In the eight chapter of the Blank Slate, Pinker unveils the three misconceptions individuals tend to relate with evolutionary theory: Eugenics, Social Darwinism, and Prejudice; and how it impacts society from adolescents into adulthood. Eugenics references species biological differences can create discontent and may force individuals to enhance society via biological methods. Social Darwinism addresses how groups might differ based on socioeconomic status, achieved status, wealth is a result of natural composition and cannot be categorized as inequality or prejudice. Lastly, Prejudice which argues the rationale behind discriminating a certain group of individuals simply because they are biologically different from others. These three “evils” …show more content…
Pinker aims to suggest that inequality is a result of humans seeking to create difference within one another in order to justify acts of discrimination, oppression, and injustice. As the chapter progresses, Pinker attacks the notions of prejudices, eugenics, and social Darwinism separately. He also counters the argument that natural selection acts as a neutralizer to make species more standardized by “…winnowing out the ineffective genes (Pinker 142)”. He mentions Vincent Sarich’s idea on how race plays no role because we are all members of the same inbred family and any difference is simply fueled by biological …show more content…
First being the all-or-none mentality, which states natural talent influences social status. This harkens back to Spencer’s assumption “that we can look to evolution to discover what is right — that “good” can be boiled down to evolutionarily successful (Pinker 150)”. Pinker then references the association of Social Darwinism and eugenics with the Nazi regime and their treatment of Jews and other ethnicities that they deemed inferior to the German society. The belief of dividing individuals based on outgroups and ingroups; treating the outgroup as inferior to the ingroup retrieves a dark path of human nature is why Pinker believes the blank slate just as human nature both have bad and good aspects to them. Once again, I agree with Pinker’s ideology as we can’t say all of one thing is necessarily bad or good, because we all should look at the different aspects and perspectives of things before forming
Whether it is too much equality, or too much discrimination, the world needs to reach a balance where the right amount of equality and segregation can meet. In the year 2081 in “Harrison Bergeron,” George and Hazel both have restraints to hold back any so called “advantage,” that they may possess. This in turn, forces innovation and evolution to a sudden hault. “Totem” on the other hand, says that evolution has overdeveloped where the social structure is back where sympathy is nonexistent. It suggests that the development in society has also taken a standstill and is struggling to innovate. The two stories are similar in a way that both argue no matter which angle humans approach society from, an equilibrium must be established for a successful environment to
Anthropologists, who study humans and their origins, generally accept that the human species can be categorized into races based on physical and genetic makeup. For example, many slaves had physical differences from their counterpart white race, such as dark skin and wiry hair. Throughout history, the study of Sociology has had a significant impacted the `nature versus nurture' debate. Social Darwinism based its theory on genetic determinism and natural selection, advocating a capitalist economy, promoting racism and the inherent inequality of such as society. Karl Marx, also an advocate for capitalism and slavery, applied the Marxist philosophy to the practice of science, emphasizing environmental influences determined behavior. Max Weber is known his ...
...by Charles W. Mills, the author attempts to provide an explanation for the way that race plays a role in our society, and how it has reached this particular point. Not only does Mills’ work provide some explanation in regards to this matter, but other notable texts and documents connect to his ideas as well, such as Michael Omi and Howard Winant’s, “Racial Formation in the United States,” and the remarks made by Abraham Lincoln in “The Lincoln-Douglas Debates.”
The “Roaring Twenties” was a time period known for its innovation. Skirts got shorter, teens got bolder, and Prohibition was in full swing. These changes also gave way to a time period full of religious conflict. “In [religious] minds, Prohibition had always been about more than alcohol. It represented an effort to defend traditional American values against the growing influence of an urban, cosmopolitan culture” (Gillon 152). Charles Darwin had published his book, The Evolution of Species, in 1859 and The Descent of Man in 1871, detailing the evolution of man from ape-like creatures. When A Civic Biology, a biology textbook containing information on evolution, was published in 1914, teachers around the country began using it in their courses. By the twenties, these books had sparked all sorts of new ideas regarding the origin of man as well as opposition due to the creature from which he claimed we evolved and to the disagr...
The theory of social darwinism was first introduced to the public[1] in “A Theory of Population, Deduced from the General Law of Animal Fertility”, an article by Herbert Spencer published in 1852. This work preceded the publishing of Darwin’s book by seven years, and “given the timing, it is curious that Darwin’s theory was not labeled ‘natural Spencerism’ instead of Spencer’s theory being labeled ‘social Darwinism.’”[2] Spencer’s article, though mainly focused on biology and the ways in which animal populations develop, does include an inkling of the social ideas he would later more fully examine. His main theory of population deals with survival of the fittest, a phrase he coins in this a...
Steven Pinker lays the foundation for his book by highlighting three main philosophies that permeate society’s view of humanity and their historical context: The Blank Slate (empiricism), the Noble Savage (romanticism), and the Ghost in the Machine (dualism) (2002, p. 11). Pinker is correct to challenge previous philosophical frameworks as they skew the way scientific research has been conducted. Present-day scientific and social research will only benefit from an acknowledgement of innate human nature.
Our daily lives are affected by race, whether we are aware of it or not. How we live different aspects of our lives depends on the colour of our skin. From the types of jobs we have, the income we earn, where we live, etc. In societies fundamentally structured by race, it is important that we do not abandon the notion of race, but instead pioneer a revolution in the way that races are understood. In this paper, I will examine how the dominant groups in society define race in terms of biology, which leads to the notion of white privilege, which is their advantaged position in society, at the expense of other racial groups.
Most people believe that Social Darwinism is a term that can only be applied to people’s race, and for most well known social Darwinism theories this is true. The basis of these theories is always revolved around the term survival of the fittest. Darwin works where to do with animals and how animal species have ada...
Race as a “…social and historical idea, not biological” (Palaita, Lecture 1/25/18), only works because according to Social Construction Theory, “…these categories work because our complacency allows us to presume that the identities are natural and a group’s social status relies on biology, rather than social/cultural circumstances” (Palaita, Lecture 1/25/18). Our unwillingness to challenge these identities has allowed these categories to be used to determine who will be on the advantageous side of the inequality we face here in the United States. If we no longer accepted these conditions, and change the way social groups are viewed and treated, we may create a new norm and close the inequality gap between social
Those with negative, undesirable, or inferior traits may be discouraged from having offspring. They may be sterilized, or undergo dangerous medical procedures or operations with high mortality rates. I chose this topic because it appealed to me and seemed interesting. In the following paragraphs, the tactics, methods, and propaganda the Nazi’s used will be exposed. Adolf Hitler (the Führer or leader of the Nazi party) “believed that a person's characteristics, attitudes, abilities, and behavior were determined by his or her so-called racial make-up.”
“Black, white and brown are merely skin colors. But we attach to them meanings and assumptions, even laws that create enduring social inequality.”(Adelman and Smith 2003). When I first heard this quote in this film, I was not surprised about it. Each human is unique compared to the other; however, we are group together based on uncontrollable physical characteristics. Eyes, hair texture, and skin tone became a way to separate who belongs where. Each group was labeled as having the same traits. African Americans were physically superior, Asians were the more intellectual race, and Indians were the advanced farmers. Certain races became superior to the next and society shaped their hierarchy on what genes you inherited.
Steen, R. Grant. DNA and Destiny: Nurture and Nature in Human Behavior. New York: Plenum Press, 1996.
Social Darwinism is a late 19th century term used to describe the application of British naturalist Charles Darwin’s theory of natural selection to social and political conditions. Late 19th century sociologist Herbert Spencer tried to capture the essence of social Darwinism with his phrase “survival of the fittest”. This essentially meant that the strong would rise to the top while the weak simply died out. Social Darwinists eschew social responsibility and compassion, instead believing that some people are more fit to survive than others. Many social Darwinists advocated that the government should maintain a laissez-faire, or hands off, approach when it came to regulating economic competition and alleviating social inequalities. Social Darwinism was used to justify the consolidation of the majority of wealth by a minority of Americans. The term allowed people to rationalize capitalism, imperialism, racism, and even eugenics. The wealthy believed in social Darwinism because it allowed them to justify their oppressive business tactics and low wages for their labor force. Politicians believed in it because it allowed them to justify imperialism, or expansion of the nation. Affluent Anglo-Saxons believed in social Darwinism, believing themselves to be the superior race, and used it to justify ...
Evolutionary Psychology has been controversial since its rise in the 1990s, with critics and proponents debating its merits as a science. While critics (e.g. David Buller, Elizabeth Lloyd) have extensively criticized the fundamentals of Evolutionary Psychology, few philosophers or scientists have challenged them. Given the growing influence of the evolutionary behavioral sciences within mainstream science like Psychology and Anthropology, it is important analyze the critiques and see if the arguments against Evolutionary Psychology have merit. This paper will focus on two of the most often cited critiques of Evolutionary Psychology: the critique of the concept of the modular model of the mind and the critique of the two “signature achievements” in Evolutionary Psychology, Martin Daly and Margot Wilson’s Cinderella Effect and David Buss’s studies of male-female differences in jealousy. I will describe and respond these critiques of Evolutionary Psychology, making the case that these critiques are not valid and have little merit on scientific basis of Evolutionary Psychology.
Reflecting directly on the cultural attitudes and sociocultural messages explained throughout this course, it is clear that race, gender, and sexuality are all socially constructed in one way or another. Contrary to popular belief, race is actually almost completely socially constructed, it is not biological. Further, a human’s DNA does not differentiate at all to create any specific race. However, society has categorized certain things, such as skin color, to determine the race of individuals. In simpler terms, there are not specific genes that parents pass on to their offspring that determine their race; society categorizes people into specific races when they are born based on their