In his article “Revenge of the Nerds”, Steven Pinkler’s main argument is that human ancestors’ particular habits made them more apt to evolve causal reasoning. He argues this through four reasons.
First, that primates are visual animals. “In monkeys such as the rhesus macaque, half of the brain is dedicated to sight” (Pinkler 191). Furthermore, he also references the early development of stereoscopic perception and color vision, which allowed them to amplify their diet. These characteristics serve as warrants because they allowed primates to see the world in terms of objects that move through space. Furthermore, it led towards the notion of a third dimension of depth that animals that look at the ground more, simply do not have. This allows for the conceptualization of change with or without movement, one of the most important aspects of determining the cause of something.
The second reason that Pinkler gives is that human ancestors lived in groups, unlike most mammals. This means that they can hide and defend themselves more effectively against predators and other dangers. This is important for causal reasoning because of the cognitive characteristics of language. First, “information is the one commodity that can be given away and kept at the same time” (Pinkler 192), giving knowledge great value. Furthermore, it leads towards shrewd cognitive development because they also have to survive their own social group, often meaning deceiving and monitoring others. In this sense, it leads to constant cognitive enhancement, as one needs to always be better than the others, who are also competing to think better than you do.
Pinkler’s third reason is that the hands of primates are especially suited to develop intelligence, especially because of the precision that they provide. Even though he just presents hands as a reason, he also correlates it to people walking upright, which would seem to have more suitable evidence. For example, he states that “Bipedal walking is a biomechanically efficient way to retool a tree-hanging body to cover distance on the flat ground” (Pinkler 194). He also seems to think that this happened because it led to hominids catching less sun, which would seem to be an inverse argument.
Finally, Pinkler believes that hunting was the other main reason that humans developed causal reasoning. The main evidence is that it allowed humans to change their diet, integrating concentrated nutrients, which can better develop brain tissue. Pinkler also argues that meat was “a major currency of our social life” (Pinkler 196), as the difficulty that hunting poses makes its product of great value. Furthermore, it can serve as an investment for the future, or in exchange for something now, including sexual satisfaction.
Starting on page 193 he discusses the theory of a cognitive arms race. This is not precisely an acknowledgement of a counterargument, because it does not contradict nor substantially modify his argument. He presents this component that fits in with his theory, yet says that it simply “was not enough to launch human intelligence” (Pinkler 193). Therefore, he does not completely dismiss or contradict it; he merely responds to it saying that this was probably not the only or main reason for his main claim. On page 195 he also somewhat acknowledges the counterargument that usually men were the ones that hunted, while women took care of the home. He responds by saying that women developed their social intelligence instead.
Works Cited
Pinkler, Steven. “Revenge of the Nerds.” How the Mind Works. NY: W.W. Norton and Company, 2009. 191-205.
