On the topic of neuroscience's refutation of "The Blank Slate" hypothesis, I was most struck by Pinker's discussion of the correlation of coefficients amongst the gray matter of two random people, fraternal twins, and "identical" twins. His example of the Trinidadian Jewish brother and Catholic Nazi brother, who were separated at birth, who "met each other in the lab in their 40s, both walked in wearing identical navy blue shirts with epaulets. Both of them kept rubber bands around their wrist. Both of them, it turned out on questioning, liked to dip buttered toast in coffee, etc.," was especially striking to me.
I am an identical twin myself, though I was raised with my brother. I grew up without any other sibling relationship, so its difficult for me to even comprehend a typical sibling relationship. But Pinker's example seriously questioned my identity as an identical twin - what for me is very much my reality.
In my reality, I have grown more and more separate from my brother (this is a purely objective and not scientific observation, unlike Pinker's). Yet Pinker indirectly questions how I came about to differ from my brother - because I was raised very closely with my brother, have I changed so that I would be different from my brother. My brother's and my differences run deep: I am an English/Cultural Studies major; my brother, a Biology major. My brother is heterosexual; I identify as bisexual. Heck, I live on West Bank, and my brother lives on East Bank. From any standpoint, my twin and I seem different. I have simply assumed that the differences between my brother and I were simply personality differences (such differences that would exist among any two people), and did not have roots in biology - or in perhaps a psycho-biological response to being raised together.
But are our differences the result of us living together? Pinker's example might say that if my brother and I had grown up apart from one another, perhaps even without the knowledge that the other existed, that we could possibly be far more alike than one would observe now. My stake in the situation is the basis of my identity: is my personality based off "non-twin" factors, or is it free will (insert argument that no one, twin or not, has free will). Like any interpellated individual, I would like to think that my identity, personality, etc. is based off my own choices, but I am left unaware if "me" is more of a "non-twin brother" or not.
This mirrors what we call the "science wars." Like psychology, it deals with grouping philosophy and the science of consciousness together: is there a quantifiable, tangible chemical creating this difference (perhaps even in sexuality, personality traits, and intellectual pursuits, etc.), or is it simply (or a combination of) a difference of consciousness/psychology that exists outside the genes my brother and I share? Is there a fitness-enhancing, evolutionary response happening here? Despite endless personal consequences if Pinker is correct, the argument that (nearly) identical genes code for such a significantly similar human (in Pinker's example, down to choice of shirt color, or how to eat toast) questions how reality is constituted by our relationships, for all individuals.
Eric Best
It's interesting that you have some first hand knowledge of this, being that you're a twin. And you raise some good points about how Pinker's article relates to what you've experienced as a twin. What I found most interesting was where you asked "Because I was raised closely with my brother, have I changed so that I would be different from him?" This is a really good question, and really makes me wonder whether or not twins do end up with more differences if they know each other while growing up. You could make an argument that this is the case as most people attempt to define themselves as an individual, and people don't usually want to just be the same as someone else. So it could be argued that since twins start out so similar in appearance and what not, that they'll drift apart in terms of behavior, because they want to individualize themselves and not be thought of as a collective like "The Johnson Twins". I don't know if this is the case, but you raised some interesting points and they made me wonder, so good job.
ReplyDelete