LISTSERV mailing list manager LISTSERV 16.5

Help for SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Archives


SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE@LIST.UVM.EDU


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Monospaced Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE Home

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE  November 2002

SCIENCE-FOR-THE-PEOPLE November 2002

Subject:

Sociobiology in the Nation Magazine

From:

Louis Proyect <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Science for the People Discussion List <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Mon, 4 Nov 2002 17:13:12 -0500

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (120 lines)

A few weeks ago I received an invitation to get a trial subscription to
the Nation Magazine. What the hell, I said. This would give me a chance
to see what the red-baiters were up to first-hand, as well as work on
their nifty crossword puzzles. When my last subscription was winding
down during Clinton's first presidency, the puzzles and Cockburn's
column were the only things that kept me going. When they cut Cockburn
back to one page and then went into a full-tilt boogie for Clinton, I
said to hell with them.

When I got my first complementary copy this morning, I was reminded why
I let this awful magazine lapse. Starting out with an editorial
admonition to its readers against wasting a vote for the Green Party in
tomorrow's elections, it then proceeds to a defense of sociobiology of a
kind that I've never seen in a left publication.

In Steven Johnson's review of Steven Pinker's "The Blank Slate", we
discover that E.O. Wilson, Stephen Pinker and Richard Dawkins were right
all along. Biology is destiny. Women's brains differ from men's, hence
accounting possibly for men's superiority in theoretical physics among
other things. (Don't worry, gals, your brains might just as easily
prepare you for "social interactions" and "empathy".)

While reading through this crapola, one gets no sense of what Pinker
stands for politically. Johnson assures us that Pinker presents his
views on the political and social implications of neo-Darwinism with his
characteristic "eloquence" and "humor" but one would get no sense from
the review what ideas this humor and eloquence is actually mustered to
support.

Let's look at a few of them:

--Males have a stronger tolerance for physical risk and a stronger drive
for anonymous sex.

--Women have stronger emotions and are better at reading emotions on the
faces of others.

--Pinker states "A variety of sexual motives, including taste in men,
vary with the menstrual cycle."

--He also states that "in a sample of mathematically talented students,
boys outnumbered girls by 13 to one" but that women maintain more
eye-contact, and smile and laugh more often.

--Humans are hard-wired to think in stereotypes and to prefer kin.

--Some people, most of them men, are born with criminal tendencies.

--Turning to the big questions of social transformation that have vexed
Great Thinkers for the millennium, we learn from Pinker that "Biological
facts are beginning to box in plausible political philosophies."
Communism may work for insects, but humans are programmed for economic
exchange and "reciprocal altruism." (Is that the reason I used to climb
across the ceilings and consume a pound of sugar at a time when I was in
the Trotskyist movement, I wonder?)

When you stop and think about it, the title of Pinker's book sets up a
straw man, namely that radicals of one sort or another believe that the
mind is a "blank slate" and that human nature is infinitely malleable.

It is of no small importance that Pinker ultimately finds backing in
Noam Chomsky's linguistic theories, mediated through anthropologist
Donald Brown who adapted Chomsky's idea of a "universal grammar" to
"social patterns, beliefs and categories" shared by all human societies.
We discover that Pinker (and presumably the feckless reviewer) are so
impressed by Brown that he devotes an entire appendix to such categories
worked out in alphabetical order. The c's include cooking, cooperation,
and copulation (all of my favorite activities, it turns out.)

With such basic activities underpinning all human societies, and human
nature implicitly, one might easily conclude that it is risky business
to tamper with the eternal nature of things, like sending your daughter
to MIT. You might end up with Pol Pot, Stalin, the Animal Farm or women
running around burning their bras. Pinker quotes Chomsky just to show
that this kind of hostility to revolution has respectable defenders:

"A vision of a future social order is&based on a concept of human
nature. If, in fact, man is an indefinitely malleable, completely
plastic being, with no innate structures of mind and no intrinsic needs
of a cultural or social character, then he is a fit subject for the
'shaping of behavior' by the State authority, the corporate manager, the
technocrat, or the central committee. Those with some confidence in the
human species will hope this is not so and will try to determine the
intrinsic characteristics that provide the framework for intellectual
development, the growth of moral consciousness, cultural achievement and
participation in a free community."

While respect must be paid to Chomsky for his fearless critique of US
foreign policy, it would be a big mistake to write a blank check for his
ideas on human nature, etc. As his biographer Robert Barsky has pointed
out, many of Chomsky's ideas on human nature and society owe much more
to 18th century rationalism than any more recent emancipatory
philosophies, including Marxism. Indeed, what permeates much of
sociobiology and Chomsky on his worst days is a kind of Hobbesian
skepticism about the human animal, who would need to be restrained from
wanton violence, rape and warfare by a protective state.

For all of Pinker's animosity to radicalism and Marxism in particular,
there is very little evidence that he understands how historical
materialism deals with the question of human nature. While it is beyond
the scope of this article to trace its development through the years,
suffice it to say that Marxism views the nature-nurture relationship
dialectically.

It does not really challenge the existence of biologically determined
traits, but simply places the whole question of equality, justice and
freedom in a *materialist* context. In other words, revolutionary
socialism strives to create the conditions in which all human beings can
reach their full potential. Within the context of such a challenge,
Pinker's "Blank Slate," with its discussions about the difference
between the appearance of male and female brains (according to Pinker,
they are "nearly as distinct as their bodies") seems little more than
"Men Are From Mars, Women Are From Venus" geared to readers of the New
York Review of Books.

--

Louis Proyect
www.marxmail.org

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

Advanced Options


Options

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password


Search Archives

Search Archives


Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe


Archives

October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
May 2004
April 2004
March 2004
February 2004
January 2004
December 2003
November 2003
October 2003
September 2003
August 2003
July 2003
June 2003
May 2003
April 2003
March 2003
February 2003
January 2003
December 2002
November 2002
October 2002
September 2002
August 2002
July 2002
June 2002
May 2002
April 2002
March 2002
February 2002
January 2002
December 2001
November 2001
October 2001
September 2001
August 2001
May 2001
March 2001
February 2001
January 2001
December 2000
November 2000
October 2000
September 2000
August 2000
July 2000
May 2000
April 2000
March 2000
February 2000
January 2000
December 1999
November 1999
October 1999
September 1999
August 1999
July 1999
June 1999
May 1999
April 1999
March 1999
February 1999
January 1999
December 1998
November 1998
September 1998
August 1998
July 1998
June 1998
May 1998

ATOM RSS1 RSS2



LIST.UVM.EDU

CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager