How do our brains represent the world around us? How accurate are these mental representations?
In The Blank Slate, Steven Pinker argues that the mainstream view of human nature is false. Then, he seeks to replace it by showing that science establishes an alternative conception of human nature. The first component of the scientific view of human nature is accurate mental representations.
Read more to understand why Pinker believes our brains have evolved to use categories, languages, and images to accurately represent the world.
Mental Representation #1: Categories
The first mental representation Pinker discusses is categories. He points out that our brains accurately sort things into different categories that help us reason about the world. For instance, your brain might categorize “large green things with scales and sharp teeth that swim underwater” as alligators, allowing you to identify alligators when you see them. Then, because you know that alligators are dangerous, this categorization allows you to respond appropriately when you see an alligator—whether that means running away or choosing not to engage.
(Shortform note: Social scientists note that we also categorize people by forming various social categories to which they belong. Although this helps children understand the world around them by, for instance, sorting individuals into different races, genders, and socioeconomic groups, it can also lead to harmful prejudices. For example, children might subconsciously form problematic racial biases as they learn to categorize people on racial grounds.)
Mental Representation #2: Language
In addition, Pinker writes that our brains have the capacity for language that allows us to accurately represent the world. Unlike postmodernists, who allege that language is merely a consistent system with no connection to the actual world, Pinker argues that we intuitively grasp the connection between our words and our world. For example, we often lament situations in which we can’t find the words to describe our experiences, but this presupposes that we can use language to accurately represent our experiences.
(Shortform note: Most philosophers of language agree with Pinker’s claim that language allows us to represent the world. According to these philosophers, language allows us to express propositions—meaningful ideas about the world that can either be true or false. For this reason, speakers of two different languages can still express the same proposition. For instance, an English speaker saying “snow is white” and a German speaker saying “Schnee ist weiss” express the same proposition.)
Mental Representation #3: Images
Finally, Pinker argues that we use images to faithfully capture the world. These images can be physical, like photographs, or mental representations, like when you imagine an apple. Once again, he notes that, according to postmodernists, images have no connection to the external world; postmodernist theory holds that images are equivalent to reality, rather than representative of reality. But Pinker notes that this thesis contradicts our practice of critiquing images as unrealistic—for example, we might critique a painting of a celebrity if it doesn’t resemble them. Contrary to the postmodernist view, this practice presupposes that images can accurately resemble the world.
(Shortform note: In The Master and His Emissary, Iain McGilchrist joins Pinker in critiquing postmodernism, adding that the postmodernist view of images harms our ability to appreciate art. According to McGilchrist, postmodernists began to value “art for art’s sake” instead of recognizing that art is supposed to reflect some feature of reality. In turn, postmodernist artists often preferred abstract works that lack meaning.)
