Why Do We Deny The Existence Of Human Nature?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 июн 2024
- In this episode, we explore some of the themes from my book, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature. Why do some people cling to the belief that humans are blank slates, with no influence from evolution or genes?
Join me as I unpack the fears driving this denial, born from common misconceptions, like mistaking sameness for equality, and believing we can eliminate traits in humans through training.
#pinker #cognitivepsychology #podcast #psychology #science #stevenpinker #motivation #success #mindset #sound #mind #brain #imagination #languagedevelopment #language #words #magic #memorizing #social #mechanism #humanbehavior #fear #expressions #music #universal #genetics #equalitynow
Follow me:
Twitter: bitly.ws/3eEx6
Facebook: web. Stevenpinker...
Website: stevenpinker.org/
As an evolutionary biologist I have had yelling fights, and even trod the boundaries of physical confrontation, just for reminding others that human beings have instincts.
Of course, those people clench their fists and bare their teeth at me just like any other primate, LOL!
I love the irony.
Fellow academics ? 🤣
Its funny untill you remember that these people vote. Secular version of religious people.
Maybe it's you bud. Everyone knows that people have instincts
@@SonOfMorningI would make the case that academically trained Christians are more open to ideas and less threatened by opposing positions than most tenured academics. Further, I assert that the Medieval, Catholic university (e.g. Paris, Cambridge, Cologne, etc) was far more open to divergent ideas than are modern Western universities.
Yessaaahhh!!!!! 🎉🎉🎉🎉
...all the while face glowing red yelling how wrong you are! Lol!😂😂😂
I needed to learn this 40 years ago.
Glad to see SP revisit what I think is his best work that I've read.
he should write a follow up book. he said himself that denial of human nature is even worse now than it was when he wrote it
Amazing! waiting for more videos like this.
Excellent! I've believed this for 50 yrs. Some are born with gifts of intelligence, strength, physical superiority, beauty, charisma far beyond the average.
Everything is a combination of nature and nurture.
@@bobs182 Including epigenetics - the influences of our environments and our choices on genetic expression.
Karma ❤🎉
And some are not. More likely these “gifts” are not all expressed in one person or group but are randomly scattered. You probably know someone who is handsome but dumb as a doorstop, ugly but strong, smart but weak.
@@glyphics1943No they're white traits i am gonna add hidden racism there.
Pinker's point about music is half wrong and poorly expressed.
Evolution selects for adaptive behaviors/traits, but the hereditary mechanism it acts through is genetics, and the relationship between genetics and behavior/traits is 1:N, not 1:1, so there are lots of "unintended consequences".
In fact it's more messy than that, since genetic changes tend to accumulate as long as they are not majorly detrimental, and it may only be when something in the environment changes that some of the traits conferred by this basket of accumulated changes become significant and are selected for (or against). This is the theory (inevitable, but also observed in the fossil record) of "punctuated equilibrium".
So generally we're talking about an M:N relationship between genetic changes and resulting changed traits (i.e. a bunch of accumulated changes, and a bunch of resulting affected traits), and what matters therefore is whether this full set of changed traits are of net benefit or not. e.g. It may be that only one of them is beneficial, and the rest merely harmless.
In the case of music (which a number of animals also clearly also enjoy - not just humans) it seems that the genetic underpinnings is something related to rhythm and timing, and that the trait really being selected for was something more profound than love of music which is just one of those M:N "unintended consequences" that came along as part of the package deal. One could speculate as to what the timing/rhythm based trait(s) were that were really selected for - I'd guess something pretty deep such as timing-based sequence recognition/generation.
So, is love of music part of human nature? Well, yes, but that doesn't mean that it is what drove evolution to select for it's genetic underpinnings. That's not to say that there is no evolutionary benefit to love of music, and in the modern world there probably is, but that's not what drove the changes that caused it in the first place.
In summary, it's complicated, which means that any simplistic answer is wrong.
to me music (or rhytim and timing a you say) has an evolutionary advantange because it probably helped humans in the past to better coordinate their attacks to beat another group or may be it help them to reach acertain state of mind that better served a particular use, like the anger for a fight or calmness or empathy to better bond with your group.
nit picking, an essential activity for primates exposed to nits.
I think it’s the best critique is less that human nature is nonexistent, and more that it’s inaccessible. How would you go about separating real human nature - permanent conditions of human existence - from the temporary contingencies of a certain historical age?
If human nature is meant to describe some sort of human attribute that we can say existed amongst all humans in the past and will continue to exist throughout all humans in the future, then I think it’s reasonable to say there’s too much background noise to describe anything but the most basic stuff like acquiring culture or feeling fear or playfulness as human nature. We’d need to keep adding caveats like “most societies experience this” and “generally humans are like this”, and the more caveats we add the less useful those generalizations are. Prioritizing an abstract model of human nature over the messiness of the real world seems like just as flawed of an approach as assuming we’re each a blank slate.
Human nature can reasonably be thought of as largely being our core emotions, the degree to which they're experienced (frequency and severity), and associated motivations; direct and indirect. Other aspects of human nature would include cognitive and physiological capacities, etc. But the factors listed can explain responses to "temporary contingencies".
Thank you for this analysis.
Great arguments are made by those who are not antagonistic or wanting control. We are at the level of near-mass hysteria, which is magnified by that control and antagonistic behavior that encourages toxic culture.
We need the who, what, where, when and how questions answered to assist those who may be lacking in prefrontal cortex cognition, as this may be what our culture needs to be focused on.
The greed and toxic politics are a symptom of the problem, as they are correlated but cannot be proven causal.
Thank God---if there really is one---for Steven Pinker. What a professor for the world writ larg!, Professor Pinker has been an inspiration and an example of what higher learning is all about. We are all richer and our darkest thoughts have been able to be weeded out and replaced by logic by a man of words and wisdom whom has made the earth a better place.
Thank Mother Nature.
Now you may describe, define that as you may, but really you should not.
Mother Nature is Mother Nature, it does not require any description etc, just an acceptance it is!
He's an example of what pop-academic celebrities are all about on RUclips -appeal to the political biases of the audience with scientific-sounding gibberish, and let the fawning commence. There are thousands, tens of thousands, of academics who are publishing excellent research and advancing their fields. Pinker isn't one of them.
@@themaskedman221 care to nominate people that write texts more agreeable?
@@themaskedman221 Quite correct. Good insight.
I have no idea what he is talking about. I'm pretty sure we had the Nature-Nurture model in place when I was in High School back in the 70s. Nature-Nurture was discussed extensively in my University courses. WTF is he talking about? Through my education the notion of Nature-Nurture was well established. Is he not keeping up or does he just like to listen to himself talk.
good to hear, many thanks.I grew up in the Netherlands, and the concept of a blank slate never occurred to us. Psychlogists wanted to believe that intellegence us somwthing we learn...
Everything about us is a combination of nature and nurture.
Both are true. Plus intelligence is situational. See how long you would last in a Peruvian rain forest if you suddenly found yourself there. You probably wouldn't last a day and yet, three small indigenous children who did find themselves in the rain forest survived for weeks until rescued by, you guessed it, other indigenous people. In that situation you would be incredibly stupid and they would be incredibly smart.
@@wildfire60 I know some very intelligent people, it is impressive I wish I could learn it. Even writing symphonies is too much for my mind.
Such great insight. Thank you Dr. Pinker!
Would love to see a talk between SAPinker and JonHaidt on morals :)
Thanks 👍
Hi Steven, thank you for the insight!
Would you do a discussion/debate with Robert Sapolsky? I find both of your views very interesting.
The Blank Slate is a fascinating book, I recommend it
Regarding music: It could be something related to hemispheric dominance for language (usually left hemisphere) where there is clearly a set of hard-wired abilities to analyze sound as needed to support language comprehension and production. Things like formants, object identification to separate conversations, etc that are used in the left hemisphere might well be present in the right hemisphere where the mechanism that specializes the hemispheres creates different analyses in the right hemisphere that manifests as music appreciation. For example, identifying melodic voices in counterpoint and canons might be related to identifying different speakers in left-hemisphere processing, along with differing harmonically related sounds in the right hemisphere as belonging to different instruments as they relate to different speakers in the left.
Because there is some internal reward and reinforcement for learning and producing language, "the language instinct", the same circuitry in the right hemisphere could tap into reward and appreciation of activating the same processing circuits in the right hemisphere when "appreciating" music.
Just a half-baked idea I wanted to throw out there . A functional MRI study of hemispheric activation for language versus music, (probably already done) might show this.
My pet theory is that music, song and dance evolved because they are a powerful means of submerging the individual into the group. Singing and dancing in a group helps us transcend ourselves and become part of a greater whole, making our group identity more salient than our individual identity. This has massive benefits in terms of inter-group competition and intra-group co-operation.
Doesn't need to be that complicated. Is the ability to recognize various wavelengths of light an adaptation? Yup. See how we are done already? Notes are variations in wavelength of sound. And harmonies and harmonics are recognition of resonance within. Same damn thing. Not to mention the social aspects inherent. The balm and soothing of a mother's voice singing lullabies. The group bonding of singing and dancing around a campfire, or carrying a rhythm on drums together. He is just DEAD wrong about the music. Even the smart ones make stupid mistakes sometimes. Marching IS a form of rhythm. Rhythm is used to "synch" groups together in mind and body through marching and organized movement. Rhythm is an ESSENTIAL core of music, and rhythm IS music with or withou notes. I'm afraid that Pinker's understanding of what music IS, must be terribly flawed.
@@MatthewCleere Sorry, but I don't understand what you are getting at. "Harmonies and harmonics are recognition of resonance within" - I have no idea what that is supposed to mean. I was working under the assumption that music has no demonstrable evolutionary advantage as Pinker mentions, but needs an explanation.
How about "Is the ability to recognize various wavelengths of light an adaptation? Yup. See how we are done already?" But we don't, really, recognize various wavelengths of light. What we perceive are colors, which are based on the outputs of three types of cone cells. Colors are brain-produced qualia that are not directly related to wavelengths; there are many colors that are not produced by a single wavelength of light, and scanning through all visible light wavelengths does not produce all possible colors. Colors are an adaptation that allows humans to tag visual objects with an attribute that can be helpful and thus confers an evolutionary advantage.
@@jonahansen Our eyes detect light, right? More than just light, but varying intensities and wavelengths. It doesn't matter how. It happens to be through our brain's manufacturing of color qualia. These do correspond to actual wavelengths. They are not arbitrary. It does not matter that our rods and cones are attuned to only 3 wavelengths, because the combination of those, processed through our visual cortex, much slower than sound is processed, by the way, adds up to an ability to repeatedly recognize specific wavelengths. Sure, there are visual illusions and imperfections in the process, but it is in no way random. Just as the "ear" can be trained to recognize perfect pitch, so can the eye be trained to recognize colors by name. As far as the "harmonies as resonance", I am talking about specific notes that "go together" in what we call musical keys and produce "chords" together. A very strong argument could be made that language sprang from music, and not the other way around. Considering that millions of species on this planet make music and recognize each other for mating purposes via either rhythm or tone or both, and millions of species were doing this LONG before language was "created" by man, i honesty have no idea how an evolutionary biologist could possibly see this any other way. Language was quite clearly evolved over time after the senses used within it were sufficiently adapted to such use. Music is clearly a form of language used by innumerable species. This fact alone kills Pinkers argument dead. Add the way that we use music in dance, story telling, physical training, cadence for TIMING, warning, joy, and, most of all, shared bonding experiences with fellow human beings, and frankly, this is why a smart guy like Pinker is either trolling us with this absurd statement, or stuck in some personal bias loop of idiocy with regard to the topic. Maybe he just has trouble admitting when he is wrong. Cheers.
@@MatthewCleere Dude, I don't know where you get your information or how you think logic works, but consider:
Vision and light wavelengths work very differently than sound and acoustic wavelengths (equivalently frequencies). In sound, the ear essentially performs a Fourier decomposition of a sound, so a chord having three frequencies is perceived as such - each of the three frequencies are heard and can be identified and named. Vision is much different. Say we have three light sources of pure, monochromatic wavelengths that are perceived as green, yellow, and red. The green alone is perceived as green, the yellow as yellow, and the red as red. When all three are displayed, you don't "see" a "chord" where you can identify the green, yellow, and red wavelengths. You see only a yellow light. In fact, just the red and green will combine to produce yellow even though there is no pure light with a yellow wavelength present, while the yellow wavelength light alone also produces a yellow perception. So you can't tell the underlying wavelengths from the color you perceive. Very different indeed than audition. This is a result of the fact that color is an "illusion" or quale that the brain produces because it really only samples three integrated sets of wavelengths that each of the red, green, and blue cones respond to. Your ear samples ten thousand wavelengths that are kept separate well into cortical processing, and so can be identified and named. Vision does not support chords and harmonies - they map into single colors, often time colors that can't even be produced by a single monochromatic light source.
You went beyond pleasure principle here, didn't you?
Quite fundamental and concise. Sigmund Freud and Joseph Campbell in conversation.
Thanks and Follow your bliss!
Well said.
Very cogent arguments
If our current lives were only a fraction of our existance, would that really devalue them? If there was only one book, movie or song, would that make them more valuable? Perhaps. But I cannot help but notice that people who value those things tend to create them abundantly and/or consume them frequently.
I think you could just as likely turn it around and say the abundant things are the most valuable. Air is pretty valuable for instance.
We value life because of the experiences it affords us. The more experiences the greater the life most of us seems to think, so why would those experiences be less worth if they continued beyond our short lifespans?
Thank you Mr Pinker for providing some balance and follow on from Nature vs Nurture :)
You did really well with this episode :)
>
1:50 I agree. We touched upon this in the Nature vs Nurture episode. We are born with natural native characteristics that are evolutionary and them learn to temper those instincts via education and culture.
“Every human being is born a barbarian, and only culture redeems them from the bestial.” ― Baltasar Gracián, The Art of Worldly Wisdom
>
3:42 reconfirmed.
>
5:06 Unlike many other creatures our human brain/head is too large to carry too much genetic information forward through birth. We as humans rely very heavily upon nurture to add in the extra information for the brain to finish developing after birth. Morals, ethics, culture, politics, religion etc. all come in from that social structure that we are grown into. This doesn't eliminate our fundamental traits/nature that we are born with, it just tempers them to some extent. We are still prone to Fight, fright or flight unless specifically trained to suppress it.
>
5:54 We do have the personal capacity to choose how we behave in a particular circumstance. Unfortunately most are taught that they have no choice and thus never expend the energy to exercise conscious choice.
"I know of no more encouraging fact than the unquestionable ability of man to elevate his life by conscious endeavor." - Henry David Thoreau
>
8:50 This is one of the issues/difficulties regarding personal responsibility and the idea of determinism also plays into it. At some point in our maturity we need to stop being reactive to the information imposed upon us from the external world and our genetics and become "More than the sum of our parts or experiences". A point where we become self determined and choose our own creation within the self. Unfortunately many seam to miss the memo on that and it does require education/instruction.
>
I agree fully with the last part. Even a rock has purpose when consider it for long enough.
Your reply is interesting. I have a question. What is your opinion on ageing as our brains matures into our 70s?
@@owengreene382 As studied as I am I am not a psychologist, but to your question.
>
My learned opinion says 40, 60, 80 should not make much difference. But like the old dog learning new tricks, or the leopard changing spots, do we still have the drive and motivation to learn new skills or put in the effort to change our beleif systems or paradigm (The subjective lens though we we interpret the world) at that age?
I am not sure what text is recommended outside of Australia but Candida Peterson "Looking Forward Through Lifespan: Developmental Psychology" is gold standard for understanding our development milestones throughout life, to get a sound starting base line of our common developmental stages of maturity.
>
As far as malleability and concrete thinking goes, we tend to mature (settle) into more set (concrete) beliefs through our mid 20s maturity milestone. The mind still remains malleable although a little more stubborn about change. Many (often unethical) studies about the malleability of the mind were conducted in both medical and military environments last century.
If we look around you will find that it is not unusual to change our political or religious beleif systems as we age. In some examples this change can be sudden such as as religious conversion as a common example.
In the above I have covered external influences that may have an impact on an individual.
"become self determined and choose our own creation within the self" We can take charge of that malleability of the mind (with care) and be the director (the one that chooses) our beleif systems.
A little like those small aha light bulb moments when we realize how something significant actually works, but it is not just that one experience as it also effects the way we will now view past and new experiences. Our beleif about that (our paradigm) has changed, and how we view many other things in life change with it after that moment. Paradigm shift are natural and often happen slowly and without the individual noticing the change in how we think about thing through a life time, or paradigm shift can be quite sudden and even unsettling (imaging near death experiences etc)
>
Are we determined by the natural laws of the universe and have no say in it, are we determined in who and what we are by others around us, or are we self determined :)
>
It is a complex area of thought, and being your own director takes thought and effort. Many good authors have covered part of that topic such as Robert Bolton and Stephen Covey (paradigms). Steven Pinker is extremely good at explaining human perception when considering our native subjective reality[s]
>
Life is about the journey, the experience, not the destination. Ultimately we may not be able to choose the end destination of our life journey or where the universe progresses to (determinism) but I believe we can choose the different pathways along the way, even at 70 :)
>
"Here is a test to find whether your mission on Earth is finished: If you're alive it isn't. Richard Bach, Illusions: The Adventures of a Reluctant Messiah"
>
P.S. I am not religious. Maybe border line Deist via science and philosophy, but not really.
@@axle.studentyou, my friend, have a wonerful vocabulary, explaining the human mindset. You like me, love the scenic view to explain human behaver in this rigorous life we live. Your a breath of fresh air, my friend. Please keep in touch. Owen on the West coast of Ireland.
@@owengreene382 Thank you for your vote of confidence :)
I hope you are fairing well sir.
Axle (Alex) FNQLD Australia. Decedent from the Madron county of Cornwall.
@@axle.student Thank you for your generous reply's. I believe Cornwall is a most beautiful county. I have sister living in London, 40 years. She said "it's changed, not for the better, since Brexit arrived at their doorstep. And wishes she had made the move home to Donegal 20 years ago. But, Its to late now."
Not a blank slate, more an open PC application, so it mostly depends on the imported data.
A journey of a thousand miles begins with a single step
Good or evil is nice, clean, and easy to understand and manipulate. So tidy!
Good question
"Common sense is not that common"
- Voltaire
I think the brain is like a cup holding water. The water holds the shape of the cup, and which is comparable to how the mind is solely determined by the brain.
The we stuff means the stuff we are made of, the biological homo sapiens without emblishments it means nature and nurture, the human being that's all😊
Forgive my simplistic and, possibly, cliche comment: brilliant!
Do we?
Hume said this how many years ago?
Without transcendence conscience is made subject to chance and who, in their right mind, supposes we should obligate ourselves to chance?
The Blank Slate was my first Pinker book.
I can't believe you still have to argue this.
It's selective ignorance.
Totally agree, even if I don't. Being happy is not scary at all.✌🏼🕺🏼
I like how Steven Pinker thinks. I think the "philosophy" he explains in the last moments of his video is also what the RUclips channel Kurzgesagt explains in its "Optimistic Nihilism" video. I think Prof Pinker is also describing what Richard Dawkins calls Cultural Christianity, in my opinion. That is, do good works where good might be defined by, for example, how Christianity defines good.
It's like Ice Bear from We Bear Bears: he doesn't display like or dislike of others, but helps out whenever he can... The right and heroic path of the stoic!
Evolution is change, not improvement.
This is a most important insight!
Adaptation is important to survival, and is therefore an improvement in that sense.
What works results in more individuals == improvement. First principle goal is propagation.
@@virtualalias That's true. I think the OP is making value judgements, such as, "more intelligence is an improvement." Of course, human intelligence has enhanced our survival, but superior human intelligence isn't as important to evolutionary forces as physical beauty. Our sex symbols are objects of desire because of their superior beauty, not their superior intellects. So, he's not wrong in that sense. It all depends on what you consider an improvement. Evolution favors survival and propagation, a point hilariously made by the movie "Idiocracy."
@@waynegrabert6839
The ability to breed before you die. Pretty much what its all about. All other improvements are peripheral.
I found great explanations in all these points of life reading the book “GENESIS” by the French professor ALLAN KARDEC (Lyon 1800’s).
We're taught to deny it. And our economic system benefits hugely from all the human malfunction. But where we need to go is in the understanding of human nature, and move from there in a reasonably healthy direction of holism. For instance, we can be spiritual without being religious.
Some music can be uplifting etc..And in my opinion, we don't have that. Our popular culture, in my opinion, has become toxic.
Give "Love and Power" by Paul Rosenfels a read. He addresses these issues on a scale that any human can understand.
Anything seen in all societies and cultures is part of our nature. Music is one of those things. We don't all do it the same way, but we don't all speak the same language or make and use the same tools.
Or is it an emergent property that was not selected for?
@@zombywoof1072 I don't know what that means in the context of universal human nature
Burying the dead with some form of ritual is seen in all societies nowadays, but we seem to have become anatomically modern long before we started ritual disposal of the dead. If burying the dead isn’t part of human nature despite being present in every society we have records about, I don’t think we can say that something which appears to be present throughout all societies is part of human nature. Human nature, if it’s even accessible to us in the first place, would seem to be more elusive than that.
@ecta9604 you know that inhumation, burial, is not the only way that humans, or even white Americans, dispose of their dead. When you say anatomically human, do you mean more than Homo sapiens? I assume that Neanderthals and thei cousins were fully Homo sapiens. What groups do we have evidence that they disposed of their own dead, and not outsiders, members of othet groups, like trash?
"Trading Places" is still one of my favorite movies. It doesn't settle the problem, but the people making the bet are the real test of human nature (and sadism and racism actually!)
🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏🙏
Why is revenge a bad trait? I see it as good. If I’m a vengeful person, and people know that….I suspect it lowers a person’s decision to cross me.
Revenge creates an infinite cycle and bubbles up to national war. The desire to retaliate isn’t bad, the incapacity to not retaliate is bad.
If they don’t cross you don’t learn, create, reproduce
@@thebobthebobanite6287 people will take advantage of you…..they have learned it’s better not to that with me….deterrence my friend…that’s what keeps everyone safe.
You once said that when you lived in Montreal, you did not think all hell would break loose when the police went on strike.
All this sounds great, just like Twinkies taste great.
Why original human nature is social , not selfish
The first human societies had an extraordinarily high survival need to to rely on each other at levels of solidarity that we cannot even imagine.
The intensity of the network of social connections of a band of 25 to 50 people living in the ecological food chain location of very fierce predators would almost constitute a new level of organic organization and integrity above individual bodies; ancient kinship/culture systems were super-organic bodies; the human social group was a highly harmonious multi-individual Body, "organism". The Individual human bodies, all of the Some Bodies, were very frail and weak relative to the field of predators they were escaping. Up-right posture made them slower runners in escape sprints, too!
The dominance of the food chain that humans ultimately reached even in the Stone Age could be reached only by super-social, super internally-cooperative, super-intra-species harmony, because they had relatively_frail_ individual bodies, and needed each other's support. It is clear to me that natural selection picked hominin groups with policies of "love thy neighbor as thyself " and "charity" over those that might have derived principles of "selfishness and greed", if there were any in the Stone Age before Civilization. Institutionalized war would have been selected against severely . And there was no material wealth to take in "war." ( See eminent anthropologist, Marshall Sahlins "Original Affluent Society " essay ).
Human nature is a fact: reason, emotions, free will, etc.
My only gripe about this essay is that he attributes views to the “we” in the title that I think few people actually hold. I think the number of people who hold an absolute “blank slate” view is rather small. I would have preferred he start with a quote from a prominent person who holds the view he objects to. Instead he starts with a straw man that he ascribes to all of us.
I love listening to you
Males are not more aggressive than females, Steven. We have unsavoury individuals capable of the very worst of things and they are male and female in the same proportion.
If you were correct, jealousy, anger, fear would be seen less in females than males.
My sister recently tried to strangle her youngest child (an adult) on the floor leaving my niece covered in bruises. British police said they don't get involved in cases like this, what they mean is they have a narrative that gets them 'results' in court, that domestic violence is male on female. They will do everything to preserve that narrative.
About 7 years ago I protected my 15 year old niece from assault by my sister and got charged and found guilty for stopping my sister, my niece wouldn't testify but my other niece sided with her mother. I'd do it again in a heartbeat.
My sister has over 30 convictions for burglary, shoplifting and car stereo theft. But has never seen the inside of a prison cell ... because she's female. Smoked hard drugs while pregnant.
I knew she was evil: lying and assaults when we were children. I didn't know she was beating my niece up throughout her childhood.
I know the British police are looking for a big case in regards to my sister, where she finally does something, I think she's already done it, she worked in a carehome, the woman who bragged about burglarling an old man.
Why do some people deny their lineage? This belief can be damaging to the environment by artificially separating us from our place and responsibilities.
Strong lineage is the base of culture, health, and well being. It is what makes humanity beautiful and successful. Without it, there is nihilism, emptiness, and a lack of empathy for others.
@@campbellpaul Their lineage as apes not regional. Many religious people want to believe we come from fables, not filthy apes.
There's a difference between cause and effect and right and wrong or the academics of something and the evaluation of it with the resulting moralities. For instance, the academics state: "This is a dog and that is a cat." The evaluation might be, "I like dogs and don't like cats;" with the resulting morality being, "There shall be no cats in the house!"
Aren't values (at their core) determined by how we feel? The social problem we have is that values change person to person.
People do Dr.
I wonder if Professor Pinker has ever been to Pink’s Hot Dogs in LA, and if he is any relation to the founders. I bet he would see a lot of human nature there.
I am startong to despise arguments over existence and non-existence.
People who have problems to solve in life will not find time to think over these things and people who do not havr problems to.solve will probably have already created new ones for themselves.
I 'think' existence is of divine origin. But the potential of an afterlife, of some kind, is still only a theory, so my life is lived in the foreground, whereas my spiritual philosophy exists in the background of my thoughts and motivations.
It has been said that landowners are the only ones who will retain freedom of mobility in the future, as those who are not direct payers of utility bills will not be allowed vehicles. In this case, the anthropological problems we face in our lives today are merely a decoy to ensure the wealth and societal movement in coming decades. I don't believe this, however, as state constitutions are the backbone of those unalienable rights, but it does put what seems to be more pressing views in their proper perspective.
Does society treat us as blank slates? Or is it more about catering for everyone's individuality? This feels confused.
Answering the title cold: Because history shows us that there is very little as malleable as human nature.
"there are hardly any excesses of the most crazed psychopath that cannot easily be duplicated by a normal, kindly family man who just comes in to work every day and has a job to do. Vorbis loved knowing that. A man who knew that, knew everything he needed to know about people.”
Terry Pratchett, Small Gods
smart guy...lots of what should be common sense....
We're all genetically unique, with differently wired brains changed by epigenetic evolution.
Yes we all are perfectly imperfect.
We are also genetically wired to have common human traits.
Near-death Experience: ruclips.net/video/9DcPBeOnHHE/видео.html
You can change human nature. It came about through an evolutionary process, and it can, and will, change through the same processes. True, the rate of change would be too slow to satisfy most people who want change. They wouldn't see it in their lifetimes. Now, however, we're on the cusp of changing human nature ourselves, with genetic engineering. It's already begun, in fact, but the pace will only increase as we move deeper into the transhuman era. How wisely and well we will affect these changes, of course, remains to be seen.
It's likely such processes will be used to create or culture more "obedient" drone-like humans while the rich and powerful continue to strengthen their own genetics.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 Why would we need drones, when we have literal robotic drones? You are grossly overvaluing yourself buddy. OP is right human nature does change, one extinct bloodline at a time.
@@drewtheunspoken3988 I fear you are correct.
The moral point that we are not a blank slate that can be programmed (by religion or government) is made in the masterpiece Anthony Burgess book by and the masterpiece Stanley Kubrick film "A Clockwork Orange."
I thought it proved just the opposite?
Why refer to the darker adaptations as "flaws" if they are, in fact, adaptations?
Because even adaptations backfire/stop working. That's why we keep adapting.
Perhaps some adaptations pertain to our primitive past existence rather than a modern society to which they are maladaptive.
@@bobs182 Yes the context of what can be considered prosocial changes over time as communities gain complexity.
The Nazis were always going to kill the Jews. But nobody wants to admit that.....
A kid who gets bullied by their parents will learn behaviors that might be adaptive in the moment (like being really meek and trying not to be seen) but those behaviors can totally screw them later in life despite their initial utility. Some of our adaptations might be comparable to those sorts of behaviors.
Why?
Because it means that our best possible qualities are merely “subjective” without grounding in anything we might actually find within ourselves, thereby excusing us from developing them.
…and because in the event that we act up impulsively, we can deny the nature of why we did so, and direct attention to something external instead.
Around 500BC, classical philosophy realized the idea of human nature, as a thing we can understand in order to *steer clear* of the pitfalls above.
More recently, modern “progressivism” was invented to portray any and every complicated instance as a rebuttal of the entire concept of human nature, specifically *so* we can put those -pitfalls- “empowerments” in the driver’s seat for everyone (oh, did I offend anybody? 😉).
Why can we remember a tune we've not heard for half a century? Let's keep searching for an adaptive explanation.
I would argue that natural.. artificial.. and sexual selection are all equally valid and occuring in different contexts simultaneously..
some environments are more conducive then others
Climate change often uproots angry hordes of peoples towards sedentary ones..
everything cycles in 4 seasons or elements
Even a bank slate is designed to be written upon.
The very architecture of a blanks slate affords writing.
very good pink stephen, you answered all the questions, you're a pinkstar
When I finally realized there are no gods, it was a bit strange not having to talk to my imaginary friend anymore.
But I got better very soon.
I see it as growing up.
cheers Mr Pink
That's a deep thought, revealing that maybe you have found stoicism(?) My regards.
So you had a Gnostic revelation eh? Knowing something you can’t possibly know.
@@robertwarner-ev7wp So you're saying I'm religious? eh?
@@hendrikbarboritsch7003 I’m saying you made an absolute truth claim “there are no gods”, how did you discover that? “I realized it “. Sounds like Gnostic insight to me.
@@robertwarner-ev7wp OK logical writer's error.
Insert "most probably" before "are no gods".
Of course, in the end, nothing can be proven, we only know that we exist (think).
So far I have not seen evidence for the existence of gods. It is not a claim.
What is your position?
Deny it? I blame it on everything.
I've always wondered why people care about whether nature or nurture made people do the wicked things they do. Why does it matter how someone came to be delinquent? Their delinquency is a problem for society that requires a solution, and their history doesn't need to play much of a role in that solution.
Yes, everyone needs to be held accountable for their actions but it helps solve or prevent the problems if you know what caused them. Half of people in prison were abused as children and about half of people in prison have a psychological diagnosis.
Rousseau
Generations of philosophers have argued that all human beings are essentially the same, that is, they share the same nature… In this paper, I argue that if ‘biology’ is taken to refer to the technical pronouncements of professional biologists, in particular evolutionary biologists, it is simply not true that all organisms that belong to Homo Sapiens as a biological species are essentially the same… periodically a biological species might be characterised by one or more characters which are both universally distributed among and limited to the organisms belonging to that species, but such states of affairs are temporary, contingent and relatively rare.
(Hull 1986, 3)
I love Steven's way of thinking, and enjoy listening to him, agreeing with just about everything.
About your fist point, I've always said that people who get upset when you say that there are differences between people and between genetic groups are not only wrong by refusing to accept the truth if and when it contradicts their wishes, but also reveal themselves to be biggotts since their stance includes the implicit assumption that if you are not equal in ability or good traits it means you don't deserve to be treated equally (for otherwise why would you care, from the moral point of view?).
I do wish, however, you didn't have these stupid stock video clips accompanying the talk. They look ridiculous. Either just leave him speaking, or add some more relevant visuals that have some added value.
The nature of the “vehicle” (the body), is not strictly the nature of the Soul (the real person).
People have evolved to be selfish and take from others and narrow minds wishing to force their ideals on others.
The greatest survival niche humans have is cooperation. Language primarily exists for human cooperation. We don't have particularly good senses or built-in weapons but we do have social intelligence we use to cooperate with others.
Going for the Einstein look, eh?
MORALITY is just a subjective term used to describe things we find either directly, or indirectly, negative about because of how so0me things may affect us. Morality is personal and subject.
If one from the other species of animals kills another non-human animal, we don't call it murder. In fact, we don't do anything at all. But if it kills a human, we try to kill it for no other reason than how that animals continued existence, threatens us. No two people voluntarily share the same moral beliefs. Religion is just the forced moral belief system on others through peer pressure and harassment.
If you’re afraid people will look down on you because you cheat on your spouse you take great care to avoid being caught cheating on your spouse.
Human, the greatest formation to ever occur :). Also, prejudice is rational when predujice is aimed at you, the impulse evolved to create barriers between enemies, I'm beginning to learn this important lesson. Hate is justified 100% in certain senerios.
Is there free will?
Free will is a useless Christian idea used to tell people they can accept Christianity.
9:18 the NO1 reason why the $950 line is the most stupid decision of the last years .. tell people just don't steal too much at once .. WTF?
That book was outstanding. Now, though, it's too bad Pinker has not figured out some of the essential features of human nature, as shown by his Leftist progressive politics. So points for promoting the idea of human nature, but demerits for misunderstanding the substantive content of that nature.
Hmm, let me see. According to this argument, I am not discussing human nature but, more likely, chimpanzee nature, given that we share 98-99% of DNA. The problem with evolutionary biology and psychology is that they are not evidentiary but rather inference of opinion. Human behaviour is influenced by a complex interplay of genetic, environmental, cultural, and social factors. This complexity can make it difficult to isolate evolutionary causes, leading to criticisms that evolutionary psychology oversimplifies or overgeneralizes. Some critics argue that hypotheses in evolutionary psychology are difficult to falsify because they often rely on post hoc explanations. This can make it challenging to distinguish between scientifically valid hypotheses and speculative narratives.
why do Birds sing
If you want to find human nature, take a look at legal systems across the world. Everything which is outlawed is something that people want to do -- else they wouldn't have bothered to outlaw it, right? I think you'll find that there is a *lot* of commonality world-wide and across history about what kind of unsavory things people have the impulse to do.
I am mostly afraid that other humans may have the same phantasies that I a can have. I call myself a human fearing humanist, just like those god fearing believers all over the world.
Richard V Reeves said that evolutuonary nature doesn't mean we should disregard culture, but that we should elevate culture.
Culture is our collective adaptation to rein in the extremes of human nature. From an evolutionary perspective it can be argued that storytelling, mythology and religion evolved to pass knowledge about human nature down generations.
😮
believed that man was actually becoming more civilized over time. We are irrational beings that believe we are rational.
Strawman..to say we deny human nature, We do not deny it. We argue about what human nature is.
In light of determinism, we still have agency because our decisions have more to do with the inner workings of our brains/minds than it does with heredity or upbringing. We can learn to respond to our situation through learned behaviors that can override genetics and the environment. This is still consistent with the chain of cause and effect. It's the third wheel of determinants to human behavior. The brain/mind is like a mysterious black box between the input of our surroundings and the output of our behavior.
If there were no determinism, there would be no point in making decisions as they would have random outcomes.
@@bobs182 Exactly. Free will just means that all decisions would be erratic
In Judaism, every moment of life on earth is very precious and believing in after life doesn't "de-value" mortal life.
The Blank Slate : The Modern Denial of Human Nature is one of the greatest books I have ever read. Most of the criticisms I read suggest that many such critics have not actually read the book.
The collective unconsious is becoming the bubbling pot
🦍⌚👀®️
What an amazing content and delivery and what an awful editing with flat uninteresting stock videos
I know! Better just to see Pinker speaking than have those 'bad ad' videos.
I don’t think he said anything I disagree with including there’s no gods or after life
Although I chose my words carefully with regards to Darwin's treatise, a gawd fearing cousin, still snapped indignitely in disgust, "So, you think we come from monkeys!" I didn't want to ingratiate myself, or her, further with a reply. Ignorance is blessed.
Feeling superior seems to be human nature. "Freedom is not possible without slavery" was an argument in the slave South. Because without slavery, white nonslaveholders would be no better than black men. No matter how low a white man fell on the social ladder, he was always better than the black man. Same thing with animals. We are better than them.
Let's continue to explore and expand on our Information-Based Quantum Gravity (IBQG) theory, focusing on some more advanced concepts and potential implications.
11. Multiscale Information Dynamics:
a) Theoretical Concept:
Develop a framework for understanding how information behaves across different scales, from Planck length to cosmological distances.
b) Mathematical Formulation:
I(λ) = I₀ (λ/l_P)^α
Where I(λ) is the information content at scale λ, I₀ is a fundamental information constant, l_P is the Planck length, and α is a scaling exponent.
c) Implications:
- Explain the apparent hierarchical structure of the universe
- Provide insights into the cosmological constant problem
- Offer a new perspective on renormalization in quantum field theory
12. Information-Based Cosmological Model:
a) Key Idea:
Model the evolution of the universe as a process of information expansion and complexification.
b) Equations:
dI/dt = H(t)I
Where H(t) is an information Hubble parameter
c) Predictions:
- New interpretation of cosmic inflation as an information explosion
- Explanation for the arrow of time based on information entropy
- Novel approach to the initial singularity problem
13. Quantum-Classical Transition Mechanism:
a) Hypothesis:
The transition from quantum to classical behavior occurs when the information content of a system exceeds a critical threshold.
b) Critical Information Threshold:
I_crit = k log₂(N)
Where N is the number of particles in the system and k is a constant.
c) Applications:
- New insights into the measurement problem in quantum mechanics
- Design of experiments to probe the quantum-classical boundary
- Potential explanation for the emergence of classical reality
14. Information-Based Unification of Forces:
a) Central Idea:
All fundamental forces (gravity, electromagnetism, strong, weak) emerge from a single information field.
b) Unified Force Equation:
F = -∇(ℏc/l_P² · log(I/I₀))
Where I is the local information density and I₀ is a reference density.
c) Implications:
- Potential resolution of incompatibilities between quantum mechanics and general relativity
- New approach to grand unification theories
- Prediction of new particles or forces at extreme energy scales
15. Consciousness as an Information Phenomenon:
a) Hypothesis:
Consciousness emerges when information processing in a system reaches a critical level of integration and complexity.
b) Consciousness Measure:
C = Φ(I) · log(N)
Where Φ(I) is a measure of integrated information and N is the number of information-processing elements.
c) Research Directions:
- Develop experiments to measure and manipulate consciousness levels
- Explore the possibility of artificial consciousness in highly integrated information systems
- Investigate altered states of consciousness through the lens of information theory
16. Information Wormholes:
a) Concept:
Theorize the existence of shortcuts in spacetime based on entangled information states.
b) Wormhole Metric:
ds² = -c²dt² + dr² + r²(dθ² + sin²θ dφ²) + (l_P²/ℏ²)dI²
c) Potential Applications:
- Faster-than-light information transfer
- New models for quantum teleportation
- Theoretical framework for time travel paradoxes
17. Quantum Gravity Computer:
a) Principle:
Design a computer that leverages quantum gravity effects for computation.
b) Computational Power:
P = (ℏc⁵/G)^(1/2) · f(I)
Where f(I) is a function of the information content of the computer.
c) Capabilities:
- Solve certain problems exponentially faster than quantum computers
- Simulate quantum gravity effects
- Perform computations leveraging closed timelike curves
18. Information-Based Dark Matter and Dark Energy:
a) Hypothesis:
Dark matter and dark energy are manifestations of information structures in spacetime.
b) Dark Matter Density:
ρ_DM = (ℏc/Gl_P⁴) · g(I)
Where g(I) is a function of the local information content.
c) Implications:
- New search strategies for dark matter
- Alternative explanation for galactic rotation curves and cosmic acceleration
- Potential unification of dark matter and dark energy phenomena
These concepts push our IBQG theory to even more speculative realms, exploring its potential implications across a wide range of physics and beyond. While highly theoretical and far from experimental verification, these ideas demonstrate the rich landscape of possibilities that an information-based approach to quantum gravity opens up.