TED2003
Steven Pinker: Human nature and the blank slate
Filmed:
Readability: 5.2
1,450,741 views
Steven Pinker's book The Blank Slate argues that all humans are born with some innate traits. Here, Pinker talks about his thesis, and why some people found it incredibly upsetting.
Steven Pinker - Psychologist
Steven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature. Full bio
Steven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:18
A year ago, I spoke to you about a book
0
0
4000
00:22
that I was just in the process of completing,
1
4000
3000
00:25
that has come out in the interim, and I would like to talk to you today
2
7000
3000
00:28
about some of the controversies that that book inspired.
3
10000
4000
00:32
The book is called "The Blank Slate,"
4
14000
2000
00:34
based on the popular idea
5
16000
2000
00:36
that the human mind is a blank slate,
6
18000
2000
00:38
and that all of its structure comes from
7
20000
3000
00:41
socialization, culture, parenting, experience.
8
23000
3000
00:45
The "blank slate" was an influential idea in the 20th century.
9
27000
4000
00:49
Here are a few quotes indicating that:
10
31000
3000
00:52
"Man has no nature," from the historian
11
34000
2000
00:54
Jose Ortega y Gasset;
12
36000
2000
00:56
"Man has no instincts," from the
13
38000
2000
00:58
anthropologist Ashley Montagu;
14
40000
2000
01:00
"The human brain is capable of a full range of behaviors
15
42000
3000
01:03
and predisposed to none," from the late scientist Stephen Jay Gould.
16
45000
4000
01:08
There are a number of reasons to doubt that the human mind
17
50000
2000
01:10
is a blank slate,
18
52000
2000
01:12
and some of them just come from common sense.
19
54000
2000
01:14
As many people have told me over the years,
20
56000
3000
01:17
anyone who's had more than one child
21
59000
2000
01:19
knows that kids come into the world
22
61000
3000
01:22
with certain temperaments and talents;
23
64000
2000
01:24
it doesn't all come from the outside.
24
66000
2000
01:27
Oh, and anyone who
25
69000
2000
01:29
has both a child and a house pet
26
71000
3000
01:32
has surely noticed that the child, exposed to speech,
27
74000
2000
01:34
will acquire a human language,
28
76000
2000
01:36
whereas the house pet won't,
29
78000
2000
01:38
presumably because of some innate different between them.
30
80000
2000
01:41
And anyone who's ever been
31
83000
2000
01:43
in a heterosexual relationship knows that
32
85000
2000
01:45
the minds of men and the minds of women are not indistinguishable.
33
87000
2000
01:49
There are also, I think,
34
91000
2000
01:51
increasing results from
35
93000
2000
01:53
the scientific study of humans
36
95000
2000
01:55
that, indeed, we're not born blank slates.
37
97000
2000
01:58
One of them, from anthropology,
38
100000
3000
02:01
is the study of human universals.
39
103000
2000
02:03
If you've ever taken anthropology, you know that it's a --
40
105000
2000
02:05
kind of an occupational
41
107000
2000
02:07
pleasure of anthropologists to show
42
109000
2000
02:09
how exotic other cultures can be,
43
111000
3000
02:12
and that there are places out there where, supposedly,
44
114000
2000
02:14
everything is the opposite to the way it is here.
45
116000
2000
02:17
But if you instead
46
119000
2000
02:19
look at what is common to the world's cultures,
47
121000
4000
02:23
you find that there is an enormously rich set
48
125000
2000
02:25
of behaviors and emotions
49
127000
3000
02:28
and ways of construing the world
50
130000
2000
02:30
that can be found in all of the world's 6,000-odd cultures.
51
132000
3000
02:34
The anthropologist Donald Brown has tried to list them all,
52
136000
3000
02:37
and they range from aesthetics,
53
139000
2000
02:39
affection and age statuses
54
141000
3000
02:42
all the way down to weaning, weapons, weather,
55
144000
3000
02:45
attempts to control, the color white
56
147000
2000
02:47
and a worldview.
57
149000
2000
02:49
Also, genetics and neuroscience
58
151000
2000
02:51
are increasingly showing that the brain
59
153000
2000
02:53
is intricately structured.
60
155000
2000
02:56
This is a recent study by the neurobiologist Paul Thompson
61
158000
2000
02:58
and his colleagues in which they --
62
160000
2000
03:00
using MRI --
63
162000
2000
03:02
measured the distribution of gray matter --
64
164000
2000
03:05
that is, the outer layer of the cortex --
65
167000
3000
03:08
in a large sample of pairs of people.
66
170000
3000
03:11
They coded correlations in the thickness
67
173000
3000
03:15
of gray matter in different parts of the brain
68
177000
2000
03:17
using a false color scheme, in which
69
179000
3000
03:20
no difference is coded as purple,
70
182000
3000
03:23
and any color other than purple indicates
71
185000
2000
03:25
a statistically significant correlation.
72
187000
2000
03:27
Well, this is what happens when you pair people up at random.
73
189000
3000
03:30
By definition, two people picked at random
74
192000
3000
03:33
can't have correlations in the distribution
75
195000
2000
03:35
of gray matter in the cortex.
76
197000
3000
03:38
This is what happens in people who share
77
200000
3000
03:41
half of their DNA -- fraternal twins.
78
203000
3000
03:44
And as you can see, large amounts of the brain
79
206000
2000
03:46
are not purple, showing that if one person
80
208000
3000
03:49
has a thicker bit of cortex
81
211000
3000
03:52
in that region, so does his fraternal twin.
82
214000
3000
03:55
And here's what happens if you
83
217000
3000
03:59
get a pair of people who share all their DNA --
84
221000
2000
04:01
namely, clones or identical twins.
85
223000
3000
04:04
And you can see huge areas of cortex where there are
86
226000
4000
04:08
massive correlations in the distribution of gray matter.
87
230000
3000
04:11
Now, these aren't just
88
233000
2000
04:13
differences in anatomy,
89
235000
2000
04:15
like the shape of your ear lobes,
90
237000
2000
04:17
but they have consequences in thought and behavior
91
239000
4000
04:21
that are well illustrated in this famous cartoon by Charles Addams:
92
243000
4000
04:25
"Separated at birth, the Mallifert twins meet accidentally."
93
247000
4000
04:30
As you can see, there are two inventors
94
252000
2000
04:32
with identical contraptions in their lap, meeting
95
254000
2000
04:34
in the waiting room of a patent attorney.
96
256000
2000
04:36
Now, the cartoon is not such an exaggeration, because
97
258000
3000
04:39
studies of identical twins who were separated at birth
98
261000
3000
04:42
and then tested in adulthood
99
264000
2000
04:44
show that they have astonishing similarities.
100
266000
3000
04:47
And this happens in every pair of identical twins
101
269000
3000
04:50
separated at birth ever studied --
102
272000
2000
04:52
but much less so with fraternal twins separated at birth.
103
274000
3000
04:55
My favorite example is a pair of twins,
104
277000
3000
04:58
one of whom was brought up
105
280000
2000
05:00
as a Catholic in a Nazi family in Germany,
106
282000
4000
05:04
the other brought up in a Jewish family in Trinidad.
107
286000
3000
05:08
When they walked into the lab in Minnesota,
108
290000
2000
05:10
they were wearing identical navy blue shirts with epaulettes;
109
292000
3000
05:13
both of them liked to dip buttered toast in coffee,
110
295000
3000
05:16
both of them kept rubber bands around their wrists,
111
298000
4000
05:20
both of them flushed the toilet before using it as well as after,
112
302000
3000
05:23
and both of them liked to surprise people
113
305000
3000
05:26
by sneezing in crowded elevators to watch them jump.
114
308000
4000
05:30
Now --
115
312000
2000
05:32
the story might seem to good to be true,
116
314000
2000
05:34
but when you administer
117
316000
2000
05:36
batteries of psychological tests,
118
318000
3000
05:39
you get the same results -- namely,
119
321000
2000
05:41
identical twins separated at birth show
120
323000
2000
05:43
quite astonishing similarities.
121
325000
2000
05:45
Now, given both the common sense
122
327000
2000
05:47
and scientific data
123
329000
2000
05:49
calling the doctrine of the blank slate into question,
124
331000
2000
05:51
why should it have been such an appealing notion?
125
333000
3000
05:54
Well, there are a number of political reasons why people have found it congenial.
126
336000
3000
05:57
The foremost is that if we're blank slates,
127
339000
3000
06:00
then, by definition, we are equal,
128
342000
2000
06:02
because zero equals zero equals zero.
129
344000
2000
06:05
But if something is written on the slate,
130
347000
2000
06:07
then some people could have more of it than others,
131
349000
2000
06:09
and according to this line of thinking, that would justify
132
351000
2000
06:11
discrimination and inequality.
133
353000
3000
06:14
Another political fear of human nature
134
356000
3000
06:17
is that if we are blank slates,
135
359000
2000
06:19
we can perfect mankind --
136
361000
2000
06:21
the age-old dream of the perfectibility of our species
137
363000
3000
06:24
through social engineering.
138
366000
2000
06:26
Whereas, if we're born with certain instincts,
139
368000
2000
06:28
then perhaps some of them might condemn us
140
370000
2000
06:30
to selfishness, prejudice and violence.
141
372000
3000
06:34
Well, in the book, I argue that these are, in fact, non sequiturs.
142
376000
3000
06:38
And just to make a long story short:
143
380000
2000
06:40
first of all, the concept of fairness
144
382000
2000
06:42
is not the same as the concept of sameness.
145
384000
3000
06:45
And so when Thomas Jefferson wrote
146
387000
2000
06:47
in the Declaration of Independence,
147
389000
2000
06:49
"We hold these truths to be self-evident,
148
391000
2000
06:51
that all men are created equal,"
149
393000
3000
06:54
he did not mean "We hold these truths to be self-evident,
150
396000
2000
06:56
that all men are clones."
151
398000
3000
06:59
Rather, that all men are equal in terms of their rights,
152
401000
3000
07:02
and that every person ought to be treated
153
404000
3000
07:05
as an individual, and not prejudged
154
407000
2000
07:07
by the statistics of particular groups
155
409000
2000
07:09
that they may belong to.
156
411000
3000
07:12
Also, even if we were born
157
414000
2000
07:14
with certain ignoble motives,
158
416000
2000
07:16
they don't automatically lead to ignoble behavior.
159
418000
3000
07:19
That is because the human mind
160
421000
2000
07:21
is a complex system with many parts,
161
423000
2000
07:23
and some of them can inhibit others.
162
425000
3000
07:26
For example, there's excellent reason to believe
163
428000
3000
07:29
that virtually all humans are born with a moral sense,
164
431000
3000
07:33
and that we have cognitive abilities that allow us
165
435000
3000
07:36
to profit from the lessons of history.
166
438000
2000
07:38
So even if people did have impulses
167
440000
2000
07:40
towards selfishness or greed,
168
442000
2000
07:42
that's not the only thing in the skull,
169
444000
2000
07:44
and there are other parts of the mind that can counteract them.
170
446000
2000
07:47
In the book, I
171
449000
2000
07:49
go over controversies such as this one,
172
451000
2000
07:51
and a number of other hot buttons,
173
453000
3000
07:54
hot zones, Chernobyls, third rails, and so on --
174
456000
3000
07:57
including the arts, cloning, crime,
175
459000
2000
07:59
free will, education, evolution,
176
461000
2000
08:01
gender differences, God, homosexuality,
177
463000
3000
08:04
infanticide, inequality, Marxism, morality,
178
466000
2000
08:06
Nazism, parenting, politics,
179
468000
2000
08:08
race, rape, religion, resource depletion,
180
470000
2000
08:10
social engineering, technological risk and war.
181
472000
3000
08:13
And needless to say, there were certain risks
182
475000
2000
08:15
in taking on these subjects.
183
477000
3000
08:19
When I wrote a first draft of the book,
184
481000
3000
08:22
I circulated it to a number of colleagues for comments,
185
484000
2000
08:24
and here are some of
186
486000
3000
08:27
the reactions that I got:
187
489000
2000
08:29
"Better get a security camera for your house."
188
491000
3000
08:33
"Don't expect to get any more awards, job offers
189
495000
3000
08:36
or positions in scholarly societies."
190
498000
2000
08:39
"Tell your publisher not to list your hometown
191
501000
2000
08:41
in your author bio."
192
503000
3000
08:44
"Do you have tenure?"
193
506000
2000
08:46
(Laughter)
194
508000
2000
08:48
Well, the book came out in October,
195
510000
2000
08:50
and nothing terrible has happened.
196
512000
3000
08:55
I -- I like --
197
517000
3000
08:58
There was indeed reason to be nervous,
198
520000
2000
09:00
and there were moments in which I did feel nervous,
199
522000
2000
09:02
knowing the history
200
524000
2000
09:04
of what has happened to people
201
526000
2000
09:06
who've taken controversial stands
202
528000
2000
09:08
or discovered disquieting findings
203
530000
3000
09:11
in the behavioral sciences.
204
533000
2000
09:13
There are many cases, some of which I talk about in the book,
205
535000
3000
09:16
of people who have been slandered, called Nazis,
206
538000
4000
09:20
physically assaulted, threatened with criminal prosecution
207
542000
3000
09:23
for stumbling across or arguing
208
545000
3000
09:27
about controversial findings.
209
549000
2000
09:30
And you never know when you're going to
210
552000
2000
09:32
come across one of these booby traps.
211
554000
2000
09:34
My favorite example is a pair of psychologists
212
556000
2000
09:36
who did research on left-handers,
213
558000
3000
09:39
and published some data showing that left-handers are, on average,
214
561000
3000
09:42
more susceptible to disease, more prone to accidents
215
564000
3000
09:45
and have a shorter lifespan.
216
567000
2000
09:47
It's not clear, by the way, since then,
217
569000
2000
09:49
whether that is an accurate generalization,
218
571000
3000
09:52
but the data at the time seemed to support that.
219
574000
3000
09:55
Well, pretty soon they were barraged
220
577000
2000
09:57
with enraged letters,
221
579000
3000
10:00
death threats,
222
582000
2000
10:02
ban on the topic in a number of scientific journals,
223
584000
3000
10:05
coming from irate left-handers
224
587000
3000
10:08
and their advocates,
225
590000
2000
10:10
and they were literally afraid to open their mail
226
592000
3000
10:13
because of the venom and vituperation
227
595000
3000
10:16
that they had inadvertently inspired.
228
598000
3000
10:19
Well,
229
601000
2000
10:21
the night is young, but the book has been out
230
603000
2000
10:23
for half a year,
231
605000
2000
10:25
and nothing terrible has happened.
232
607000
2000
10:27
None of the dire professional consequences
233
609000
2000
10:29
has taken place --
234
611000
2000
10:31
I haven't been
235
613000
2000
10:33
exiled from the city of Cambridge.
236
615000
3000
10:36
But what I wanted to talk about
237
618000
2000
10:38
are two of these hot buttons
238
620000
3000
10:41
that have aroused the strongest response
239
623000
4000
10:45
in the 80-odd reviews
240
627000
2000
10:47
that The Blank Slate has received.
241
629000
3000
10:50
I'll just put that list up for a few seconds,
242
632000
3000
10:53
and see if you can guess which two
243
635000
2000
10:55
-- I would estimate that probably two of these topics
244
637000
2000
10:57
inspired probably 90 percent
245
639000
3000
11:00
of the reaction in the various reviews
246
642000
3000
11:03
and radio interviews.
247
645000
2000
11:05
It's not violence and war,
248
647000
2000
11:07
it's not race, it's not gender,
249
649000
2000
11:09
it's not Marxism, it's not Nazism.
250
651000
3000
11:12
They are: the arts and parenting.
251
654000
3000
11:15
(Laughter)
252
657000
2000
11:17
So let me tell you what
253
659000
2000
11:19
aroused such irate responses,
254
661000
2000
11:21
and I'll let you decide if whether they --
255
663000
3000
11:24
the claims are really that outrageous.
256
666000
2000
11:26
Let me start with the arts.
257
668000
3000
11:29
I note that among the long list of human universals
258
671000
2000
11:31
that I presented a few slides ago
259
673000
3000
11:34
are art.
260
676000
2000
11:36
There is no society ever discovered
261
678000
3000
11:39
in the remotest corner of the world that has not had something
262
681000
3000
11:42
that we would consider the arts.
263
684000
3000
11:46
Visual arts -- decoration of surfaces and bodies --
264
688000
2000
11:48
appears to be a human universal.
265
690000
2000
11:50
The telling of stories, music,
266
692000
2000
11:52
dance, poetry -- found in all cultures,
267
694000
3000
11:55
and many of the motifs and themes
268
697000
3000
11:58
that
269
700000
3000
12:01
give us pleasure in the arts
270
703000
2000
12:03
can be found in all human societies:
271
705000
3000
12:07
a preference for symmetrical forms,
272
709000
3000
12:10
the use of repetition and variation,
273
712000
2000
12:12
even things as specific as the fact
274
714000
2000
12:14
that in poetry all over the world,
275
716000
2000
12:16
you have lines that are very close
276
718000
3000
12:19
to three seconds long, separated by pauses.
277
721000
3000
12:22
Now, on the other hand,
278
724000
2000
12:24
in the second half of the 20th century,
279
726000
2000
12:26
the arts are frequently said to be in decline.
280
728000
3000
12:29
And I have a collection,
281
731000
2000
12:31
probably 10 or 15 headlines, from highbrow magazines
282
733000
3000
12:34
deploring the fact that
283
736000
2000
12:36
the arts are in decline in our time.
284
738000
3000
12:39
I'll give you a couple of representative quotes:
285
741000
3000
12:42
"We can assert with some confidence that our own period is
286
744000
2000
12:44
one of decline, that the standards of culture are lower
287
746000
3000
12:47
than they were 50 years ago, and that the evidences of this decline
288
749000
3000
12:50
are visible in every department of human activity."
289
752000
3000
12:53
That's a quote from T. S. Eliot, a little more than 50 years ago.
290
755000
3000
12:56
And a more recent one:
291
758000
2000
12:58
"The possibility of sustaining high culture in our time
292
760000
2000
13:00
is becoming increasing problematical.
293
762000
3000
13:03
Serious book stores are losing their franchise,
294
765000
2000
13:05
nonprofit theaters are surviving primarily
295
767000
2000
13:07
by commercializing their repertory,
296
769000
2000
13:09
symphony orchestras are diluting their programs,
297
771000
2000
13:11
public television is increasing its dependence
298
773000
2000
13:13
on reruns of British sitcoms,
299
775000
3000
13:16
classical radio stations are dwindling,
300
778000
2000
13:18
museums are resorting to blockbuster shows, dance is dying."
301
780000
2000
13:20
That's from Robert Brustein,
302
782000
2000
13:22
the famous drama critic and director,
303
784000
3000
13:25
in The New Republic about five years ago.
304
787000
3000
13:28
Well, in fact, the arts are not in decline.
305
790000
3000
13:31
I don't think this will as a surprise to anyone in this room,
306
793000
3000
13:34
but by any standard
307
796000
2000
13:36
they have never been flourishing
308
798000
2000
13:38
to a greater extent.
309
800000
2000
13:40
There are, of course, entirely new art forms
310
802000
3000
13:43
and new media, many of which you've heard
311
805000
2000
13:45
over these few days.
312
807000
3000
13:48
By any economic standard,
313
810000
2000
13:50
the demand for art of all forms
314
812000
3000
13:53
is skyrocketing,
315
815000
2000
13:55
as you can tell from the price of opera tickets,
316
817000
2000
13:57
by the number of books sold,
317
819000
2000
13:59
by the number of books published,
318
821000
2000
14:01
the number of musical titles released,
319
823000
3000
14:04
the number of new albums and so on.
320
826000
2000
14:07
The only grain of truth to this
321
829000
2000
14:09
complaint that the arts are in decline
322
831000
2000
14:11
come from three spheres.
323
833000
4000
14:15
One of them is in elite art since the 1930s --
324
837000
3000
14:18
say, the kinds of works performed
325
840000
2000
14:20
by major symphony orchestras,
326
842000
2000
14:22
where most of the repertory is before 1930,
327
844000
3000
14:26
or the works shown in
328
848000
2000
14:28
major galleries and prestigious museums.
329
850000
3000
14:32
In literary criticism and analysis,
330
854000
2000
14:34
probably 40 or 50 years ago,
331
856000
2000
14:36
literary critics were a kind of cultural hero;
332
858000
3000
14:39
now they're kind of a national joke.
333
861000
2000
14:41
And the humanities and arts programs
334
863000
3000
14:44
in the universities, which by many measures,
335
866000
2000
14:46
indeed are in decline.
336
868000
2000
14:48
Students are staying away in droves,
337
870000
2000
14:50
universities are disinvesting
338
872000
2000
14:52
in the arts and humanities.
339
874000
2000
14:54
Well, here's a diagnosis.
340
876000
3000
14:57
They didn't ask me, but by their own admission,
341
879000
2000
14:59
they need all the help that they can get.
342
881000
3000
15:02
And I would like to suggest that it's not a coincidence
343
884000
2000
15:04
that this supposed decline
344
886000
2000
15:06
in the elite arts and criticism
345
888000
3000
15:09
occurred in the same point in history in which
346
891000
2000
15:11
there was a widespread denial of human nature.
347
893000
3000
15:14
A famous quotation can be found --
348
896000
2000
15:16
if you look on the web, you can find it in
349
898000
2000
15:18
literally scores
350
900000
2000
15:20
of English core syllabuses --
351
902000
3000
15:23
"In or about December 1910,
352
905000
3000
15:26
human nature changed."
353
908000
2000
15:28
A paraphrase of a quote by Virginia Woolf,
354
910000
3000
15:31
and there's some debate
355
913000
2000
15:33
as to what she actually meant by that.
356
915000
2000
15:35
But it's very clear, looking at these syllabuses,
357
917000
2000
15:37
that -- it's used now
358
919000
2000
15:39
as a way of saying that all forms
359
921000
4000
15:43
of appreciation of art
360
925000
2000
15:45
that were in place for centuries, or millennia,
361
927000
4000
15:49
in the 20th century were discarded.
362
931000
3000
15:52
The beauty and pleasure in art --
363
934000
2000
15:54
probably a human universal --
364
936000
2000
15:56
were -- began to be considered saccharine,
365
938000
2000
15:58
or kitsch, or commercial.
366
940000
3000
16:01
Barnett Newman had a famous quote that "the impulse of modern art
367
943000
3000
16:04
is the desire to destroy beauty" --
368
946000
3000
16:07
which was considered bourgeois or tacky.
369
949000
3000
16:10
And here's just one example.
370
952000
2000
16:12
I mean, this is perhaps a representative example
371
954000
3000
16:15
of the visual depiction of the female form
372
957000
3000
16:18
in the 15th century;
373
960000
2000
16:20
here is a representative example
374
962000
2000
16:22
of the depiction of the female form in the 20th century.
375
964000
3000
16:26
And, as you can see, there -- something has changed
376
968000
2000
16:28
in the way the elite arts
377
970000
2000
16:30
appeal to the senses.
378
972000
2000
16:32
Indeed, in movements of modernism
379
974000
2000
16:34
and post-modernism,
380
976000
2000
16:36
there was visual art without beauty,
381
978000
2000
16:38
literature without narrative and plot,
382
980000
2000
16:40
poetry without meter and rhyme,
383
982000
2000
16:42
architecture and planning without ornament,
384
984000
2000
16:44
human scale, green space and natural light,
385
986000
3000
16:47
music without melody and rhythm,
386
989000
2000
16:49
and criticism without clarity,
387
991000
2000
16:51
attention to aesthetics and insight into the human condition.
388
993000
3000
16:54
(Laughter)
389
996000
2000
16:56
Let me give just you an example to back up that last statement.
390
998000
3000
16:59
But here, there -- one of the most famous literary
391
1001000
2000
17:01
English scholars of our time
392
1003000
2000
17:03
is the Berkeley professor,
393
1005000
2000
17:05
Judith Butler.
394
1007000
2000
17:07
And here is an example of
395
1009000
2000
17:09
one of her analyses:
396
1011000
3000
17:12
"The move from a structuralist account in which capital
397
1014000
2000
17:14
is understood to structure social relations
398
1016000
2000
17:16
in relatively homologous ways
399
1018000
2000
17:18
to a view of hegemony in which power relations are subject to repetition,
400
1020000
3000
17:21
convergence and rearticulation
401
1023000
2000
17:23
brought the question of temporality into the thinking of structure,
402
1025000
3000
17:26
and marked a shift from the form of Althusserian theory
403
1028000
2000
17:28
that takes structural totalities as theoretical objects ..."
404
1030000
3000
17:31
Well, you get the idea.
405
1033000
3000
17:34
By the way, this is one sentence --
406
1036000
2000
17:36
you can actually parse it.
407
1038000
3000
17:40
Well, the argument in "The Blank Slate"
408
1042000
2000
17:42
was that elite art and criticism
409
1044000
2000
17:44
in the 20th century,
410
1046000
2000
17:46
although not the arts in general,
411
1048000
2000
17:48
have disdained beauty, pleasure,
412
1050000
2000
17:50
clarity, insight and style.
413
1052000
3000
17:53
People are staying away from elite art and criticism.
414
1055000
3000
17:57
What a puzzle -- I wonder why.
415
1059000
2000
18:00
Well, this turned out to be probably
416
1062000
2000
18:02
the most controversial claim in the book.
417
1064000
2000
18:04
Someone asked me whether I stuck it in
418
1066000
2000
18:06
in order to deflect ire
419
1068000
3000
18:09
from discussions of gender and Nazism
420
1071000
2000
18:12
and race and so on. I won't comment on that.
421
1074000
3000
18:16
But it certainly inspired
422
1078000
3000
18:19
an energetic reaction
423
1081000
3000
18:22
from many university professors.
424
1084000
3000
18:25
Well, the other hot button is parenting.
425
1087000
3000
18:28
And the starting point is the -- for that discussion
426
1090000
3000
18:31
was the fact that we have all
427
1093000
2000
18:33
been subject to the advice
428
1095000
2000
18:35
of the parenting industrial complex.
429
1097000
3000
18:38
Now, here is -- here is a
430
1100000
2000
18:40
representative quote from a besieged mother:
431
1102000
3000
18:43
"I'm overwhelmed with parenting advice.
432
1105000
2000
18:45
I'm supposed to do lots of physical activity with my kids
433
1107000
2000
18:47
so I can instill in them a physical fitness habit
434
1109000
3000
18:50
so they'll grow up to be healthy adults.
435
1112000
2000
18:52
And I'm supposed to do all kinds of intellectual play
436
1114000
2000
18:54
so they'll grow up smart.
437
1116000
2000
18:56
And there are all kinds of play -- clay for finger dexterity,
438
1118000
3000
18:59
word games for reading success, large motor play,
439
1121000
3000
19:02
small motor play. I feel like I could devote my life
440
1124000
2000
19:04
to figuring out what to play with my kids."
441
1126000
3000
19:07
I think anyone who's recently been a parent can sympathize
442
1129000
2000
19:09
with this mother.
443
1131000
3000
19:12
Well, here's some sobering facts about parenting.
444
1134000
2000
19:15
Most studies of parenting on which this advice is based
445
1137000
3000
19:19
are useless. They're useless because they don't control
446
1141000
3000
19:22
for heritability. They measure some correlation
447
1144000
3000
19:25
between what the parents do, how the children turn out
448
1147000
3000
19:28
and assume a causal relation:
449
1150000
2000
19:30
that the parenting shaped the child.
450
1152000
2000
19:32
Parents who talk a lot to their kids
451
1154000
2000
19:34
have kids who grow up to be articulate,
452
1156000
2000
19:36
parents who spank their kids have kids who grow up
453
1158000
2000
19:38
to be violent and so on.
454
1160000
2000
19:40
And very few of them control for the possibility
455
1162000
3000
19:43
that parents pass on genes for --
456
1165000
3000
19:46
that increase the chances a child will be articulate
457
1168000
2000
19:48
or violent and so on.
458
1170000
2000
19:50
Until the studies are redone with adoptive children,
459
1172000
3000
19:53
who provide an environment
460
1175000
2000
19:55
but not genes to their kids,
461
1177000
2000
19:57
we have no way of knowing whether these conclusions are valid.
462
1179000
3000
20:00
The genetically controlled studies
463
1182000
2000
20:02
have some sobering results.
464
1184000
2000
20:04
Remember the Mallifert twins:
465
1186000
2000
20:06
separated at birth, then they meet in the patent office --
466
1188000
3000
20:09
remarkably similar.
467
1191000
2000
20:11
Well, what would have happened if the Mallifert twins had grown up together?
468
1193000
3000
20:14
You might think, well, then they'd be even more similar,
469
1196000
3000
20:17
because not only would they share their genes,
470
1199000
2000
20:19
but they would also share their environment.
471
1201000
3000
20:22
That would make them super-similar, right?
472
1204000
2000
20:24
Wrong. Identical twins, or any siblings,
473
1206000
3000
20:27
who are separated at birth are no less similar
474
1209000
4000
20:31
than if they had grown up together.
475
1213000
2000
20:33
Everything that happens to you in a given home
476
1215000
2000
20:35
over all of those years
477
1217000
2000
20:37
appears to leave no permanent stamp
478
1219000
2000
20:39
on your personality or intellect.
479
1221000
2000
20:42
A complementary finding, from a completely different methodology,
480
1224000
3000
20:45
is that adopted siblings reared together --
481
1227000
4000
20:49
the mirror image of identical twins reared apart,
482
1231000
2000
20:51
they share their parents, their home,
483
1233000
2000
20:53
their neighborhood,
484
1235000
2000
20:55
don't share their genes -- end up not similar at all.
485
1237000
3000
20:58
OK -- two different bodies of research with a similar finding.
486
1240000
3000
21:01
What it suggests is that children are shaped
487
1243000
2000
21:03
not by their parents over the long run,
488
1245000
3000
21:06
but in part -- only in part -- by their genes,
489
1248000
3000
21:09
in part by their culture --
490
1251000
2000
21:11
the culture of the country at large
491
1253000
2000
21:13
and the children's own culture, namely their peer group --
492
1255000
2000
21:15
as we heard from Jill Sobule earlier today,
493
1257000
3000
21:18
that's what kids care about --
494
1260000
2000
21:21
and, to a very large extent, larger than most people are prepared to acknowledge,
495
1263000
3000
21:24
by chance: chance events in the wiring of the brain in utero;
496
1266000
3000
21:27
chance events as you live your life.
497
1269000
2000
21:31
So let me conclude
498
1273000
2000
21:33
with just a remark
499
1275000
2000
21:35
to bring it back to the theme of choices.
500
1277000
3000
21:38
I think that the sciences of human nature --
501
1280000
2000
21:40
behavioral genetics, evolutionary psychology,
502
1282000
3000
21:43
neuroscience, cognitive science --
503
1285000
2000
21:45
are going to, increasingly in the years to come,
504
1287000
3000
21:48
upset various dogmas,
505
1290000
3000
21:51
careers and deeply-held political belief systems.
506
1293000
3000
21:54
And that presents us with a choice.
507
1296000
2000
21:56
The choice is whether certain facts about humans,
508
1298000
3000
21:59
or topics, are to be considered taboos,
509
1301000
3000
22:03
forbidden knowledge, where we shouldn't go there
510
1305000
2000
22:05
because no good can come from it,
511
1307000
2000
22:07
or whether we should explore them honestly.
512
1309000
3000
22:10
I have my own
513
1312000
2000
22:12
answer to that question,
514
1314000
2000
22:14
which comes from a great artist of the 19th century,
515
1316000
3000
22:17
Anton Chekhov, who said,
516
1319000
3000
22:20
"Man will become better when you show him
517
1322000
2000
22:22
what he is like."
518
1324000
2000
22:24
And I think that the argument
519
1326000
2000
22:26
can't be put any more eloquently than that.
520
1328000
3000
22:29
Thank you very much.
521
1331000
2000
22:32
(Applause)
522
1334000
5000
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Steven Pinker - PsychologistSteven Pinker is a professor of cognitive science (the study of the human mind) who writes about language, mind and human nature.
Why you should listen
Steven Pinker grew up in the English-speaking community of Montreal but has spent his adult life bouncing back and forth between Harvard and MIT. He is interested in all aspects of human nature: how we see, hear, think, speak, remember, feel and interact.
To be specific: he developed the first comprehensive theory of language acquisition in children, used verb meaning as a window into cognition, probed the limits of neural networks and showed how the interaction between memory and computation shapes language. He has used evolution to illuminate innuendo, emotional expression and social coordination. He has documented historical declines in violence and explained them in terms of the ways that the violent and peaceable components of human nature interact in different eras. He has written books on the language instinct, how the mind works, the stuff of thought and the doctrine of the blank slate, together with a guide to stylish writing that is rooted in psychology.
In his latest book, Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress, he writes about progress -- why people are healthier, richer, safer, happier and better educated than ever. His other books include The Language Instinct, How the Mind Works, The Blank Slate: The Modern Denial of Human Nature, The Stuff of Thought, and The Better Angels of Our Nature.
Steven Pinker | Speaker | TED.com