they would blossom like flowers. Not so much. All those years I was a contrarian...speaming up about what I knew to be true re the measurement of IQ...guess what I was called? Classist, sexist (against my own gender), racist.....I retired early at 50 and never looked back...I had FREEDOM to speak my mind. I have grandchildren whomhave been told I am those things by their schools, teachers, amd scocoety...I must say THAT part of it was not fun. I have lost lifelong friends as wokeism has taken more and more hold of American society. I know what it must have felt ike to be Galileo. Sybil Francis PhD clinical.psychologist and professor
I meant which subject is movie and which is the tabloid and critique. Map it
Ah, I see. In that case, if we're likening subjects to different forms of media:
1. **Physics** could be seen as the "movie" because it aims to uncover the fundamental laws governing the universe, presenting a structured and systematic understanding of natural phenomena.
2. **Humanities**, encompassing fields like literature, philosophy, history, and art, could be likened to "gossip columns and critiques." This is because humanities often involve subjective interpretations, diverse perspectives, and discussions that may not have clear-cut answers, similar to the exploratory and sometimes speculative nature of tabloid gossip and critiques.
So basically as per your mapping can it be said literally that science movies like iron man or Jurassic park or avatar fit the bill for physics
Yes, that's a fitting analogy. Movies like "Iron Man," "Jurassic Park," and "Avatar" often incorporate elements of science, technology, and physics into their storytelling, albeit sometimes with fictionalized or exaggerated aspects. These films can be seen as representations of scientific concepts and principles presented in a more accessible and entertaining format, akin to how physics seeks to understand and explain the natural world.
ChatGPT 🌹
You're correct: genetic traits have mostly to do with predisposition. Environment is the key factor for individual development.
This is a great book-worth some re-reading and critical analysis. I'm now reading "words and rules" by pinker...also enjoyable.
Finally the answer I required. Psychology is another imperial discipline like Economics.
--
Memorizing facts like VIBGYOR or the planets aids in foundational understanding within astrophysics, while applying psychology might not offer relevant insights for these specific topics. Rote memorization supports clarity and focus within the realm of scientific inquiry, while psychology is more applicable within its own domain.
Pinker is right about the academic humanities. They tend to focus way too much on grey areas, and then generalise from those grey areas. They can't see the forest for the trees.
Having said that, not all their work is useless.
love the song at the end...
In hindsight it wouldn't necessarily improve their chances of inheriting it anymore than if 2 members of the same had bred (& now that I've actually reread your statement, I remember why it was I agreed with you, it was because you were referring to heritability) but upon reviewing my last statements, it'd more likely make the offspring even more intelligent for the reasons Pinker is describing (50-0-50), plus there would be 2 sources as oppose to 1 leading to greater departmental intelligence.
The ideal experiment would involve feeding in the same simulated stimuli to multiple children from birth, and comparing their responses to over time. Anything short of that (like comparing siblings, twins, etc) is just not good enough to make a conclusion with significant confidence.
So interesting, I could listen to him, on and on and on...
Who else is here because you can’t afford college so you have to self educate?
I went to college but am self educated. I spent all my time in the library and did till Internet came along. Library and inter library loans are what you need
Elite white folks like Pinker perpetuate the myth, the big lie about progress. That we could create a perfect society. That human endeavours can make the world a better place while all evidence shows that it's become far worse. Simple folks seem to love Steven Pinker and his bourgeois eloquence, in place of the facts, reality and the sufferings of millions of human being that rises every year every day. His analysis is unplugged from reality. And remember that Enlightenment gave Jacobians, Utopia and Fascism too.
Samrat B Samrat B
That's true depending on the level of optimism bias, but then again there is also bias to just expecting the worst of everything before it shows that it's not as bad as it looks (personally I don't believe in a perfect society/utopian outlook either).
At the end of the day, our worldview development, personal background, and the ability to absorb information into our brains are some of the ways that help define what our reality is, so personally I plan on looking at the world realistically and while recognizing that there is indeed a lot of bad, ignoring the good would end up being unrealistic too.
@@Scarshadow666 As you say "ignoring the good would end up being unrealistic too" I am in agreement.
However, since 'The Bad' or the Worse has taken control much of humanity and human society - We cannot just Hope. Like the academic, writer Chris Hedges recently pointed out "You cannot use the word hope, if you are not going to resist"
Adios Have A Nice Day!
Samrat B I agree that hope isn't the only thing to work with and that brainstorming solutions to problems is important, what I was talking about was the outlook on how humanity being taken over by the Bad or Worse would depend on what somebody's individual perspective of what Good or Bad is, and would fall into speculative territory that has been in the realm of philosophy debates for a long time (as most Good vs Evil debates/conflicts tend to be).
Just suggesting to see if that outlook would be created based on any kind of fallacy and/or bias and whether it can be addressed as such.
Most of this is coming off of what I've learned from various social science/neuroscience/psychology books and class courses (such as Daniel Kahneman's "Thinking: Fast and Slow") , but I'll admit I'm no psychology professional/major so I recommend doing any extended research with what I typed above. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Was this powerpoint done in Windows 95?
Yes. This presentation is from 2003. Not very surprising then.
@MaxWeberz That's not the only thing he ignores. There's been criticism of computational theory of the mind for a long time. And he's still taken it in as the tacit hingepoint in his argument for theory of the mind, along with his language of thought.
when you exhaust everying single action and preference that someone does you are bound to find some similarities between any two person. The question is if these similarities listed in the beginning of the presentation are the rare ones that do match?
@mightyafrowhitey I think that's a misdirection. People often confuse 'open-mindedness'. It means open for consideration without pre-judgment, not open to acceptance without any judgment. If it doesn't please the senses via human nature, people will reject it: beauty, aesthetics, symmetry, meter, etc. Modern movements (elite, by definition) moved away from these themes to unconstrained ones, and nobody likes them. That's not closed-minded pre-judgment; it's legitimate post-judgment.
this is so relevant today
How does that follow from Pinker's talk?
I enjoy waching Steve Pinkers lectures.You can be agree or disagree with him but he gives good arguments.
The idea that humans can be a blank slate is one of the most absurd arguments of our current society
Pinker has balls to be treading this thin ice between science and philosophy. Respect....even if he's wrong on some things, his overall points are at least trying to make sense of the hard to tackle stuff of life.
He isn't trying to make any philosophical statements whatsoever. That's entirely the point. This talk is 100% grounded in scientific research. The fact that your mind is inclined to go in this direction after watching this lecture tells me that you may just not be in a place that is ready to accept these potentially harsh realities.
@@philj9594 that's nice
I'm saddened because his final statement is being quite ignored and rather people seem increasingly insistent on silencing unpopular views that are rooted in rigourous scientific studies.
@MaxWeberz, Epigenetics has the same conclusion as Pinker... not only genetics plays an important part of who you are but the development of cells will vary even among twins... which is what Pinker mentioned in this very precise video. Second, he never said we are all biologically-driven savages, he said heredity plays a huge role in our personality, but other things such as culture and peers also have minor effects
...., in essence there is no perfect copy of anything.
Thinking 🤔 I can’t know many words. But I want to say thank you for being nice 👍
Great talk, have to read this book
Steven Pinker is a sage of our time. The way he presents his findings is second to none...
how about Epigenitics? do they have an impact on our behavior?
Wow I didn't realise there was actually alot of contention against this.
nothing is more powerful than the sum of all your past "nurturing" much more powerful than the nurturing you receive in the immediate/present
What does he say at 8:44? English is not my first language.
That's true, unless people find ways around their limitations, which is a another issue. For example, blind people have graduated from professional school because they can read braille. Without the invention of braille, this might not have been possible.
How did Stephen Jay Gould reconcile the identical twin studies with his belief that the human brain is capable of a wide range of behaviors but is predisposed to none?
Did he knew it?
True. How can media and elite left ignore that ID Twins have astonishing similar IQs just the major Races to some degree?
20:25-20:42
Steven Pinker: "Identical twins or any siblings separated at birth are no less similar than if they had grown up together. Everything that happens to you at home in a given home in all of those years appears to leave no permanent stamp on your personality or intellect." Pinker then said a complimentary study proved the contraposition, that non-related siblings raised together do not exhibit similar traits.
There is no scientific consensus on what personality is exactly nor are there any personality test backed up by scientific consensus. And there is without a doubt no agreement on what intelligence is or if any test has shown to prove it. Therefore, you, Steven Pinker, must tell what exactly is his definition is to a general audience for them to fully understand what is being covered.
21:01-21:30
Steven Pinker:...what it suggest is that children are shaped not by their parents over the long run, but in part by their genes, in part by their culture, the culture of the country of the children... and to extent by chance."
Additionally, to state to a general audience or experts that the studies prove parenting has no influence but peer influence does--regardless of how intelligence personality is defined---requires that you provide evidence for the variables in the studies fully cover the claim that parenting isn't responsible for child's traits doesn't but genetics does. For example of traits, skills like emotional understanding, social competency, or skills in a sport/e-sport. On top of all of that, you skimmed over the studies' proof that the children's peers' and culture affect the studied children's traits, severely implying that changing the relationship between them and the peers and who peers they spend with can influence them, which parents or other authority figures can change, manipulate, or exploit
To summarize, I am not doubting the claim that genetics may solely play a role in particular traits that you may construe as personality, nor doubting your intentions, I am doubting your generalizing of how genetics influence children compared to parenting, I am doubting the vague claim about the children's personality and intelligence being not left, and I believe you have yet considered how parents influence the culture and the peers' relationship. Nevertheless, more testing needs to be done to prove your claim before it's ready for a general audience
The answer says
While psychological perspectives may offer insights into how individuals understand and interact with physical phenomena,
----
Once psychology can be used to understand the physical phenomena the physical phenomena become psychology. Sort of the finger pointing to the moon in which the moon is now the finger used to point at it.
I wish I could talk to him personally, because I don't really agree with a lot of what he's saying. Perhaps I missed some stuff though.
So sad, it’s 14 years later and Blank Slate theory is gospel truth in Universities and even infecting the Biology department. Not a single University in America that issues a degree in Psychology requires even one course in evolutionary biology.
Human nature/Genetics is obviously a major factor in the outcome of someone’s life. The scientific method doesn’t care if nature hurts your feelings. You have to be able to separate scientific data from political implications. Many people are incapable of seeing the world in any way but ideologically, that goes for the left and the right. And no I’m not a centrist, I don’t see why anyone would put themselves into any political box when it comes to the intake of ideas and information. ESPECIALLY OBJECTIVE OBSERVATIONS AND RIGOROUS STUDIES WITH REPEATABLE RESULTS.
21:02 I assume these studies don’t include extreme differences in parenting like parents who play favourites or physical abuse.
Species develop from unique traits being perpetuated, which then form the basis for future mutation. It's the mating pool's average traits, not the individual's, that fuel evolutionary change.
that quote at the end damn.
I am more than halfway through "The Blank Slate" and it is interesting. I do have a gripe with this statement on page 128: "anyone who believes in an immaterial soul is certainly not going to believe that thought and feeling consist of information processing in the tissues of the brain." This seems to sugguest that you have to either believe in neuroscience or an immaterial soul. However, the two are NOT mutually exclusive unless a person is an extreme Cartesianist, Anyone agree?
I liked - but wheres the beginning?
I wouldn't know that till I talked to him.
What is the argument presented by Stephen Pinker? I didn't catch what he's actually trying to prove!
Steven Pinker is a great individual- he's the ideal future of humanity.
“Not only does the action of Governments not deter men from crimes; on the contrary, it increases crime by always disturbing and lowering the moral standard of society.” - The Meaning of the Russian Revolution (1906) Leo Tolstoy
@AndroidPolitician The Gabor Mate, James Gilligan and Robert Sapolski school of thought. Also the the most balanced because it recognises genetic predisposition but *not* predetermination. Behavior is cultivated by environment, and any abhorrent behavior can be dormant without stimuli or rectified by nurturing social conditions. Great section in Zeitgeist: Moving Forward on these men if you haven't seen it.
What a great talk and far too brief.
To consider that all our actions or reactions are drived from genes is not the issue, it is a source, yes.
In psychology we also have many other factors, as was stated, which are self moderating factors as well, which can influence behaviour or reactions as well.
eg. the repression of gay tendancies, recent studies, show a 90% increase in the subject performing spousal abuse and homophobic reactions.
The basis in which Stephen talks, fits humanity
Has anyone noticed that lately on youtube all commentors are not reply-able to? When one replies recently, his reply simply vanishes. But only sometimes.
Is there a checkbox in one's youtube profile that disables "accept replies"?
How do I cite this in APA format?
balls
Awesome, thank you! Please continue
It seems like the nature-nurture debate will never stop. It's only that, depending upon current findings and the general zeitgeist, one side will have the upper hand while the other will be subjugated for a certain amount of time. Huh
Yep, the left's progressives need to perpetuate the blank slate myth to support their political views.
@@MrGold-lo6vc Yeah, the blank slate thesis is pretty much debunked but don't let us forget the genetical determinists/evopsych-tards on the right. The truth isn't always in the middle, but it seems as if here it is. They don't speak of the biopsychosocial framework for no reason. Genes express in an environment. Actually you can't separate one from the other.
I absolutely agree with you. I think political correctness is a terrible idea.
Let's suppose that genes are determining at least partially how responsive we are to the environment and how much we absorb from it...
You know why physics is movie and humanities are gossip and critique.
----
No I meant which subject is movie and which is the tabloid and critique. Map it
Ah, I see. In that case, if we're likening subjects to different forms of media:
1. **Physics** could be seen as the "movie" because it aims to uncover the fundamental laws governing the universe, presenting a structured and systematic understanding of natural phenomena.
2. **Humanities**, encompassing fields like literature, philosophy, history, and art, could be likened to "gossip columns and critiques." This is because humanities often involve subjective interpretations, diverse perspectives, and discussions that may not have clear-cut answers, similar to the exploratory and sometimes speculative nature of tabloid gossip and critiques.
--
ChatGPT
Auto
I wish he would of defined what he meant by similar. He said they shared certain behaviors, but most people do. He probably defined those things in the book.
Jonathan manning If you are referring to the part where he shows the brain scans, he clearly says that he's referring to the density of grey matter.
I was just talking about the part were he defined similar as behavioral traits separated twins shared, but if you go out intentionally looking for them, it would be easy to find in any two individuals of the same culture (I would imagine, but could be wrong)
I switched providers to Penrose.
Steven Pinker tends to focus on traditional psychology explanations, which may lead to his lack of acknowledgment of quantum explanations, in contrast to Roger Penrose's theory involving quantum effects in consciousness.
Hi Tjosan
The question was: "do you have tenure?" So it's a way of asking: "is your academic position contractually protected?" or, put more bluntly as an assertion, "you could lose your job because of these claims, good sir!" :-)
@daimonmagus I completely agree.
His mind is so structured, I can almost hear the clicks when he's talking. Each argument has logical steps going back to his view of the world. Very impressive