Rating: 
Summary: The walls are coming down
Review: This is a difficult book to read, or review. It is very rich in detail, and politically charged. Put simply, it discusses in detail the old gene-culture/nature-nurture relationship, highlighting in particular how many social structures and various ideologies are in fact rooted in an outmoded view of human nature-the so-called "Blank Slate", or tabular rasa. (Even our language is rife with it, although this is gradually changing). The book's value above the average however, in this widely debated genre, is that it isn't just a rehash of what everybody knows-that the truth for most of these things lies somewhere in between-rather it details just how many 'Blank Slate'-type assumptions people *unconsciously* follow, particularly within both politics and the humanities, but which are being progressively disproved by observational science. It is also very up to date with current research in a range of fields including economics, evolutionary psychology, history, ecology, biology, philosophy, neurology etc. It highlights in particular how humanity can actually benefit from various biological discoveries, in particular in terms of socio-political theory and resistance to various political ideologies. (A common underlying theme of the book is that resistance to the corruption of power may be best attempted through facing the realities of what science says about ourselves, rather than by denying or ignoring it). It attempts to show that despite common misconceptions, the progressive harmonising of biology into social theory is providing a range of positive social benefits and new discoveries. These are too many to be detailed here, but include a range of discussions on violence, gender, the arts, politics, children and education, history, inequality, imperfectibility, determinism, and nihilism. Who would have thought Galapagonian finches could have had anything to do with collective farming, or Nazi youth camps? Or that the geology of cold and lonely rock outcrops on the coast of Scotland, and world geography and trade (location, location, location-Mr Diamond), could have anything to do with education, raising our children, farming, or increasing our health? Mr Pinker brings a range of scientific discoveries into a stream of age-old socio-political views, with a flamboyance and freshness that is long overdue. The Noble Savage, the Blank Slate, the Ghost in the machine, (if you haven't heard much about these-you are in for a crash course) and several other common old assumptions and ideas are discussed in the light of new discoveries in the natural and human (actually these two are the same thing) world. Slowly but inevitably, old ideas, many rooted in misguided political ideologies, (or in some cases the fear of them), are breaking down like the proverbial Berlin Wall. The reason for them to be simply exists no longer. Or to put it more accurately, perhaps there never was a good reason for many of them to be. (Other than, perhaps, the psycho-social benefits of wishful thinking, as Mr Pinker alludes to in George Orwell's 1984-those who swallow the party line best are generally those who can't comprehend it). Or perhaps it may be best said that old ideas are gradually being cast aside, because there are better and more peaceful ways of living in the world. Mr Pinker's understanding of social theory and human nature is generally very sound. But I did have a few quibbles with some of his discussions. I don't think, for example, that Mr Pinker's strong reliance on the 'left versus right' political dichotomy is ultimately true to reality, and I also think that he himself overstates his case at times. (eg 'The Tragic Vision is turning out to be true'- the term 'tragic' itself is contextual and relative-something strong in biological theory, and also eg the 'universality of ethnocentrism'-strictly speaking nothing really is ever universal in the *absolute* sense-eg spandrels and biological co-option abounds). But he does present his arguments with an astuteness and a flair for language and the written word that is quite rare. The general theme of this book is that our biological heritage does not constrain us, so much as enrich us. The devil is in the detail (too many to discuss in short review), but it is a sad fact that much of our social heritage has blinded us to this fact, for too long. Such details are discussed at length in this book. It is a long book, politically very sensitive, very detailed, but worth ploughing through to the end. In the genre of nature/nurture and evolutionary-social theory it is indeed amongst the very best, as my work collegues also attest.
Rating: 
Summary: Strawmen as Fish in Barrels
Review: I have enjoyed other books by Pinker and was expecting to enjoy this one as well. However it did not take me very long to tire of this tedious book. Pinker does not hide his opinions. Indeed he is most certain of them and expounds them tediously in page after page of description. With that, I found myself quickly growing tired of him building up strawmen only so that he can knock them down. I am not a scholar but even I could tell that his descriptions of opposing philosophical theories are shallow and designed to prove his point. Mr. Pinker obviously has deep convictions about human nature. This book reminds me of being forced as a student to listen to a professor profess his pet theories before a captive audience. I found no great exploration of ideas here but just a declaration of Pinker's beliefs. I kept thinking of strawmen and fish in barrels while I read this.
Rating:
Summary: Complicated, Convoluted, yet also Comprehensive
Review: This book is a literary, historical, linguistic, psychological, biological, anthropological, economical, political, sociological, feministic, socialist, physisological, theoretical, cognitive exploration and in this sense is an encapsulating and fascinating read. However, the question remains, but of what? This book is basically a loosely bound together collection of ideas. The ideas are all fascinating, but the quantity of them makes it very difficult to follow the "theme" or extract the purpose of the work. An English teacher might say that it lacks a "central thesis." In short, it doesn't really prove a point. There is no unifying theory or idea that is held through to the end, or if it is there, it is mired down and difficult to extract. The book is also too often focused on discussing what things are not instead of what things are and the distinctions are fuzzy (it is easy to understand what the author doesn't approve of, but difficult to get a sense of what he does approve of).
Rating: 
Summary: Is what it is
Review: There are enough reviews here already, I suppose. But I will warn you that this book is readable and very approachable for the undergraduates. That is part of what makes it so good. This is not just for professional academics. I think it succeeds admirably in what it wants to do. And even if cultural biology is a viable field of endeavor that supplants evolutionary psychology, its need to make factors other than human nature look primary will always be suspect -- and rightfully so.
Rating:
Summary: Good understanding of recent science.
Review: Pinker seems to have a hard time deciding whether he's writing for a popular audience or a scholarly audience. Blank Slate is full of references and names of previous researchers as a work written for scholars would have, but has a rambling intuitive style more common in popular works. The first part of the book defines a sociological theory called "The Blank Slate" as the assumption that all kids are born blank and learn everything from their culture, nurture, as opposed to nature. He then spends several chapters giving arguments why a "blank slate" theory doesn't fit human experience. In the last half of the book Pinker expounds on applications of human nature to social and ethical questions such as gang violence and politics. He gives us a theory as to why someone who favors a free economy most likely wants social controls limiting individual behaviors. In his chapter on "Gender," Pinker talks about feminism saying, "most women don't consider themselves feminists... yet they agree with every major feminist position. (p-343). It is plainly apparent throughout the book that Pinker probably doesn't consider himself a feminist, yet he agrees and supports every major misandrist feminist position. Perhaps it comes from the intellectual collegiate society where misandrist feminism is required to stay employed or get your book published. There are many dogmatic PC beliefs stated as facts that are either wrong or contradict other theories. I wondered for a while if he put those in as a nod to on-campus PC-feminism so the book could be written, or if he really believes them. By the end of the book its clear that he really believes all those PC stereotypes and assumptions. In the last part of the book he rambles on about "the arts" and literature, fields that are obviously way out of his expertise. A more discerning reader can skip over the political agenda and gain some insight into human nature. Overall there is a lot to be learned about current science of brains and how they work.
Rating:
Summary: A Fair and Balanced Look at Human Nature
Review: Steven Pinker is to be commended for this classic work on cognitive psychology for a number of reasons, not the least of which is taking the "fear" out of the phrase "human nature." Citing a plethora of sources, he proves that the tabula was never quite rasa, and that ghost in the machine was just a figment of imagination. The superorganism called "cahlchure" is politely, yet categorically dismissed as the social science's equivalent of "the magic bullet" that killed JFK. Humans are born with a sort of "pre-packaging" of software that can be examined and studied to find out why we do the things we do. Demagogues will automatically decry this as being too much "nature" and not enough "nurture" but the fact remains we are who we are. This book blows the lid off the Boasian perspective on human nature and its censorious effect on real scholarship in the social sciences. In my own counseling studies I have witnessed first hand how professors immediately intercept, interrupt, and re-interpret any conversation that even hints at man having innate abilities, even though cognitive science has made great and historic advances in terms of how the brain works and operates. I read this book because I refuse to walk in ingnorace, even though the more "politically correct" view is that man is by nature, infinately perfectable. Hogwash! Dr. Pinker deserves a lot of praise and credit for pushing back the frontiers of ignorace with this methodical, categorical treatment of this subject.
Rating:
Summary: One of the best.......
Review: This is a great book, and I think it can be enjoyed by those familiar with or new to the field of philosphy/neurosciences.
I also realize this is NOT a discussion board, but I have to say I am baffled as to why anyone would insult this book with a low rating and then continue to blab about thier own personal opposing theories. Pinker is brilliant in his ability to cross reference so many peoples works, and though I may not understand or agree with the entire book, I give it 5 stars easily.
Rating: 
Summary: Pinker continually distorts his opposition
Review: The fact that nobody actually beleives in the idea that humans are a blank slate doesn't stop Pinker from acting as if they do. Over and over again in this book, Pinker quotes his purported opposition and follows up his quotation with an interpretation which is clearly a distortion. This book is merely a diatribe: I can read "adaptionist" books with great pleasure when they are written by people with some subtelty of mind--Richard Dawkins or EO Wilson, say. But Pinker, either through willfulness or incapacity, utterly misses the nuance in arguments made by anyone for whom he considers to be an enemy. A witless, unsubtle and closing-in-on-useless book. Of course, if what you are interested in is seeing Pinker take a bludgeon to a bunch of strawmen, then you'll probably like this book.
Rating:
Summary: Steven Pinker does it again
Review: I have loved everyone of Pinker's previous books, especially "The Language Instinct," so this book had a lot to live up to. "The Blank Slate" is easy and fun for any layperson to read, utterly convincing, and mindboggling in its breadth. When I first picked up this book, my first thought was that its topic was unnecessary...isn't the blank slate theory dead? Pinker shows that it is not, and also shows the dangers of the blank slate as compared to a theory of innate human behavior and characteristics. Far from being the saving grace of humans and the end of racism and other prejudices, the blank slate has been responsible for some of this centuries greatest atrocities, and continues to influence policy in this country today. Pinker can be a bit arrogant...he calls other research into question continuously, but seems to think that the fact that identical twins separated at birth both comment independently on a car's handling is some sort of great indication of their basic similarities. Other times, I felt he missed the point entirely. For example, when discussing Southern ideas of honor, he left out the history of humiliation in the South, a more convincing explanation than the kinship of mountain families. Also, when discussing women in the workplace, he neglects to mention that perhaps part of the paygap arises not due to women making the choice to have a family, but employers assuming they will and hiring accordingly. This is a serious problem in Japan, a country he continuously cites in the gender chapter. Other times the reader will get tired of Pinker's seeming self-adulation. Do I care what art shows he's seen at MIT? Hardly. Even with these small complaints, this book is worthy of all 5 stars. Arrogance aside, I found the rest of this book fabulous and highly persuasive, at times funny, and always witty. Pinker, along with Jared Diamond, is the best popular science writer working today. If you haven't read his books, you are missing out on one of the great minds currently thinking.
Rating:
Summary: Scientific dogmatism exposed
Review: Scientists and academicians, it is often supposed, are dispassionate intellectuals simply following the evidence where it leads--regardless of the scientist's own personal views. Pinker's fascinating study repeatedly demonstrates that scientists, contrary to popular belief, do in fact have heavy ideological axes to grind, and they defend their cherished views with dogmatic, quasi-religious fervor. Of course, any intelligent, educated, open-minded individual who has been following the Darwin vs. Design dialogue already knows this.
|
