Clarissa Carrillo
Pinker-Chapter 6 (363-382)
Hotheads
This chapter begins with the story of Thomas Hamilton. Hamilton was a man who on March 13, 1996, walked into an elementary school in Dunblane, Scotland, with two revolvers and two semiautomatic pistols. The result was that he wounded staff members, went to the gym and killed 16 kindergarten kids, their teacher and then shot himself. No one understands why Hamilton would do such a horrific act. Some believe it may have been for revenge. The reason is because he was a suspected pedophile and had been forced to resign as a Scout leader. He then formed his own youth group so that he could continue to work with boys. Finally, after many complaints, he was forced out. One of the main reasons why everyone was shocked was because these sort of things didn’t happen in Dunblane. Crime was not known there. It was far from America, “the land of the wackos, where there are as many guns as people and where murderous rampages by disgruntled postal workers are so common that a slang term for losing one’s temper is ‘going postal’(363-64). Pinker then defines the phrase running amok. The word Amok is Malay for the homicidal sprees occasionally undertaken by lonely Indochinese men who have suffered a loss. This term has been used in many other cultures far from the West. The amok man is patently out of his mind. His reaction, however, is preceded by lengthy brooding over failure and is carefully planned. The rampage is not triggered by a stimulus, but by an idea. Pinker then gives a summary from seven interviews performed by a psychiatrist. This psychiatrist asked these men who had been hospitalized amoks in Papua New Guinea. The summary was very depressing and scary. It helped get insight of the mind of a “wacko.” It expressed feelings of revenge through homicide. According to Pinker, “the amok syndrome is an extreme instance of the puzzle of the human emotions” (364). It seems exotic at first, but then turns out to be universal and an irrational act.
Universal Passion
The next section called Universal Passion talks about emotions being universal. Although they are felt the same throughout the world, they are expressed very differently verbally. The example starts off with is of the Utku-Inuit Eskimos who have no word for anger. Because of this, many believe they do not have the emotion either. Another example is that Tahitians supposedly do not recognize guilt, sadness, longing or loneliness. They would describe grief as fatigue or sickness. Just because there is not an exact word to describe a particular emotion in a certain culture, it does not mean that the emotion does not exist. “The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals” is a questionnaire Darwin circulated to people who interacted with aboriginal populations on the five continents. This included people who had little contact with Europeans. The questions were to simply express different emotions, and it had to be done from observation, rather then memory. The results were that “the same state of mind is expressed throughout the world with remarkable uniformity” (365). A psychologist named Paul Ekman studied emotions in the 60’s. He felt that facial expressions were arbitrary signs that an infant learns from watching their parents when rewarded or punished. He did his own test by taking pictures of people showing different emotions such as happiness, sadness, fear, anger, disgust and surprised. When he showed these pictures to people who had been isolated in New Guinea, they were all recognized. The results were the same as in Darwin’s experiment. Darwin also made another observation, that children who are blind and deaf from birth can show the same emotions on their faces. Why then do people believe that emotions differ from culture to culture? The answer comes from two sources, their language and their opinions.
Pinker feels that the influence of language is exaggerated when it comes to language of feelings especially. Whether a word can be translated depends on the translator and on the quirks of the languages grammar and history. Pinker states, “when a language has not had these stimulants, people describe how they feel with circumlocutions, metaphors, metonyms, and synecdoche’s” (367). This just means that there is no exact translation, just a word that is similar. He feels that new emotion words can catch on quickly without definitions. They can come from other languages, subcultures or general slang. Pinker ends by saying that he has never heard a foreign emotion word whose meaning was not instantly recognizable.
Feeling Machines
This next section begins with discussing how far back emotions and intellect have been used in different realms. They go as far back as the Romantic movement, being used in philosophy, literature, and art about 200 years ago. He says that emotions come from nature and live in the body. Intellect, on the other hand, comes from civilization and lives in the mind. Romantics believe that the emotions are the source of wisdom, innocence, authenticity, and creativity and that it should not be repressed. Romanticism dominates contemporary American popular culture. Scientists accept the premises of Romanticism even when they disagree with the morals. The reason is because the irrational emotions and repressing intellect appear in scientific guises. Some examples of these guises are the id and superego, biological drives and cultural norms and the right and left hemisphere of the brain. Pinker presents an unromantic theory of emotions. It combines the computational theory of the mind with the modern theory of evolution. In this chapter he shows that the emotions are adaptations. They work together with intellect and are indispensable to the functioning of the whole mind. Pinker feels that there is a problem with emotions. The problem “is not that they are untamed forces or vestiges of our animal past; it’s that they are designed to propagate copies of the genes that built them rather than to promote happiness, wisdom, or moral values” (370). He states that although we call acts that are harmful to a social group “emotional,” these emotional acts are expected from well-engineered emotions. They are not malfunctions.
Paul MacLean was the neuroscientist that took the Romantic doctrine of emotions and translated it. Pinker feels that his translation was an incorrect theory. This theory is known as the Triune Brain. The way he described it was that the human cerebrum was an evolutionary palimpsest made up of three layers. At the bottom are the basal ganglia or Reptilian Brain. This is where the primitive and selfish emotions driving the four F’s (feeding, fighting, fleeing and sexual behavior) are located. (370) The next layer in the Mammalian Brain which is dedicated to kinder, gentler, social emotions, like those behind parenting. Wrapped around this is the Modern Mammalian Brain. This is the neocortex that grew wild in human evolution and houses intellect. The problem that Pinker presents for this theory is that evolution does not heap layers on unchanged foundation. Although natural selection works with what is around, it can modify. For example, some parts of the human body came from ancient mammals and before them ancient reptiles. But, in this case, many parts were heavily modified to fit human lifestyle. He states that there are some traits that are a part of the plan and therefore cannot be changed through selection. Emotions are not hard to reprogram and therefore we are not condemned to feel the way our ancestors did. The genus that is closest to ours is that of the chimpanzee. Chimpanzee males massacre rival gangs and females can murder one another’s babies. Although natural selection does not have the power to reprogram all emotions, it can do most. In conclusion to Pinker’s section on emotions, he makes it clear that emotion is not as simple as running away from a bear. It can be set off by the most sophisticated information processing the mind is capable of.
Pinker then talks a little about the best way to reverse-engineer emotions. He feels that the best way to do this is through is to imagine what it would be like without them. He uses Mr. Spock as an example. Many think that Spock never felt any emotion when in reality he did. Since he was able to stay calm, he was always in control. His emotions were expressed through his wanting to explore new worlds. Without Spock’s emotions, he would not pursue any goals.
Pinker then discusses the goals of intelligence. He compares the intelligence of a computer to that of the intelligence of robots and aliens. Computers will give a list of instructions and stop when the machine reaches STOP. He feels that robots, aliens and animals need a flexible method of control. Since intelligence is the pursuit of goals, without goals the concept of intelligence is meaningless. He then uses an example of him being locked out of his apartment. He begins to set goals as to how to get in. Each plan is called a subgoal. The topmost goal comes from artificial intelligence systems, it comes from the programmer. For organisms, it comes from natural selection. The key to why we have emotions is because animals cannot pursue all goals at once. The example used is that if an animal got hungry and thirsty at the same time, it would not just stand there between the two. Instead, the animal will commit its body to one goal. Emotions help to set the highest-level goals. From then on, emotion triggers a cascade of subgoals. Another example used is fear. Fear is triggered by a signal of impending harm. This signal sets of a fleeing response. It sets up a goal of high priority, our sense of urgency. Then it also lights up subgoals and longer-term goals, such as avoiding danger in the future. “Most artificial intelligence researchers believe that freely behaving robots will have to be programmed with something like emotions merely for them to know at every moment what to do next” (374). Human emotion helps mobilize the mind and body to meet one of the challenges of living and reproducing in the cognitive niche.
The Suburban Savanna
Pinker’s next section discusses habitat selection which is also called environmental aesthetics. Environmental aesthetics are the kinds of places that we enjoy being in. Homo sapiens are adapted to two habitats. The first is the African Savanna, where most evolution took place. The savanna is more hospitable compared to other ecosystems. It is rich in biomass, much in the flesh of large animals because grass replenishes quickly. The savanna also offers expansive views, so that predators and water can be spotted from afar. Trees provide shade and escape from carnivores. The second habitat is the rest of the world. As the population expanded to other areas, the climate changed. Pinker feels that it was natural beauty that drove our ancestors to other suitable habitats. “We innately find savannas beautiful, but we also like the landscape that is easy to explore and remember, and that we have lived in long enough to know its ins and outs” (376). People do not have a longing for ancient homelands. Instead they are pleased with the savanna. The landscapes that are known to be the loveliest are almost exactly like the savanna. The open space, large trees, water, changes in elevation and multiple paths leading out are all seen as appealing. Pinker then talks about reference frames which help finding locations on a landscape. He also mentions that people are fascinated with animals. Therefore we eat them and they eat us. This is opposite to the way we feel about flowers because although we a fascinated with them, we do not eat them. Finally Pinker concludes this section of the savanna by stating that our mood depends on our surroundings. The three major rules of home buying are location, location, location.
Disgust
Pinker’s section on disgust starts of by stating that disgust is a universal human emotion. Disgust has a profound effect on human affairs. According to Pinker, he feels that judging by the standards of modern science, disgust is manifestly irrational. People that are sickened by the thought of eating something disgusting feel that way because they feel it is unsanitary or harmful. He uses examples like thinking a sterilized cockroach is just as revolting as a fresh one from the cupboard. Another example is people refusing to drink juice that has been stored in a brand new urine collection bottle or people eating soup from a brand new bed pan. These are a few examples of things people will not do because they are all associated with disgusting objects. He also brings up the fact that some people will not eat insects because they think they are unsanitary. When in reality, we eat vegetables that have been fertilized with manure. Paul Rozin, a psychologist, defined disgust: “the fear of incorporating an offending substance into one’s body. Eating is the most direct way to incorporate the substance” (379). A person’s disgust can be seen through their facial expression: the wrinkled nose and constricting nostrils to keep out foul smells. The mouth is open in order to keep offending material out. A common feeling is that disgusting things come from animals. Whole animals, parts of animals or body products are universally thought of as disgusting. Pinker then describes the difference between distaste and disgust. Distaste is when a particular food is avoided because it has a bitter taste or pungent. Disgusting products are seen as vile and polluting.
Pinker states that some Americans are even pickier because they are repulsed by different sections of the animals. An example was given to show that not only Americans are disgusted by unknown body parts. Napoleon Chagnon safeguarded his peanut butter supply and hot dogs from begging Yanomamo informants by telling them that they were feces and penises of cows. Although the Yanomamo eat caterpillars and grubs, they had no idea what cattle were, but they lost their appetite.(380) Going back to examples of the clean bedpan and the clean urine cup, Pinker feels that these objects are tainted because they are designed to touch something disgusting. Some things are tainted by mere resemblance.
Rozin suggests that disgust is a learned behavior learned in the middle school years. Children learn this emotion by looking at the expression on their parents’ faces when they come in contact with something disgusting or not. While they are toddlers they behave similarly to their parents. Kids above the age of two are at an age where their parents struggle to feed them certain foods. Finally, children learn what to avoid. According to Pinker, Cashdan has a better idea. He feels that the first two years are the sensitive periods for learning about food. During those years mothers control their food intake. Then their tastes shrink and they only stomach food that was given during their sensitive period.
What is disgust for? Many fish, amphibians, and intervertebrates contain potent neurotoxins. Although meats are harmless, they can house parasites when they spoil. If this happens, meat can be deadly. Rozin ventured that disgust is an adaptation that deterred our ancestors from eating dangerous animal stuff. Children use their older relatives as testers like the kings used in case their food was poisoned. Pinker then explains the revulsion of fake objects that resemble something disgusting. He feels that the reason why we still feel revulsion is because we are still emotionally connected to the response.
Sean Cuypers
Chapter 6: Hotheads (pp. 386-406)
Pinker went on to discuss fear and the idea that fear is the emotion that motivated our ancestors to cope with the dangers they were likely to face. Granted fears do change with experience, creatures cannot be conditioned to fear just any old thing. Phobias are usually about neutral objects that were once paired with some trauma. But fear is not usually brought on by frightening or painful events, but it does make people more prudent around the cause.
Pinker went to pursue the topic of happiness, in which he asked how much happiness is too much. How do we know what we can reasonably be attained? Whatever is just barely in your grasp is enough, too much pursuit will lead to unhappiness. Money will not bring happiness, but not having it will bring some misery.
The point that Pinker brought up next was the decisive thoughts in which to choose long-term or short-term interests. Many social scientists consider any deferment of rewards is called self-control or delay of gratification which is often treated as a sign of intelligence, while following something in short-term interest is considered emotional. Pinker though, could not come up with a conclusion since there are several points favoring both sides.
Are most ardent emotions are not brought out or evoked by areas or things but it is evoked by other people. The last area he covered was selfishness and altruism. These two types of genes or rather organisms are set up to explain replication of selfish genes, but as a whole, only genes are replicated, eliminating the idea that people want to reproduce and pass on their genes (selfish), but they love their children in an altruistic matter, that it is impossible to support selfishness. Even other species show altruism to members outside of reproduction family.
Pinker, Chapter 6
Pages 407-424
By: Elaine LeDuff
“It is 1962, and you are the president of the United States. You have just learned that the Soviet Union has dropped an atomic bomb on New York. You know they will not attack again. In front of you is the phone to the Pentagon, the proverbial button, with which you can retaliate by bombing Moscow.
You are about to press the button. The nation’s policy is to retaliate in kind against a nuclear attack. The policy was designed to deter attackers if you don’t follow through; the deterrent would have been a sham.
On the other hand, you are thinking, the damage has been done. Killing millions of Russians will not bring millions of dead Americans back to life. The bomb will add radioactive fallout to the atmosphere, harming your own citizens. And you will go down in history as one of the worst mass murderers of all time. Retaliation now would be sheer spite.
But then, it is precisely this line of thinking that emboldened the Soviets to attack. They knew that once the bomb fell you would have nothing to gain and much to lose by retaliating. They thought they were calling your bluff. So you had better retaliate to show them it wasn’t a bluff.
But then again, what’s the point of proving now that you weren’t bluffing then? The present cannot affect the past. The fact remains that if you push the button, you will snuff out millions of lives for no reason.
But wait—the Soviets knew you would think it is pointless to prove you weren’t bluffing after they tried to call your bluff. The very fact that you are thinking this way brought on the catastrophe—so you shouldn’t think this way.
But not thinking this way now is too late…
You curse your freedom. Your predicament is that you have the choice to retaliate, and since retaliating is not in your interests, you may decide not to do it, exactly as the Soviets anticipated. If only you didn’t have the choice! If only your missiles had been wired to a reliable nuclear-fireball-detector and went off automatically. The Soviets would not have dared to attack, because they would have known retaliation was certain,” (Pinker, 407-8)
This passage was used in this chapter as a conflict of strategy, whereby one has a choice to trigger, as Pinker puts it, a machine that is able to be triggered and impossible to untrigger. Pinker uses this conflict of strategy because it may explain why we show emotion on our faces. The best way that I can connect the two is that we react to certain emotions that we have and once those emotions are triggered, there is no turning back.
There is one theory, by a psychologist that says that facial muscles send blood to the parts of the brain that have to cope with the situation. However, Pinker does not exactly agree with this theory because he says, “the theory cannot explain why we are more expressive when there are other people around,” (Pinker, 414). He explains that social smiles are formed with different muscles from a true smile of pleasure, and that anger, fear, and sadness also trigger specific muscles.
Pinker also discusses that when dating, we are searching for our idea of the perfect mate; someone who is smart, funny, stable, rich, etc. He says that we choose mates that will be committed to us for who we are, not what we have. When someone is committed to another by an emotion, Pinker says, is “an emotion that the person did not decide to have, and so cannot decide to have,” (Pinker, 418).
When there is a death in the family, it can be devastating and cause a great “battle inside the head,” (Pinker, 420). This battle is also known as grief that one feels in a situation with a death of a family member, or anyone else that was dear to their heart. Pinker does not know why we have to suffer so much grief when someone dies. He says that “perhaps grief is an internal doomsday machine, pointless once it goes off, useful only as a deterrent,” (Pinker, 421).
Lying is very stressful for people and in order to be successful at it, you must be “an exceptionally good liar,” (Pinker, 421). A couple of ways to being a successful liar is, one, to listen to the Yiddish saying, “a liar must have a good memory,” and two, “to believe your own lies,” (Pinker, 421). These are basic strategies that humans must use in order to relieve their minds of any stress from telling lies.
Pinker also mentions cognitive dissonance, "in which," he says, "people invent a new opinion to resolve a contradiction in their minds," (Pinker, 422). He gave the example that someone will admit to enjoying a boring task because they recommended it to others and was paid to do so. Pinker is demonstrating that people are constantly attempting to keep their minds from having so much stress, and that they utilize many simple strategies to do so.
Outlines
Sean Cuypers
Chapter 6: pp. 386-406
Hotheads
I. A. The Smell of Fear
1. Common fears related to situations that put our evolutionary ancestors in danger.
2. Fears are result of several emotions.
3. Cannot be conditioned to fear just anything.
4. Some adult phobias derive from childhood fears.
B. The Happiness Treadmill
1. At healthiest we are happy.
2. The function of happiness would be to mobilize the mind to seek the keys to Darwinian fitness.
3. Happiness is not necessarily brought by money, but not having money could bring misery.
C. The Siren's Song
1. Emotional versus Reason, ( Short-term vs. Long-term interest).
2. Sacrifice long-term goals for short-term could stump future goals. As for long-term goals, sign of self control and intelligence.
3. Both sides are at a standstill on which is good and which is bad.
D. I and Thou
1. Our emotions are evoked by other people.
2. Selfishness vs. Altruism
3. Not possible for selfishness to replicate itself, most people are altruistic.
Clarissa Carrillo
Pinker Chapter 6
Hotheads
I. Running amok
A. Amok: Malay word for homicidal sprees occasionally undertaken by lonely Indochinese men who have suffered loss of love, money or loss of face.
1. amok man out of his mind
2. reaction triggered by an idea
3. amok syndrome: an extreme instance of the puzzle of human emotions
a. exotic at first
b. turn out to be universal upon scrutiny
c. irrational
d. tightly interwoven with abstract thought
e. cold logic of their own
Universal Passion
II. Emotions: are they expressed differently between cultures?
A. Darwin: “The Expression of the Emotions in Man and Animals”
1. questionnaire for aboriginal population on five continents
2. asked about expression of emotions
3. conclusion: same form of expressions throughout the world
B. Paul Ekman- psychologist
1. (1960) studied facial expressions
2. infants learn facial expressions by what they see parents do
3. showed photographs to many cultures
4. showed Fore foragers of Papua New Guinea
5. results: all recognized happiness, sadness, anger, fear, disgust and surprise
6. conclusions have been replicated and accepted
7. Darwin’s observation of blind and deaf children
III. Why do people think emotions differ from culture to culture?
A. Two sources: language and opinions
1. Influence of language on feeling and thought, exaggerated
2. Correct translation depends on the skill of the translator and on quirks of the language’s grammar and history
3. Metaphors are used to describe feelings when there are no exact translations
Feeling Machines
IV. Emotions and intellect
A. Emotions and intellect: different realms
1. emotions- nature and live in body
2. intellect- civilization and lives in the mind
B. Emotions and intellect during the Romantic movement
1. Romantics believe emotions are a source of wisdom, innocence, authenticity and creativity
2. Romantics acknowledge the dark side
3. The irrational emotions and the repressing intellect keep reappearing in scientific guises:
a. id and superego
b. biological drives and cultural norms
c. left and right hemispheres
d. general intelligence
C. Distinct unromantic theory of emotions
1. computational theory of the mind
2. modern theory of evolution
3. emotions are adaptations that work with intellect
4. problem with emotions
5. “emotional” acts
D. Triune Brain: theory by neuroscientist Paul MacLean
1. the cerebrum: evolutionary palimpsest of three layers
a. Reptilian brain: seat of primitive and selfish emotions driving the “Four F’s.”
b. Primitive Mammalian Brain: limbic system; dedicated to kinder, social emotions
c. Modern Mammalian Brain: the neocortex that houses intellect
E. Problems with the theory
1. Forces of evolution do not just heap layers on unchanged foundation
2. Natural Selection has to work with what is already around, can modify
3. Parts of human body came from ancient mammals and before them, ancient reptiles
4. Parts are heavily modified
F. Are emotions able to be modified?
1. Emotional repertoires vary among animals depending on their species, sex and age
2. genus closest to us are chimpanzees
3. Natural Selection does not have complete freedom to modify emotions
G. Systems in our brain work in tandem
1. amygdala: houses main circuits that color our experience with emotions
a. sends signals to every part of the brain
b. includes the decision- making circuitry of the frontal lobes
V. Reverse- engineering emotions
A. Try to imagine what life would be without them
1. Mr. Spock from Star Trek
2. computer program: list of instructions a machine executes until it reaches STOP
3. intelligence of animals needs a more flexible method of control
B. Goals of intelligence:
1. intelligence is the pursuit of goals in the face of obstacles
2. Without goals, intelligence is meaningless
i.e. opening a locked door
3. topmost goal comes from the programmer for artificial intelligence systems
4. for organisms it comes from natural selection
5. brain strives to put its owner in circumstances like those that caused its ancestors to reproduce
6. goals installed in Homo Sapiens
a. problem-solving, social species are not just the “Four F’s”
b. understanding the environment and securing the cooperation of others
C. Key to emotions
1. an animal cannot pursue all its goals at once
2. it must commit to one goal at a time
3. goals have to be matched with the best time to achieve them
4. emotions are mechanisms that set the brains highest level goals
5. once triggered by a moment, an emotion triggers a cascade of subgoals-thinking and acting
i.e. fear
6. freely behaving robots will have to be programmed with something like emotions
7. each human emotion mobilizes the body to meet one of the challenges of living and reproducing the cognitive niche
The Suburban Savanna
VI. Habitat Selection
A. “environmental aesthetics:” what kinds of places we enjoy being in
B. Homo Sapiens are adapted to two habitats:
1. The African Savanna
a. rich in biomass
b. offer expansive views
c. trees provide shade
2. Rest of the world
a. ancestors wandered almost everywhere
b. left savanna for many different reasons
C. Wanderlust
1. we can afford wanderlust because of our intelligence
2. people explore, make mental resource map and make new homeland
3. natural beauty drove our ancestors into suitable habitats
D. Preferential landscapes
1. People don’t have mystical longing for ancient homelands
2. They are pleased with landscape features savannas have
3. landscapes that are the loveliest- savannas
4. landscapes are big- recognition of complex objects comes from reference frame
5. key to natural beauty
6. moods depend on surroundings
VII. Disgust
A. Disgust is universal human emotion
1. profound effects on human affairs
2. food aversions are tenacious ethnic markers
3. people who are sickened by the thought of ingesting a disgusting object- it is unsanitary
a. cockroach sterilized
b. juice in urine collection bottle
c. soup in clean bed pan
d. fudge in shape of dog feces
B. Westerners eating insects
1. most Westerners will not eat insects because they are seen as unsanitary
2. insects are highly nutritious to others
3. humans eat tomatoes fertilized in manure
C. Paul Rozin- psychologist
1. psychology of disgust: the fear of incorporating an offending substance into one’s body
a. eating is the most direct way to incorporate a substance
b. smelling and touching is also unappealing
2. facial expressions show how disgusted on really is
a. mouth opened
b. nose wrinkled
c. tongue pushed forward
3. Disgusting things come from animals
a. whole animals
b. parts of animals (carnivores and scavengers)
c. body parts- viscous (mucus, pus and feces are universal)
d. List of non-disgusting animals differs from culture to culture
4. Distaste different from disgust
a. distaste is due to bitterness or pungent taste
b. not likely to be vile or polluting
c. simply avoided, no strong feelings
5. A disgusting object contaminates
a. invisible contaminating bits- cooties
b. some objects tainted because they are designed to touch something disgusting
c. others tainted by resemblance
6. Two laws of sympathetic magic- voodoo
a. law of contagion: once in contact, always in contact
b. law of similarity: like products like
D. Disgust- a learned emotion
1. children put everything in their mouths
a. Rozin studied the development of disgust
b. offered the kids food the parents found disgusting
c. results: 62% ate imitation dog feces; 31% ate a grasshopper
2. Rozin suggested disgust is learned in middle school
a. when children are scolded or by looking at their parents’ expression
b. Pinker disagrees:
1) subjects older than toddlers behave the same as adults
2) children above 2 yrs. finicky and parents struggle to get them to eat new food
3) If all children had to learn what to avoid, then all animals would be palatable except for the proscribed
3. Cashdan’s idea
a. first 2 yrs. sensitive about food- take what mothers give
b. tastes shrink during sensitive period- distaste’s can last until adulthood
4. What is disgust for?
a. meats harmless unless they spoil- deadly
b. food contamination is a danger
c. Rozin- disgust is an adaptation that deterred our ancestors from eating dangerous food
d. children use adults as tasters
e. revulsion to objects that resemble disgusting things is- mind has already been programmed to revolt.
Pages 149-174
By: Elaine LeDuff
GET SMART
We, as human beings, have many questions regarding life on other planets, and we are constantly searching for the answers. One way that we have been able to pursue them is by NASA's ten year, one hundred million dollar Search for Extraterrestrial Intelligence (SETI). However, there were many opposing views, by many prominent biologists, of this search because SETI is dependent upon assumptions from evolutionary theory, especially the evolution of intelligence. In 1961, Frank Drake, an astronomer and SETI enthusiast, developed a formula for the number of extraterrestrial civilizations that may contact Earth:
(1) (The number of stars in the galaxy) x
(2) (The fraction of stars with planets) x
(3) (The number of planets per solar system with a life-supporting environment) x
(4) (The fraction of these planets on which life actually appears) x
(5) (The fraction of life-bearing planets on which intelligence emerges) x
(6) (The fraction of intelligent societies willing and able to communicate with other worlds) x
(7) (The longevity of each technology in the communicative state).
Ernst Mayr, a biologist, felt that "only one in fifty million species on earth had developed civilizations, so the probability that life on a given planet would include an intelligent species might very well be small," (Pinker, 151). However, Drake had his own argument:
"The first species to develop intelligent civilizations will discover that it is the only such species. Should it be surprised? Someone must be first, and being first says nothing about how many other species had or have the potential to evolve into intelligent civilizations, or may do so in the future…Similarly, among many civilizations, one will be the first, and temporarily the only one, to develop electronic technology. How else could it be? The evidence does suggest that planetary systems need to exist in sufficiently benign circumstances for a few billion years for a technology-using species to evolve," (Pinker, 151-2).
Looking at an analogy, in which the human brain evolved only once and the elephant's trunk (which can do multiple physical tasks) evolved only once, it is evident that both were a result of natural selection. So, Mayr uses Drake's argument against him; a person on the "Planet of the Elephants defending SETT, the Search for Extraterrestrial Trunks:
"The first species to develop a trunk will discover that it is the only such species. Should it be surprised? Someone must be first, and being first says nothing about how many other species had or have the potential to evolve trunks, or may do so in the future…Similarly, among many trunk-bearing species, one will be the first, and temporarily the only one, to powder itself with dust. The evidence does suggest that planetary systems need to exist in sufficiently benign circumstances for a few billion years for a trunk-using species to evolve," (Pinker, 152).
Pinker notes that because of “fortuitous preconditions in the elephants’ ancestors (large size and certain kinds of nostrils and lips), certain selective forces (the problems posed by lifting and lowering a huge head), and luck, the trunk evolved as a workable solution for those organisms at that time,” (Pinker, 152). He then mentions that “other animals did not and will not evolve trunks because in their bodies and circumstances it is of no great help,” (Pinker, 152). However, it is still a possible occurrence, just not in our lifetime.
We think that our brains are the goal of evolution, but they are not, according to Stephen Jay Gould. Gould says that, "natural selection does nothing even close to striving for intelligence. The process is driven by differences in the survival and reproduction rates of replicating organisms in a particular environment," (Pinker, 153). So, in time the organisms will gain certain designs that will help them to adapt to their environment in order to succeed in survival and reproduction.
Within evolution, organisms do not strive toward every advantage. If so, there would be organisms that could do things that we would consider impossible such as, running faster than a speeding bullet, or being able to leap over a building. If an organism were to devote all of its energy to one organ, then it must take away that same energy from another organ. Organs evolve most often when their benefits outweigh their costs.
LIFE'S DESIGNER
Richard Dawkins is an evolutionary biologist that has made a prediction about extraterrestrial life. Pinker says that, "if Dawkins is right," as he thinks he is, "natural selection is indispensable to understanding the human mind," (Pinker, 155). Pinker also describes a concept previously identified by Darwin, "a forward-causation physical process that mimics the paradoxical appearance of backward-causation," (Pinker, 156).
To demonstrate, consider A and B. Darwin says, "B can't cause A if A comes first. (Seeing well can’t cause an eye to have a clear lens.)
Has clear lens >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sees well
(A) (B)
|__________________?___________________|
But let's say that A causes B, and B in turn causes the protagonist of A to make a copy of itself--let's call it AA. AA looks just like A, so it appears as if B has caused A. But it hasn't; it has only caused AA, the copy of A.
Suppose there are three animals, two with a cloudy lens, one with a clear lens. Having a clear lens (A) causes an eye to see well (B); seeing well causes the animal to reproduce by helping it avoid predators and find mates. The offspring (AA) have clear lenses and can see well, too. It looks as if the offspring have eyes so that they can see well (bad, teleological, backward causation), but that’s an illusion. The offspring have eyes because their parents’ eyes did see well (good, ordinary, forward causation). Their eyes look like their parents’ eyes, so it’s easy to mistake what happened for backward causation.
Has clear lens >>> Sees well >>> Reproduces >>> Has clear lens
(A) (B) (AA)
Has cloudy lens >>> Sees badly
There’s more to an eye than a clear lens, but the special power replicator is that its copies can replicate, too,” (Pinker, 156-7).
Natural selection seems to be the only process that designs organisms over a period of time, however it is not the only process that may change organisms over time. Since there seems to be no alternatives to the theory of evolution, we would probably have to accept it in order to explain life on Earth. Even if there was no evidence for the theory (although there is a vast amount), there is no other logical explanation. Pinker suggests that, “natural selection remains the only theory that explains how adaptive complexity, not just any old complexity, can arise, because it is the only nonmiraculous, forward-direction theory in which how well something works plays a causal role in how it came to be,” (Pinker, 162).
Pinker asks the question, “How can anyone say that any organ was selected for its current function?” (Pinker, 170) So far, many of the organs have maintained their original function, however there are some that have changed their function. An example from Darwin is “the pectoral fins of fishes becoming the forelimbs of horses, the flippers of whales, the wings of birds, the digging claws of moles, and the arms of humans,” (Pinker, 170). These similarities are powerful evidence for the fact of evolution.
Next, Pinker asks, “How could a complex organ gradually evolve when only the final form is usable?” And the answer to this question is that the fact that a specific organ is not in its final form is irrelevant. For example, if a bird has only one eye, then it is better that the bird will have some sight, as opposed to no sight at all.
So within the competition among replicators, those that did not come from a long line of replicators cannot be explained by the theory of natural selection. In closing, Pinker says that this theory of natural selection “remains the heart of explanation in biology,” (Pinker, 174).
Clarissa Carrillo
Chapter 3- Pinker (175-186)
The Blind Programmer
Pinker begins the section called The Blind Programmer by posing the question, why did brains start to evolve? The answer to that question is information. Information is valuable and he gives the example of the newspaper. People pay money for the information given in a newspaper because it is worth it. The Pinker talks about the chances people take in life. He feels that the best thing to do is play the odds. The lottery is the example he uses to best describe this. Pinker then goes on to say that organisms don’t buy lottery tickets, but that they choose between gambles every time their bodies can move in more than one way. He feels that the organisms should be willing to pay for the information if they will be ensured safety, mating opportunities, food and other resources. He feels that information brings greater rewards and earns back extra cost. Pinker uses the example of a treasure chest. If there is a treasure chest is buried somewhere in the neighborhood, any bit of information that can help narrow down the location is useful. Therefore, one should be willing to pay for more information so that it cuts on digging time. “More information is better, up to a point of diminishing returns.” (176) This is why Pinker feels animals have evolved complex nervous systems.
The next couple of paragraphs discuss genes and their natural selection. Natural selection can only select among genes. Since genes build brains, different genes build brains that process information differently. “The evolution of information processing has to be accomplished at the nuts and bolts level by selection of genes that affect the brain assembly process.” (176) With the selection of genes, the results are better information processing. Natural selection is not concerned with the brain assembly process or the results. Changes, or modifications are evaluated on how well the brain’s algorithms work. These algorithms work in guiding the perception, thought and action of the whole animal. Through more and more modifications, natural selection will build a better functioning brain.
Pinker then writes about a new field of computer science called genetic algorithms. This shows that Darwinian selection can create increasingly intelligent software. Genetic algorithms are programs that are duplicated to make multiple copies. With each copy there is a random mutation that makes each one different. Each copy must go to solve a problem and the ones that do, are allowed to reproduce. Before they reproduce, they are again mutated and they have sex. Then the halves are exchanged. After cycles of computation, selection, mutation and reproduction, surviving programs are better then any a programmer could have designed.
Genetic algorithms have also been applied to neural networks. What happens is that the network is given inputs from simulated sense organs and outputs to simulated legs. Then the network is placed in a virtual environment with scattered “food” and many other networks competing for it. The ones that are able to leave copies are those that get the most “food”. Some example of mutations are random changes in connection weights and recombination between networks. During the early iterations, the animats, as they are called, wander and sometimes find food. Eventually they evolve to find their food source faster.
Evolution and learning can occur simultaneously. This can occur with an innate structure evolving in an animal that also learns. According to Pinker, “the population of networks can be equipped with generic learning algorithm and can be allowed to evolve the innate parts. The innate parts include the number of units, how they are connected, what their initial connection weights are and how much the weights should be nudged up or down on each learning episode.” (178) This means that evolution can guide learning in neural networks. “Surprisingly, learning can guide evolution as well.” (178) Pinker then brings up Darwin’s “what-good-is-half-an-eye problem. He uses an example invented by two theorists Hinton and Nowlan. The example is of an animal that is controlled by a neural network with 20 connections. Each connection is either excitatory (on) or neutral (off). The network is useless unless all 20 connections are set correctly. The conclusion is that it’s not only bad to have only half a network, having 95% is completely useless. This means that in a population of animals whose connections are determined by random mutation, a fitter mutant arises only once every million (2 ) genetically distinct organisms. (178) Pinker then sets an example of a population of animals whose connections come in three forms: innately on, off, or settable to on or off by learning.
The animal eventually will acquire the right settings. The earlier in life it does this, the longer it will have to reproduce at a higher rate. The advantages to the mutations are that they make the connections more and more correct. This is because the more good connections there are to begin with, the less time it takes to learn the rest.
Instinct and Intelligence
Pinker’s next section deals with the instinct and intelligence of humans and animals. He starts off with intelligence of animals. Although many people feel that animals get smarter, Pinker feels this is false. He thinks that people base their feelings on experiments such as Pavlov of Skinner. If these was the case, “the ability to associate gets better in still higher organisms, and eventually it is freed from bodily drives and physical stimuli and responses and can associate ideas directly to each other, reaching an apex in man.” (180) Pinker feels that distribution of intelligence in an animal is nothing like this. The example he uses is of the Tunisian ant searching for food and then finding its way back. If, for example, an ant leaves its nest in search for food and someone lifted the ant up and moved it somewhere else as it was leaving the nest, the ant would not be able to find its way home. If the ant would have been allowed to reach its food and then the person would move it, the ant would go back in the same direction of the nest and only miss it by a little. Pinker feels that this means the ant has somehow measured and stored the direction and distance back to the nest. This form of navigation is called path integration or dead reckoning. Pinker then gives a definition according to psychologist Randy Gallitsel. The path intergrations are done unconsciously.
Pinker then shares his example of migratory birds. These birds fly thousands of miles at night and maintain their compass of direction by looking at the constellations. Birds are not born with this knowledge, they have developed a special algorithm for learning where the celestial pole is in the night sky. The time when all this happens is while they are still in the eggs. The nestling are staring up at the night sky for hours and watch the rotation of the constellations. They use this movement of the stars when migrating from one place to the other.
Pinker also writes about honeybees and their intelligence. They perform a dance that tells their hivemates the direction and distance of a food source, with respect to the sun. He states that “bees have also evolved a variety of calibrations and backup systems to deal with the engineering complexities of solar navigation” (181). The bee that dances uses an internal clock to compensate for the movement of the sun between the time she discovered the source and the time she passes on the information. If the sky is not clear on one particular day, the other bees estimate the direction using polarization of light in the sky.
Pinker is basically saying that “animals’ brains are just as specialized and well engineered as their bodies. A brain is a precision instrument that allows a creature to use information to solve the problems presented by its lifestyle” (182). Pinker feels that although there is something special about the human brain, it is not better then animal intelligence. Humans have evolved information-processing machinery to solve our problems and animals have evolved theirs.
The next section in Pinker deals with the brain of mammals. He starts off by stating that brains are like bodies because they follow a common, general plan. Throughout the class, there are many of the “same cell types, chemicals, tissues, suborgans, way-stations, and pathways” (183). Primates differ from other mammals in the number of visual areas, their interconnections, and their hookup to the motor and decision regions of the frontal lobe. He uses bats as an example. They rely on sonar, but also have additional brain areas dedicated to ultrasonic hearing. The primate brain was considerably re-engineered, according to Pinker, to end up as a human brain. He says that our brains are three times too big for a generic monkey or ape of our body size. The inflation is caused by the prolonging of fetal brain growth for one year after birth. If out bodies grew proportionally during that period, we would be ten feet tall and weigh half a ton.
Many of the major lobes and patches of the brain have been modified as well. The olfactory bulbs (smell) have shrunk to a third of the expected primate size. The main cortical areas for vision and movement have also shriveled. Within the visual system, the primary visual cortex takes up a smaller proportion of the whole brain. The areas for hearing have grown. Other areas that have grown are the prefrontal lobes. This is the seat of deliberate thought and planning. Although the brains of monkeys and apes are asymmetrical, the human brain is lopsided. The shape of the brain is noticeable by simply looking at it. The Broca’s area, involved in speech, has a homologue (evolutionary counterpart) in monkeys. The difference is they don’t use it for speech. The real difference between the two brains is in the patterns of connections among neurons. This is similar to difference in content among different computer programs, microchips, books, or video cassettes. The difference there is not in shape but in their construents.
Next Pinker begins writing about animal and human instinct. Humans are thought to have no instincts beyond the vegetative functions. We are said to be able to reason and behave flexibly. We are freed from any specialized machinery. Darwin called human language the epitome of flexible behavior, “an instinct to acquire an art.” (184) The example Pinker uses is of a hen. He poses this question: Why does a hen submit herself to the tedium of incubating such a fearfully uninteresting set of objects as a nest full of eggs, unless she has some sort of a prophetic inkling of the result? He says the answer is ad hominem. “The only way we can interpret the instincts of brutes, is by what we know about ourselves” (185). Pinker then asks similar questions about humans. He asks why men lie down on soft beds rather then hard floors? Another question was why do we sit around a stove on a hot day? The answer to these questions and the others asked is that they are human ways and every creature like its own ways. Humans follow their ways as a matter of course. The reason why we follow them is not for the sake of their utility, but because we feel it is the right thing to do, it comes naturally.
Pinker feels that although the reactions described may seem like animal instincts, we also have rational, flexible thought. At the lowest levels, the steps have to be as automatic and analyzed as the reactions of the most brutish animal. Then the thinker must execute a rule, because he can’t help it, it’s the human way. In other words, it’s instinct. Pinker feels that everything is going well, our reasoning instincts link up into complex programs for rational analysis.
Sean Cuypers
Chapter 3: Revenge of the Nerds (pp. 186-210)
Pinker discusses the "cognitive niche" in which he refers it to the definition of human intelligence, and that is "using knowledge of how things work to attain goals in the face of obstacles. By learning which manipulations achieve which goals," (p. 188). What makes us different from other species is out behavior and the mental programs that govern it. Despite any disadvantages or handicaps the human species may have, they are the controllers of most other species' fates. Intelligence has a major part in why we may be the superior species at this time.
Another question could be, "Why is our species the one that natural selection favored?" Pinker continues to answer this question stating that our ancestors had four traits that made it possible and worthwhile to evolve better reasoning abilities. The first of these traits is that primates are visual animals. The fact that primates have stereoscopic and color vision, helps in learning about abstract thought. Most species have no ability to see three dimensional spatial and mechanical relationships.
A second trait is group living. It was not only a defense mechanism from predators or hunting, but group living allowed the value of having information passed along to each other. It also brings on new cognitive challenges, such as competition over food mates, theft, etc. Because of these challenges, the rest of the group is forced to try to stay on the right track and outsmart those leeches of the group. A third trait for intelligence is the hand. Primates used their developed hands to manipulate objects, to help in become in an upright posture (bipedal walking) and to carry food, children, etcetera.
The final trait for intelligence was hunting. It helped primates to work together to fell large game, use social intelligence to hunt, and of course food substance in order to survive. Of course hunting and obtaining meat is another benefit for sexual access to females, since meat can be considered a major resource especially in areas where there is no vegetation. As these four traits were mentioned nothing is for sure on whether formed the basis of intelligence or not.
Pinker concluded chapter three with the discussion that at this time, primates are not going through any drastic changes brought up by adaption or natural selection, and us as humans can not necessarily will up any traits that would be considered advantages to themselves. At this time natural selection is at a slow pace now, since selection already developed to what we are already and working efficiently.
Pinker, Chapter 3, Pages 149-174
a. ten year research
b. one hundred million dollars
A. a biologist
1. does not believe in life on other planets
2. human brain/elephant’s trunk analogy
IV. Stephen Jay Gould
A. Goal of evolution
1. we think that it is our brains
2. our brains are not the goal
3. natural selection does not strive for intelligence
1. ability to perform impossible actions
a. running faster than a speeding bullet
b. leaping over a building
B. if an organism were to devote all of its energy to one organ
1. it must take away that same energy from another organ
2. organs evolve most often when their benefits outweigh their costs.
VI. Richard Dawkins
A. an evolutionary biologist
1. he made a prediction about extraterrestrial life
B. he believes in natural selection
1. physical process of forward-causation and backward-causation
a. example
VII. Natural Selection
A. the only process that develops organisms over a period of time
1. not the only process that may change organisms over time
2.remains the only theory that explains how adaptive complexity can arise
3. the only forward-direction theory in which how well something works plays a causal role in how it came to be
VIII. Were any of our organs selected for their current function?
A. many organs maintained their original function; some changed their function
1. pectoral fins of fishes becoming forelimbs of horses, etc.
2. this is powerful evidence for the fact of evolution
IX. How could a complex organ gradually evolve when only the final form is usable?
A. premise of unusability is wrong
1. example; having only one eye still serves the purpose of sight
B. the organ was adapted for something else
1. eventually, the organ went through a stage that enabled the organ to adapt to both of the uses.
X. Competition among replicators
A. natural selection
1. those that did not come from a long line of replicators cannot be explained by the theory of natural selection.
2. Pinker says that this theory remains the heart of explanation in biology
Clarissa Carrillo
Pinker, Chapter 3 (175-186)
The Blind Programmer
I. Evolution of the brain
A. Information
1. Information confers a benefit that is worth paying for
a. ie. the lottery: the more chances you have of winning, the more money one will spend to increase the chances.
b. organisms: gamble when their bodies can move in more then one way
c. information brings a greater reward and earns back extra cost
(ie. treasure chest)
d. information is better- reason why animals have evolved more and more complex nervous systems
B. Natural Selection
1. Information processing must be accomplished at the lower levels by selection of genes that affect brain assembly
a. natural selection can only select among genes
b. genes build brains differently
c. genes change the molecular locks and keys that encourage neurons to connect with others
d. modifications are evaluated strictly on how well the brain’s algorithms work in guiding: perception, thought, and action
C. Genetic Algorithms
1. programs that are duplicated to make multiple copies with random mutations
a. new field of computer science
b. shows that Darwinian selection can create intelligent software
c. have been applied to neural networks
D. Evolution and Learning
1. evolution and learning can go on simultaneously with innate structure evolving in an animal that also learns
a. networks evolve the innate parts. (network designer would have already built in by guesswork, tradition, or trial and error)
b. evolution can guide learning in neural networks
c. learning can guide evolution
1. Darwin’s :what- good- is- half- of- an- eye problem
2. two theorists example: animal controlled neural network w/ 20 connections
3. Conclusion: it is no good to have half a network nor to have 95% of one
Instinct and Intelligence
I. Animal intelligence
A. Image of animals climbing the intelligence ladder is wrong
1. ability to associate gets better in higher organisms
2. eventually it is freed from bodily drives, physical stimuli, responses, and can associate ideas directly yo eachother
a. ie: Tunisian desert ant: finds way home with calculations done unconsciously
3. Other animals execute complicated sequences of arithmatic, logic, data storage and retieval.
a. ie: migratory birds- constellations
honey bees- create a dance
4. Pavlovian and operant conditioning are complex algorithms for multivariate, nonstationary time series analysis (predicting when events will occur based on their history of occurrences)
5. Animals’ brains are specialized and well engineered like bodies
a. brain is the precision instrument that allows to solve problems
b. both humans and animals have evolved information- processing machinery to solve problems
II. The Brain (mammals)
A. General plan
1. many of the same cell types, chemicals, tissues, suborgans, way stations and pathways
2. visible differences come from inflating or shrinking the parts
3. Primates differ from other mammals in the number of visual areas, their interconnections, and their hookup to the motor and decision regions of the frontal lobes
4. Noteworthy talents reflected in the anatomy of the brain
a. ie: bats- ultrasonic hearing
desert mice- cache seeds
B. Primate brain re-engineered
1. our brains are 3x too big for a generic monkey or ape of our body size
a. fetal brain growth is prolonged 1 year after birth
b. if bodies grew proportionately with brains, we would be 10ft. tall and weigh half a ton.
2. major lobes and patches have been changed
a. olfactory bulbs (smell) have shriveled to a third of expected primate size
b. primary visual cortex takes up smaller proportion of the whole brain
c. main cortical areas for vision and movement have shrunk
d. areas for complex-form processing expand
e. areas for hearing have grown
f. profrontal lobes grew to twice what a primate our size should have
3. brains of monkeys, apes and humans
a. monkeys and apes’ brains are asymmetrical
b. human brain is so lopsided that each hemisphere can be distinguished by sight. (especially areas devoted to language)
c. Broca’s area (speech) has a counterpart in monkeys- they don’t use it for any audio sound
d. human and ape brains radically different even if one looked like perfect scale model
e. real action is in the patterns of connections among neurons (analogy made to difference in content of computer programs, microchips, books or video cassettes.)
III. Human Instinct
A. Humans are said to have no instincts beyond the vegitative functions
1. said to reason and behave flexibly, freed from specialized machinery
2. Darwin called human language the epitome of flexible behavior, “an instinct to acquire an art.”
3. William James posed a question: Why do animals do what seem to us such strange things? ie. the hen sitting on her eggs
a. answer: ad hominem- “we can only interpret the instincts of brutes by what we know of instincts in ourselves”
4. every human likes his own ways and follows them as a matter of course- we do what comes natural
B. Rational, flexible thought
1. no rational creature can consult rules all the way down
2. at some point a thinker must execute a rule- it’s natural
3. reasoning instincts link up into complex programs for rational analysis.
Sean Cuypers
Chapter 3: p. 186-210
Revenge of the Nerds
I. A. The Cognitive Niche
1. Only primates to have such odd traits.
2. Use of intelligence to attain goals.
B. Why Us?
1. Four traits
a. half the brain is dedicated to sight.
b. group living
c. the developed hand
d. hunting
C. What now?
1. Are we still going through evolutionary changes?
a. Adaption to reproduce and survive.
b. Possibly a cultural evolution taken over from biological evolution.
c. Natural Selection pertains to anything that can replicate.
Chapter 6
I. The Doomsday Machine
A. A demonstration of conflict of strategy
1. a machine that is able to be triggered and impossible to untrigger
2. may explain why we advertise emotion on our faces
a. facial muscles send blood to the parts of the brain that have to cope with the situation
b. facial expressions are good only if they are difficult to fake
1. social smiles are formed with different muscles from a true smile of pleasure
2. anger, fear, and sadness also trigger specific muscles
II. Fools For Love
A. Dating
1. mate selection
2. commitment by emotion
III. The Society Of Feelings
1. A battle inside the head
a. grief
IV. Kidding Ourselves
A. Lying
B. Cognitive Dissonance
Critical Review
Elaine LeDuff
Clarissa Carrillo
Sean Cuypers
A.
(1) The point that I (Elaine) found especially interesting was the way that Pinker used the basic principle of a doomsday machine to explain why we show emotions. I thought it was very interesting because it shows that once a certain emotion is triggered, just as the doomsday machine operates, there is no way to stop it. Our emotions are the result of environmental influences, and may help us to cope with conflicts within our minds.
(2) I (Clarissa) found the selection on disgust very interesting. I thought this because I never knew the reasons why we felt disgusted by certain things. The one part in particular that I found most interesting was when Pinker talked about objects being tainted simply by association or resemblance. I put myself in all of those examples, and right away had a feeling of deep disgust.
(3) What I (Sean) found interesting was the four traits that could have been the basis for primates to develop intelligence. It was interesting because it explained possible reasons why intelligence developed in our species and none of the others.
B.
(1) I (Elaine) disagreed with Pinker's explanation of the fact that intelligence is not in any way a goal of evolution. Although this may be true (since we are living in order to reproduce), it is not true that we are not making any efforts to heighten our intelligence levels.
(2) The part that I (Clarissa) thought the author made a weak point on was when he mentioned Darwin and Ekman. The two were experimenting trying to show that facial expressions are shared by everyone around the world. Pinker pointed out that Ekman felt that children learn facial expression through the looks of approval of disappointment given by their parents. Then Darwin disputed this because he had done a study on blind and deaf children, and their facial expressions were the same. The problem I found with this section is that Pinker does not reveal Darwin’s theory of his experiment. There is no mention of what Darwin thinks about Ekman’s statement. It is not clear how Darwin thinks children learn facial expression.
(3) I (Sean) though the author made a weak case with “I and Thou” especially in discussing in general the issue of Selfishness and Altruism. I really did not see a point of that section when the chapter was discussing emotions and certain types of behavior. Also the fact that that section contradicts itself to some degree made me confused.
C.
(1) I (Elaine) think that Pinker should have explained my section, (the first twenty pages of chapter 3), in a more clear way. The chapter was very difficult for me to understand.
(2) The one section I (Clarissa) felt the author could have expanded on a little more was the section that talked about reprogramming emotions. I thought it was confusing when Pinker said that the genus closest to our was that of the chimpanzee. Then he describes characteristics such as the gangs massacring rival gangs, and female’s murdering one another’s babies. This is the part that I don’t see a connection between us and the chimpanzees. Another minor question I had was in chapter 3 when Pinker was describing the changes that Primate brains have undergone. He stated that the Broca’s area, which is for speech in humans, has a counterpart in monkeys. He also states that it is not used for speech or to make any kind of noise. I wanted to know what it was used for.
(3) What I (Sean) still feel I have questions about is whether we are still evolving or not, the wording was difficult for me to read or rather translate.