Pinker attributes differences in political opinion to conflicting perceptions of human nature. He claims that arguing on the basis of morality alone will rarely, if ever, bring either party any closer to a resolution. Finding common ground within a controversial debate requires recognizing the relationship between our inherent nature and the political ideals we uphold. Scientific research shows that individuals with certain temperaments often tend to share similar opinions. This discovery is the basis of Pinker’s philosophy that political attitudes must be partially genetic. The fundamental principle underlying almost all political opinions is how an individual perceives human potential. In this section, Pinker addresses the alternate views
…show more content…
The tendency to blame human violence on American culture is not uncommon. One of Pinker’s most convincing arguments is why this is not necessarily the case. He points out that violent behavior is not exclusive to the United States. Violence exists in societies around the world, and often in greater severity. Intellectuals who accuse the media of inspiring a culture of masculinity must recognize that a history of violence was prevalent prior to the revolution of mass media. The same goes for the assumption that the availability of guns increases violence. Many societies document incredibly high rates of violence before the invention of these weapons. These potential suspects may play a part in violent behavior, but Pinker insists they are trivial in comparison to the role of …show more content…
Hobbes attributes human violence to the evolution of competition, diffidence, and honor. The theory is that competition channels tools into weapons, and diffidence then channels those weapons into an arms race. Alliances formed in response to fear and distrust have a long history of escalating warfare. Each party is eager to make the first strike in order to intimidate the opponents. By removing the incentive to fight, the law of retaliation is able to deter violent behavior to some extent. Society upholds that the failure to abide by these rules is reason for punishment. This is especially true of infringements upon an individual’s family or group members. In this case, the individual may seek revenge as an act of honor. This raises an important question within our criminal justice system. Is acting out of retribution or self-defense an exception to the rule? Pinker also discusses the relationship between violence among African-American males and the war on cocaine. The hypothesis is that their violent behavior is a display of honor when the supply cannot meet the demand. Would the legalization of drugs and the activities they encompass reduce violence? The controversy surrounding the deterrence of violence demands careful
The tendency to blame human violence on American culture is not uncommon. One of Pinker’s most convincing arguments is why this is not necessarily the case. He points out that violent behavior is not exclusive to the United States. Violence exists in societies around the world, and often in greater severity. Intellectuals who accuse the media of inspiring a culture of masculinity must recognize that a history of violence was prevalent prior to the revolution of mass media. The same goes for the assumption that the availability of guns increases violence. Many societies document incredibly high rates of violence before the invention of these weapons. These potential suspects may play a part in violent behavior, but Pinker insists they are trivial in comparison to the role of …show more content…
Hobbes attributes human violence to the evolution of competition, diffidence, and honor. The theory is that competition channels tools into weapons, and diffidence then channels those weapons into an arms race. Alliances formed in response to fear and distrust have a long history of escalating warfare. Each party is eager to make the first strike in order to intimidate the opponents. By removing the incentive to fight, the law of retaliation is able to deter violent behavior to some extent. Society upholds that the failure to abide by these rules is reason for punishment. This is especially true of infringements upon an individual’s family or group members. In this case, the individual may seek revenge as an act of honor. This raises an important question within our criminal justice system. Is acting out of retribution or self-defense an exception to the rule? Pinker also discusses the relationship between violence among African-American males and the war on cocaine. The hypothesis is that their violent behavior is a display of honor when the supply cannot meet the demand. Would the legalization of drugs and the activities they encompass reduce violence? The controversy surrounding the deterrence of violence demands careful