Monkey Business Everything has an origin, even us humans, but how, when, and where did we evolve?
Steven Pinker’s Revenge of the Nerds contains two parts that. In the first, he identifies and examines the four traits that aid the evolution of human intelligence; this builds a background on the subject at hand. Then, the second, goes on to discuss the evolution of our mind and culture concurrently developing, thus, the standard timetable is inaccurate. Although Pinker does employ the elements of argument to defend his claim(s), sometimes efficiently, sometimes incompetently, his structure is faulty and unclear, so his ideas were not presented in the best way. The article starts off strong with Pinker’s first point, that “our ancestors had four traits that made it especially easy and worth their while to evolve better powers of casual reasoning” (191), being thoroughly introduced and discussed. Pinker maintains that our …show more content…
To the author, human evolution is more than the standard predictions and measurements. He believes that we, the modern humans, have gone through a lot of history to develop ourselves, not only just our physique, but also our intelligence. Though he does bring up an eye opening view, he creates a confusing piece due to how it is structured and the absence of adequate evidence. The structure, for one, almost advertises the first portion as the main argument, so when the readers arrive to the second, they have to release all the information absorbed in order to comprehend the true meaning of the chapter. Also, because of the insufficient amount of evidence, Pinker’s argument is weak and readers will question his credibility. All in all, Steven Pinker could have had a well written chapter that would have expanded many people’s views on human evolution if he had kept the diligent use of the elements of argument, like in the first section, to support his main
Steven Pinker’s Revenge of the Nerds contains two parts that. In the first, he identifies and examines the four traits that aid the evolution of human intelligence; this builds a background on the subject at hand. Then, the second, goes on to discuss the evolution of our mind and culture concurrently developing, thus, the standard timetable is inaccurate. Although Pinker does employ the elements of argument to defend his claim(s), sometimes efficiently, sometimes incompetently, his structure is faulty and unclear, so his ideas were not presented in the best way. The article starts off strong with Pinker’s first point, that “our ancestors had four traits that made it especially easy and worth their while to evolve better powers of casual reasoning” (191), being thoroughly introduced and discussed. Pinker maintains that our …show more content…
To the author, human evolution is more than the standard predictions and measurements. He believes that we, the modern humans, have gone through a lot of history to develop ourselves, not only just our physique, but also our intelligence. Though he does bring up an eye opening view, he creates a confusing piece due to how it is structured and the absence of adequate evidence. The structure, for one, almost advertises the first portion as the main argument, so when the readers arrive to the second, they have to release all the information absorbed in order to comprehend the true meaning of the chapter. Also, because of the insufficient amount of evidence, Pinker’s argument is weak and readers will question his credibility. All in all, Steven Pinker could have had a well written chapter that would have expanded many people’s views on human evolution if he had kept the diligent use of the elements of argument, like in the first section, to support his main