Science & Literacy as Dangerous Ideas

[OinopsPontos]

...If you don't think evolution can occur extremely rapidly, every breed of domesticated dog came from the wolf within 10,000 years. Societal pressures could easily further "academic" or "literacy" propensities.

[OinopsPontos]

"We don't have a genetic predisposition to literacy."

How could you possibly know that? You don't think propensity toward literacy gives you an edge on survival that would be more likely to be passed on than not? Virtually any trait that randomly occurs can become more frequent if it helps survival...

[amabodie]

Effing brilliant Anton!

[nspeert]

You seem to be implying that behavior that is specifically selected for is always hard wired, while the kind of behavior that is subject to change based on experience could not be the product of evolution. (cont.)...

[nspeert]

...(cont.) This is anything but the case, we evolved in an environment with a great deal of uncertainty as to the specific nature of the problems that we would be confronted with. It was therefore advantageous for our evolved behavioral mechanisms to be outfitted with a certain degree of plasticity, so as to have the capacity to account for a multitude of environmental contingencies.

[stefanlittle]

I think you are thinking oddly about evolution....

There is no proof for a lot of things via direct genetic causes...However this says nothing about human will and it's desires in how we move forward.

Also, language may be needed, but reading is not a required component of the scientific method. Reading obviously allowed it to grow and accumulate knowledge to let the method advance much farther. However, basic investigaion does not require reading.

[Elenkhos]

good vid Proff

[a2tis]

professoranton, you didn't really specify which idea is dangerous in what way and to whom? :)

the civilization?...

[CPLains]

people often confuse genetically determined from differences within a broader context as determined by genes

[nspeert]

i don't think any evolutionary psychologist (or any clear thinking person for that matter) looks at our evolved behavior as a set of normative principles. if evolutionary psychology plays any role in ethics at all, its that of providing a detailed explanation of the behaviors that we must transcend as a society.

[SkepticsClaw]

There's obviously a key difference between saying 'this is not in our genetics' and 'this is not *exactly represented* in our genetics'. Our abilities to recognise and cultivate patterns ARE literacy from a genetic perspective, or rather literacy would be seen as one aspect (or practical outcome) of this evolved capacity.

At least that's how I would interpret it. An enjoyable video once again!

[miniluvable]

I think evolutionary psychology is on the right track. The explanations are at least better than the freudian nonsense given by psychoanalysis. But I would not like to go back to only doing what weve been hard wired to do in nature. If that were the case I wouldnt even have been born. I like civilization. I think most people do, wether were predisposed to it or not.

[GirlyVoice]

The very plasticity you refer to is probably a product of evolution though! Given an environment with high semiotic variability, the capacity to learn symbols whether words or 3d objects would be very adaptive. I would suspect dyslexia is due to differing needs for such learning before literacy.

Learning isn't just a social phenomenon but an evolved neurological process in which aspects of the environment are invited to influence the structure of the brain.

[Drastam]

Our predisposition to reading might not be in our genes...I mean...is everything in our genes? Is love in our genes? Is the genius of an Einstein in the genes?

I think far too much is attributed to genes these days; they are merely codes for proteins. Ultimately they will not bear the explanatory weight heaped on them.

The genetic code is one of todays two great scientific panaceas. The other is quantum mechanics.

[itsbizbuz]

There is definitely a problem with people who think they can interpret scientific datas correctly on the base of their own prejudices, with people who believe science has yet all the answers and that mankind is totally solved and understood, that science is the alpha and the omega. Scientism can be a threat.

[Hockeyjason]

I agree, when you think that science is thee only way to understanding you no longer believe in science. You believe in sciencism

Scientism = Being Irrationally rational.

[PhoenX19]

Maybe our brains aren't specificaly adapated for reading. However, they are hard-wired to recognise patterns, sometimes even when there aren't any.

Foloowing the same idea, I'm pretty confident there isn't a gene for art, mathematics or psychology. In my opinion, the existence of those disciplines only shows how incredibly adaptative our brains can be, and adaptation is most certainly a very important caracteristic for survival.

[13otany13ay]

To put it in simpler words: Science discribes what is, while we have to decide what ought to be, on the basis of our knowledge of what is and thus what is possible and what is not possible to be.

Genetic predispositions inform us about what is, not about what we ought, might, should or want to make out of it.

Dont just replace a superstitious devine tyrany with "what nature wants".

Is that, what you are getting at here?

[conferencereport]

This is great Corey. Assuming what you say is correct then one of the defining acts of modern human civilisation is demonstrably non-genetic in origin. I love it.

[fruitsofnews]

Ant... you're for once either speaking out of your ass or from a myopic eurocentric perspective from 2:50 onwards because... are you actually saying literacy precludes tribalism??? That is utter nonsense! If it does preclude a political form of collective coherence at the level of the ethnos... because THAT is what you're saying, then: what has it done with regards to state-bound nationalism? I am talking authoritarianism in Adornos sense right now. Your political philosophy isn't very solid bro

[fruitsofnews]

By the way I see this whole conversation similar to the way you frame it... i call this the multiple "-ure" debate. CULTURE/STRUCTURE/NATURE. And as culturally socially and structurally determined beings... everytime anyone tries to elaborate on how nature and our cultural evolution are correlated... it becomes very clear, that the realm of limitless guesstimation opens up... and I fear you're doing just the same here...

[Professoranton]

@fruitsofnews Do you suggest that there is no meaningful distinction between natural evolution by genetic selection and culture changes brought about by the acts by individuals, sometimes by people who in fact have no offspring?

[fruitsofnews]

Not at all. I am listening and pondering. Weren't you the one claiming the non-link between the -according to your description above- exclusively cultural invention of literacy and our genetic dispositions. You express the possibility of serendipitous creativity that is sort of external and independent from our genetic programming. Interesting hypothesis. My problem is this: "We are both: a product of Nature and Culture." Now what I have issues with is when you interpret the act of literacy

[fruitsofnews]

and the intellectual traditions deferring from that as some sort of holy grail that liberates man and mankind from vile primordial instinctive impulses which you kinda sum up with the word "tribalism". My point is this: Nationalism, Patriotism, Tribalism, Parochialism, Provincialism have been in many ways exacerbated and amplified in their past and current horrendous sociopolitical effects through the methodical application of literacy: Science!

[fruitsofnews]

I am arguing that literacy isn't a remedy to antisocial fruits of civilisation. You seem to imply that. If that is so then you in my view fell -in this video at least- into the trap of those who have a rather lopsided and onesided... lol... parochial (regardless whether the vantage point is cartesian or confucian) understanding of civilisation. Allow me to put it this way:

[fruitsofnews]

Social evil is a moving target. It exists even within the literacy-driven-civilisation you uphold here as the remedy to barbarism. I am pinpoiting the inherently dialectic nature of the fruits of enlightenment. hence adorno. I wasn't trying to show off Ant... don't worry. I do not engage into these comments with you to pose and front. I actually enjoy this very much.

[Professoranton]

@fruitsofnews What do you think is the best form of defense against tribalism? Literacy is admittedly aligned with nationalism, but do you think science is possible without literacy?  Not sure what the reference to Adorno is meant to demonstrate?

[TheOuroborosWyrm]

It's funny I was just thinking of Habermas when I saw your last video; which annoyed the hell out me. The problem of intersubjectivity leading to subjects without objects. Excellent video nonetheless, spoken as only a semiotician could.

[fruitsofnews]

please explain "leading to subjects without objects". There is no such distinction in habermas' philosophy from my understanding. Isn't it rather the denial of the subject through rationalization that causes the trouble?

[TheOuroborosWyrm]

That's the problem I'm talking about. I'm arguing from a point of view that is fairly critical of Habermas and critical theory in general. The critique is from a guy named is Kompridis, one of Habermas' students I think. My knowledge is limited, as my interests in the Frankfurt School is simply in how it informed the post-positivists; of which, in my vulgar way, I am one. Sorry for the confusion, I'm new to this and the limited character space is daunting.

[alowlyapprentice]

The word "predisposition" was used within the context of a particular action. But not literacy. But I see your point.

When it comes to literacy I would hazard to guess that the combination of inherited neurological traits for vision and sound in combination lead to a socially mitigated propensity to connect the two in order to provide order to our understanding of the world and facilitate communication. I would think it is evolutionarily advantageous. Two traits expressed as a social meme.

[alowlyapprentice]

I saw ConferenceReports video before both of yours. I love your videos.

[alowlyapprentice]

Oy, I did not express myself properly in my first comment. I left some things out with respect to the introduction of sound. My thoughts are more complex than stated. I just can't write anymore at this time. Oy!