Why is innatism socially unacceptable with respect to the knowledge of language?

Abstract

Increasingly from the nineties, studies of animal and human
cognition are based on an architecture of minds composed of
multiple modules, genetically determined, and designed for
certain specific cognitive tasks. Noam Chomsky’s work was
pioneer in adopting this kind of outlook in studies about human
language capacity. In spite of abundant evidence and careful
argumentation, innatist and modularist theories of cognition
in animals and humans remain undisclosed and locked in the
accademic universe. Here I will show a few examples of studies
of animal behavior that follow the logic of principles and
parameters. I will also comment on modules of human cognition
that are being fruitfully studied and well understood. What
causes the social encapsulation of this sort of information is
the question left for debate.