The subjects covered in this blog include Slavoj Žižek, IQ tests, Chomsky, Tony Blair, Baudrillard, global warming, sociobiology, Islam, Islamism, Marx, Foucault, National/International Socialism, economics, the Frankfurt School, philosophy, anti-racism, etc... I've had articles published in The Conservative Online, American Thinker, Philosophy Now, Intellectual Conservative, Human Events, Faith Freedom, Brenner Brief (Broadside News), New English Review, etc... (Paul Austin Murphy's Philosophy can be found here

This blog used to be called EDL Extra. I was a supporter of the EDL until 2012. This blog has retained the old web address.


Wednesday, 5 June 2013

Helena Cronin on the Biology/Socialisation Dichotomy

Helena Cronin, the English philosopher, makes the vital and important point that "socialisation" (or "learning") or biology is simply a false dichotomy. Socialisation is simply the result of biology or genes – at least to a large extent.

We can be socialised (or learn) precisely because of our biology (or our genes). We couldn’t be socialised if we had the wrong biology or genes. The biology is necessary. In fact the biology (or genes) makes us social and allows us learn. In Cronin’s terms, we need these "evolved propensities" in order to be social and in order to learn. Put simply, 

"socialisation, or any other learning, is not an alternative to biology". 

In fact it's even starker than that. Cronin says that 

"no individual, of any species, can learn anything without underlying adaptations for learning". 

We require our "innate capacities". After all, we all know about Chomsky’s "language faculty" and other givens or innate aspects of the mind and brain. Socialisation and learning are the same. 

All this, then, is a result of our "priming" by "natural selection". In a sense it's our biology we need to thank for our social nature and our capacity to learn; not... well, society itself (or not society alone). 

The result of all this is that "different species are differently primed". Not only that: "so too are males and females" of our species. That is, the biology and genetics of socialisation and learning must be different for males and females. 

No wonder politicos and left-wing feminists don’t like Cronin’s ‘sociobiological’ or "reductionist" arguments – their ideologies and political values won't not allow them to do so. The truth, for them, is simply too complex and not black and white enough to further their political ends or causes. That’s why Cronin, E.O. Wilson, Dawkins and others suffer the wrath of these Trotskyist/Leftist politicos who dabble in the 'critique' of science.

No comments:

Post a Comment