This page is hosted on AFS file server space, which is being shut down on November 13, 2018.
If you are seeing this message, your service provider needs to take steps now.
Visit afs.unc.edu for more information.
Soci326-002 – Evolutionary Sociology
Module 2 – Human Nature I – Discussion Topics – 6 Sep
2005
As a first topic of discussion today I would like
each seminar participant to talk about their own intellectual background and
intellectual history with respect to the roles of evolution and of
biological factors in explaining human behavior, the nature/nurture debate,
etc. If you can, try remembering your feelings about these
topics (anger, disgust, embarrassment, illumination, etc.) as well as your
more intellectual itinerary. What issues (e.g., differences in sexual
behavior between men and women, class differences in IQ, possible biological
basis of violence, apparently pessimistic implications of biology for social
justice, religious faith, etc.) have been particularly important in shaping
your position vis-à-vis these issues. To break the ice I will go over
this myself first. Please keep in mind that this is not an
interrogation. There is no a priori better personal history than
others, and there is no mandated position on the issues.
In what way(s) do language and linguistic evolution
provide a model for the evolution of culture and social organization in
general?
A central concept of the emerging evolutionary
psychological view of human nature is the concept of modularity, i.e. the
innate structuration of the human brain into specialized modules designed (=
evolved) to meet specific environmental contingencies such as finding a
mate, insure survival of children, communicate with language, avoid being
exploited in exchange, etc. What role does modularity play in the new
perspective? In what way(s) is it (or is it not) threatening to
traditional conceptions of human nature based on a "blank slate, noble
savage, ghost in the machine" model?
What are the intellectual sources of opposition to
the evolutionary view of human nature, both from the Left and from the Right
of the philosophical-political spectrum?
Why has modularity and an evolutionary perspective
on human nature imposed themselves in the new perspective? What fields
of research and discoveries have helped consolidate the evolutionary view of
human nature? (What I have in mind here are the 4 "bridges between
mind and matter" that Pinker discusses p. 31, 41, 45, 51.)
What are/were the scientific and moral-political
reasons for the emergence and eventual triumph in the social sciences of the
culture (and society) as existing at a separate level of analysis, separate
from individual members? A related issue is that of the value (or lack
thereof) of reductionism. Are there different kinds of reductionism?
What is the basis of the blank slate's (scientific)
"last stand"? (See Pinker p. 74).