Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress | Steven Pinker

Is the world really falling apart? Is the ideal of progress obsolete? In this elegant assessment of the human condition in the third millennium, cognitive scientist and public intellectual Steven Pinker urges us to step back from the gory headlines and prophecies of doom, which play to our psychological biases. Instead, follow the data: In seventy-five jaw-dropping graphs, Pinker shows that life, health, prosperity, safety, peace, knowledge, and happiness are on the rise, not just in the West, but worldwide. This progress is not the result of some cosmic force. It is a gift of the Enlightenment: the conviction that reason and science can enhance human flourishing.
Far from being a naïve hope, the Enlightenment, we now know, has worked. But more than ever, it needs a vigorous defense. The Enlightenment project swims against currents of human nature - tribalism, authoritarianism, demonization, magical thinking - which demagogues are all too willing to exploit. Many commentators, committed to political, religious, or romantic ideologies, fight a rearguard action against it. The result is a corrosive fatalism and a willingness to wreck the precious institutions of liberal democracy and global cooperation.
With intellectual depth and literary flair, Enlightenment Now makes the case for reason, science, and humanism: the ideals we need to confront our problems and continue our progress.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

17:53 Life 20:30 Health 22:57 Wealth 28:02 Peace 30:04 Freedom & Rights 33:46 Crime 38:28 Knowledge 40:16 Quality of life 43:44 The Environment

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

When an unconsidered person is questioned on their opinion, they frantically reach around their magazine shelf brain for any reason they can possibly use in the heat of the moment, but when Steven Pinker is questioned on his opinion, he calmly climbs up the ladder in his extensive library brain and pulls out the relevant encyclopaedia. The man is on another level.

[@ConnecttoSoul]

Thank you for your personal continued understanding, enthusiasm together with guidance to guide my trip to turning into more consciously watchful and as a consequence spiritually connected.

[@SuperHuia]

re Pinkers views; no one can agree on what defines 'race' in humans. Most geneticists argue race is meaningless. So how can IQ scores be compared to race categories which are either arbitrary or self defined? Its irrational to do so.

[@squamish4244]

Red Pillers, anti-PCers and incels want to do that, and so do intellectuals who like to stir the pot. Or the former misrepresent the latter in videos with titles like "CRUSHES" or "SMACKS DOWN".

[@TheVaayuputra]

Great data points and thanks for bringing it up. The complete research and analysis is based on only 200 - 300 years. If it can be expanded to few thousand years ( especially older than 2000 or 3000 years), conclusions to Inventions, Industrial revolution, Health, Prosperity etc.. can be more substantial.

[@Andrey-il8rh]

Do you realize the scope that you demanding? I don't think anyone could analyze such broad peroid adequately.

[@heyandy889]

inspiring

[@billallen3696]

How about "a relic of the past?" One of my favorites.

[@moldenhaver]

Nevertheless despite his deep anti-catholic bias I strongly recommend his books as great compendium of data about wonderful progress

[@Meshwork123]

Nice presentation, but he does, understandably, look exhausted.

[@zauberlu]

reason, a beautiful process through which I transform my wishes into your needs and our priority. leactures, long brainwashing sessions that if dont kill you make you smarter, endoctrinated and a better western society warrior. Althoug there are facts, good points and some of my favourite traits when it comes to people I like to talk to regarding the speaker, and despite rhe fact I resort to this ‘’theory‘’ when harrassed by religious relatives for instance, I cant help seeing my own bias spreading like cancer when I agree or try to agree with all of this, speacialy some of the messages that ends up passing through within these ‘’facts‘’.

[@americanojoel]

This is good stuff, but I would be more convinced if Pinker would have spoken to what it the affect of homogenizing livestock and crops will have once the super viruses, diseases and pests evolve to get past the artificial sustainability of our mega-crops. it would have been interesting to see a graph of the diversity of species of flora and fauna of the earth, and what the reduction of diversity means for our ecology, and long term ability to feed the growing nations of people and livestock. It can't be good that we're headed towards another massive extinction of species, but he left that part out. Too bad, because that is what I am primarily concerned about. That and the development of the strength of the bacterias and viruses that are constantly evolving to overcome the protections we develop against them. See a good recent discussion on this issue here (where science used to lengthen life is pitted against the current mass extinction we are sliding into: kzbin.info/www/bejne/n3LQYX5-nKuqiq8

[@josephhoward9163]

i like sp,but i dont know that the reason\instinct debate has ever been settled.

[@daignat]

really???? the environment is better now??????? Deforestation declined???????????? I sgtrongly (and literally) doubt it!!!! Where did you get your data???????

[@moldenhaver]

The greatest achievement of enlightenment was reintroducing modern state as a mass terror and murder as it was during roman times (this is by the way what he shows in his book better Angels) And use of scientific means to institute this terror . Scientific method rational thinking use od data for arguments were product of medieval church! Nevertheless despite his deep anti-catholic bias I strongly recommend his books as great compendium of data about wonderful progress

[@AgeofCraccadilliaassent]

Republics not democracy

[@davidwilkie9551]

It's accurate to be accurate. Good and bad, who knows?, without accurate research.

[@2spooky4me35]

The fact that physical violence has gone down doesn't mean that people are less violent, they've just turned their violence inward in their own societies. We have gotten more civilized but human conflict will never go away.

[@nefaristo]

35:50 domestic violence doesn't equate to "violence against girlfriends and wives". Somebody as careful with words as Pinker should remember that encompasses violence against children and men. I guess violence against children wasn't recorded in the past while violence against men is still disregarded by media and even not recorded by statistics in various countries (!); but then I don't think he should speak about "domestic violence" in general.

Brilliant information, but please stop the tongue tsking, smacking sounds, Prof. Thanks (PS you may need a speech therapist to help you)

[@chris934]

Rusty Writer I enjoyed the talk. . But yeah you’re right. It was distracting/annoying

[@AgeofCraccadilliaassent]

Why is the US not the happiest I thought the capitalist republic was the best system devised

[@robrophside3691]

America is not the only capitalist republic.

[@charlesrump5771]

Technology, the house of cards in which we all live, can easily fall in the event of an EMP.

[@jameswhyard2858]

He plots "England", should be United Kingdom since the Act of Union?

[@Jeff-tv8qc]

response: kzbin.info/www/bejne/epTLaIeCjZx7fck

[@zonsb]

Pinker champions democracy. Democracy is tyranny of the majority. Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for dinner. I'm a voluntaryist/anarchist. Meaning, all human interactions should be voluntary. Underpinning premise of freedom of association is each individual's right to decline to associate with anyone they choose. If I did as government types do and forced strangers to give me money, would you consider me a criminal? If government services were wanted by the market they wouldn't be provided on a compulsory basis. Can anybody delegate an authority they don't have? Was anybody born with innate authority over anybody else? Then how did authority nobody had get delegated to those who call themselves government?

[@brandonjanssen1981]

The constitution.....move out of this country or argue for an amendment but most of us love it here

[@Ben.....]

Pinker's conception of the Enlightenment, based in reason and science, seems to be incomplete. To bring forward information regarding human advancement and ex post facto use it as proof for the Enlightenment's value is weak; at least without discussing the philosophical relationships in detail.

[@woooweee]

He's a gen1 boomer in mouse utopia... "everything is fine!"

[@morningstomper123]

The Enlightenment isn't a "conception" of Stevens, it's simply the period of history in which the scientific method was developed and popularized and the stupidity of faith was illuminated and replaced with logic; there is nothing 'incomplete' about that. You should look up what 'ex post facto' actually means, because you clearly have no idea. You're probably trying to accuse Steven of making a 'post hoc ergo propter hoc' argument, which is ridiculous.

[@flyingphoenix113]

Well, the "enlightenment" isn't a uniform entity. For instance, Marquis de Sade is technically an enlightenment thinker, but he advocated for unrestrained sexual decadence, the complete rejection of reason, and violent anarchism. But, noticeably, Pinker doesn't devote any time to de Sade. When Pinker, Dr. Peterson, Shapiro, Harris, et al. talk about "the enlightenment," they are talking about a specific subset of philosophers that conform to a specific narrative. You can even see this exercise of deliberate cherry-picking at the beginning of Pinker's presentation. Is this a bad thing? No, not at all. The reason these specific philosophers, economists, and ethicists are still discussed is because their ideas were the most important to the progress and shaping of modern society as we see it today. But, it is INCREDIBLY disingenuous to say that "it's simply the period of history in which the scientific method was developed and popularised and the stupidity of faith was illuminated and replaced with logic." Hume, one of the very philosophers Pinker references, said that "reason is, and ought only be the slave of the passions." The functional premise of Lockean rights is *contingent* on belief in the existence of the Abrahamic God, and the whole reason the enlightenment and subsequent scientific revolution were even allowed to happen (and not quashed by the Catholic church) was because of the Protestant reformation that preceded it. But, I'm sure I'm just another plebeian to whom you will condescend by saying "clearly, you have no idea."

[@johannhamann681]

morningstomper123 Scientific revolution preceded "enlightenment" by 200 years.

[@moldenhaver]

I wonder if Pinker is conscious of his anti catholic bias and is willfully omitting history Or ignorant to facts that Christianity and Roman catholic church in particular was uniquely responsible for idea of continuous progress in science For development of Universities as centers for learning and knowledge accumulation , for creating scientific method, rational thinking, use of mathematics to verify science, placing medicine as a science within university system, development of hospitals orphanages and and social work and so on.

[@yamerojones]

Pinker gets credit for the "Blank Slate" where he addressed issues which were logically obvious, but few of his brethren dared to say, and that hasn't changed much which is a clue he now ignores when he confuses his political and ideological opinions with science. I've seen Sam Harris fall to this one as well, the idea that their analysis is a new kind of philosophy for finding the truth when its hardly so. Simply look at how he contradicted himself in this very speech, he can't dare address the issue of racial differences, even when evolution makes his position untenable, he requires creationism to be true for his utopian vision to be anything more than a reckless experiment. You can tell he and his audience flatter themselves hinting that one side is thinking based on scientific reasoning. Yet the number of lefties who don't know what the AR in AR15 actually stands for while speaking stridently on the issue after every shooting never surprises me. I'm sure many of his audience cheered the Paris Accords, because "science", when it was revealed it wasn't actually based on any they didn't reconsider why they were so willing to be blindly led to spend hundreds of billions on faith. They didn't ask questions when the numbers were mysteriously "revised" to fit the previous agenda so they could try again. This is why the alt right is rising btw, they are often right because they can take that extra step the Pinkers of the world dare not tread. And this naive view of progress is built on an ever more fragile system, I'm sure it was nice for a while before Rome fell. The people are not violent because they are anesthetized. California is prime example, endless immigration, endless spending on the faith that the poor will pay for the yuppies retirements when in reality the pension system of that state is on course to disaster, never mind the rest. Democracy is not an unquestionable good so using it as a benchmark is a mistake. As the vote is expanded to every group, now to even illegals in many state as is their clear intention, the system is twisted more and more by the takers who have no investment in the system, you see this in Europe as well, they are happy to take your money, but not your values. A quick kick from a severe calamity whether economic, cultural or environmental will reveal the cracks in the system which were suppressed by prosperity, its an arrogant view to be certain of the future simply based on a few selective metrics which radically over simplify the changes in society. Cato itself has proven this idea of scientific rationalism bunk, I watched you tweet out a twisted study minimizing radical Islamic terrorism by simply classifying everything under the sun as terrorism while shamelessly excluding 9/11 from the data set, counting incidents not deaths, the standard fake news apologist propaganda you see after every incident claiming white nationalists are responsible for more terrorism in the US than Muslims. But name me one white nationalist Orlando massacre in recent memory, never mind the rest, you can't, it should be obvious, but this is what Cato itself pushed because certain measures are required to protect the faith and by faith I don't mean Islam.

[@Betcsbirds]

Rant much?

[@johannhamann681]

Pinker is what Nietzsche called "last man". watch: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gYmZY5ukr9qWeqc

[@mhmeekk3003]

There's only two logical flaws in the entire presentation. The first, of course, is the backhanded and short-sighted dismissals of religion. Does Pinker have any comprehension regarding how solidly the Enlightenment values are derivative of Judeo-Christian culture? Or how enormously the advances of the Enlightenment have been brought by religious, not secular, men and women? The second is "liberal" democracies being the harbringer of these values. They are not liberal. Enormous periods of the Enlightnement in the graphs shown were periods of conservative government by and under conservative individuals. Pinker has a good grasp of the data, but tends to ideologically interpret it.

[@knightmare1442]

"the Enlightenment values are derivative of Judeo-Christian culture" Are you a troll? Enlightnment values are the complete opposite of christian values and the enlightenment startet a fight against the opression by religion. All the human rights we now have (in most western countries) have been fought for by people of the Enlightenment against Christianity. "religious, not secular" Please check the meaning of secular, thanks...

[@mhmeekk3003]

"Enlightnment values are the complete opposite of christian values" That is probably one of the most absurd things I've ever read. It's obvious you haven't seen a history book in a few decades. Try one that mentions the fact that the separation of church and state was invented by a Christian theologian for theological purposes. When I read you write "All the human rights we now have (in most western countries) have been fought for by people of the Enlightenment against Christianity" I can only imagine the type of secular indoctrination you've been subjected to. Luckily, I'm an ancient history buff who has professionally published in the field. So I can see straight through this self-serving internet propaganda. You seem like a new atheist. Start fresh, since your ideology is going out the window.

[@brandonjanssen1981]

Which of the four pillars of enlightenment that pinker uses to describe his meaning of the word enlightenment are logically fallacious? I think you aren't agreeing with his four pillars, which is fine and open to debate. But it is a separate argument, and I think you might be the one ideologically interpreting it.

[@johannhamann681]

watch: kzbin.info/www/bejne/gYmZY5ukr9qWeqc

[@suckmyass7368]

Religion as it existed at the time of the enlightenment didn't allow room for a lot of independent thought. You're in denial if you believe otherwise.

[@mrgruust8679]

at 26:00 Pinker mocks comments about libertarian dystopia by presenting the rising spending of social spending. well, here is another take of it: why does the government see the need to increase it from nearly 0 to 22% on average? Because there is no need for it? Because Reagan, Thatcherites and the rest of the western world was against libertarianism? Give me a break. This graph actually proves the libertarian dystopia and its effects and at the same time demonstrates that it's pure BS if put to practice because it's a simplistic ideology, in that sense pretty similar to what rightwing nuts attribute to communism - and if a dictator would have put libertarianism to work, millions would have died in it, too.

[@knightmare1442]

Poor murica

[@brandonjanssen1981]

I agree with you, in that I think extreme libertarians are simplistic idiots......but i also agree with pinker and the data where 25% of GDP is where government involvement can start to make things decline.......I spend most of my time arguing against libertarians who want to argue to reduce government far below 25% of GDP but I also agree with the facts that going above it might not bring any more prosperity

[@squamish4244]

Pinker likes strawmen. Not a lot of people alive today actually believe in a "Golden Age", or that tribal societies were edenic.

[@TheLionheartCenter]

How is this strawman for his argument towards progress? It's because most people don't believe we can never achieve anything close to a "Golden Age" that he's talking about this. So many are completely entrenched with disempowerment and fear given by the mainstream media, they believe we are heading towards doomsday. He's not saying there will ever be a perfect age, because no, that will never exist...but rather we are getting BETTER rather than worse.

[@squamish4244]

But that's not what he says. He presents a quote that literally says, "In the past we lived in a state of order and harmony, until alien forces brought on decadence and degeneration. We must restore the society to its golden age." How many people today literally believe this? Do you know any?

[@knightmare1442]

I know a few and politics is made with this in the last years.

[@brandonjanssen1981]

valar they are called trumpists

[@americanojoel]

@@squamish4244 These are the "Back to the Land" people. There is a movement and it is growing.