Brooks on Psychology

David Brooks had a pretty cool article discussing the drawbacks of evolutionary psychology in Friday's NY Times. In it he says:

"But individuals aren’t formed before they enter society. Individualsare created by social interaction. Our identities are formed by the particular rhythms of maternal attunement, by the shared webs of ideas, symbols and actions that vibrate through us second by second. Shopping isn’t merely a way to broadcast permanent, inborn traits. For some people, it’s also an activity of trying things on in the never-ending process of creating and discovering who they are.'

My initial reaction to that paragraph was praise for the fantastic insight. Although, within a few minutes, the beauty of the language had worn off a bit and I was left with the sort of - well, no shit - feeling.

All these arguments tend to group themselves into neat little categories. Nature vs. nurture, good vs. bad, rational vs. emotional, when most of our world is far too complex and illogical to paint with such broad strokes. I mean really, it's in our nature to believe we are more of a product of nurture. It's our emotions that cause us to ascribe rationality to subconscious thought processes. It can be the bad in us that causes us to judge others for things we deem bad. We're all shades of gray swimming through overwhelming inputs seeking efficiency of story, often at the sacrifice of objective reality.

No real point here, but just got me thinking that a little balance, a little moderation of thought and humility could probably do us all some good.

Now time for you to say, "Well, no shit."