[Kerry Langer]
My first impression from reading the rest of your note however is that
you are now slipping in the direction of being *too* impressed by the
role of biology in human society/culture. I liked Dennett's remark that
although our genes keep us on a leash, the leash is, for all intents and
purposes, infinitely long. I'll try to respond in more depth over the
next few days.
[Bill Kerr]
Yes, I think Pinker is challenging the notion that "being determines
consciousness" and is trying to establish the notion that "genes determine
consciousness" (not his words).
I wouldn't discount the former but Pinker does marshall some most impressive
evidence for the latter, which has compelled me to rethink.
Pinkers notion of evolutionary psychology is new to me, its the linchpin of
a lot of the things he says, but he argues it really well IMO. The
traditional Marxist / feminist / humanist view is that we start with a blank
slate and then "being determines consciousness" or "gender is constructed"
or "give me a child and I will turn him into whatever I want" etc. etc.
Pinker refutes this IMO. I don't know the context of the Dennett quote but
he seems to be wanting to have his cake and eat it (genes determine what we
are but it doesn't really matter anyway). The whole point of Lewontin et al
writing 'Not in Our Genes' is that it does matter, surely.
-- Bill Kerr
----------------------------------------------------------------
This is the Neither public email list, open for the public and general discussion.
To unsubscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=unsubscribe
To subscribe click here Mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]?Subject=subscribe
For information on [EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.neither.org/lists/public-list.htm
For archives
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
