Steven Pinker: “I Manage My Controversy Portfolio Carefully” | People I (Mostly) Admire | Episode 1

[@OmniphonProductions]

Noam Chomsky has proposed that, in the absence of a shared language, each individual would invent one because language is the means by which we organize our _own_ thoughts and contemplate abstract concepts. On one hand, I've observed two-way conversations between toddlers in which the only word I recognized was, "Yeah." On the other hand, a portion of the population has _no_ internal monologue, and they still seem to organize and convey their thoughts as well as anyone else. A such, I loved hearing Steven Pinker opine that language is pointless if it isn't _shared_ because communication of our _own_ thoughts to/with/between/among _others_ is the part that requires _more_ than conceptual imaging. P.S. I've been a Police/Fire/EMS Dispatcher for twenty-two years, and it's very easy to develop a skewed view of the world. I recently quoted several statistics on overall human well-being to a police colleague...statistics I learned from Steven Pinker. The officer argued, "I don't think I believe that." I told him, "It's not a matter of what you _believe._ It's what the data says." Unfortunately most of us get our information about the world from journalists and social media...both of which are sorely lacking in actual Journalism degrees...where revenue _depends_ on sensationalism rather than _qualified experts_ in any given field. I've found that, for most enterprises, the more one _actually understands,_ the less afraid one tends to be.

[@JoBlakeLisbon]

Pinker is a midwit. If he had even an ounce of genuine intellect he would know that the reason there aren't more deaths by homicide is simply due to much, much more advanced medical technology. In the inner cities in the US there is currently incomparably more violence than in the past - and with much more powerful weapons. There is just a corresponding level of medical care that mitigates this.

[@_sol.invictus__]

Well said.

[@OmniphonProductions]

@@_sol.invictus__ Thank you!

[@danielpaulson8838]

Just as a personal comment, I do not agree with this part; "On the other hand, a portion of the population has no internal monologue, and they still seem to organize and convey their thoughts as well as anyone else." People lacking an internal monologue tend to be followers of someone who can be their inner voice.

[@OmniphonProductions]

@@danielpaulson8838 Your comment raises some questions. 1. Are you somebody without an internal monologue who relies on others to guide you through life? 2. Have you discussed this with others for whom this is the case? 3. Can you share links to any research or interviews that inform the opinion you have put forth? 4. If the answer to any of these questions in, "No," do you simply _assume_ that that lacking an inner monologue is some kind of handicap, requiring external aid? I ask these questions because, despite reading several articles and interviews on this topic, I can't find any data (not even anecdotal evidence) that addresses the claim you have put forth.

[@Scarletpimpanel73]

I love Steven Pinkers books, one of my favourite thinkers

[@gledatelj1979]

He is a political activist . A thinker for people who don't think.

[@guitarmusic524]

​@@gledatelj1979 On what do you base this comment? Have you ever read the Better Angels of Our Nature? If so, did you check the citations? Have you ever collected and analyzed data for a thesis project? Are you published in a reputable journal? Show us the fountain of your wisdom. (Without pulling your pants down!)

[@P2Reflectschannel-hh2zl]

@@gledatelj1979 Aw ya poor thing. Not woke enough for you?

[@gledatelj1979]

@@P2Reflectschannel-hh2zl Do you understand that this Pinker is a definition of woke? As if woke is a serious word?

[@gledatelj1979]

@@guitarmusic524 I had a misfortune to read his political screed for a bit and it was intellectually insulting . To suggest that people in the past were more violent compared to today and he gives all the political system is absurd. In the past, people didn't have a mass killing technology like current army and there was no national and international land disputes as the borders were either natural or non existent except for minor private land disputes that fizzled with time. Furthermore ,the biggest conflict and dispute has become individual vs government and the latter one doesn't have any definition and hence provokes and executes mass killing at any time and place. In the past a King had a small personal army and if he fought war , it was only for his interest and his cost. Compared that to the President who wages war by conscription and extortion and never puts himself in danger. The president of today will always gravitate towards war unlike a King from the past.

[@dukeallen432]

Pinker makes me happy.

[@bradsillasen1972]

So many rich and tasty bits to ruminate on in this one. Awesome exposure to what is Pinker :)

[@kevinn1158]

Steven seems to be the quintessential Canadian. Compromise is the key to every decision. Moderation, pragmatism is so critical to moving forward in a progressive way. Thanks Steven.

[@clivesmith9377]

In Greece, We had an hour per week getting taught Logic, in 1980.

[@bellakrinkle9381]

Amazing - very un-American🙃

[@notreallydavid]

Sounds fair - your forebears invented it.

[@martinbrittain2573]

I've often thought that logical reasoning and philosophy should be compulsory secondary school subjects, and one foreign language too.

[@AL_THOMAS_777]

@@bellakrinkle9381

[@njhoepner]

Selling a rape victim to her rapist is of course part of the "perfect" law of the "perfect, moral lawgiver," it's right there in Deut 22: 28-29. Just one example of many, many that one could bring up. The only reason Christianity and Judaism (and Islam, and most other religions for that matter) can even put on a facade of morality today is because they've adopted moral improvements imposed on them from the outside, and abandoned (and still tapdance and delete and excuse their way around) most of what their "god" commanded them.

[@jonmeador8637]

One reason the Bible cannot be the source of morality is that it often gives you 2 different answers to the same question.

[@jeremyserwer2586]

Probably has lots to do with it being written 2000 yrs ago by humans, right?

[@midnightwatchman1]

maybe because life and humans are complex which I think you know already but somehow expect simple one-dimensional answers for everything. Science tells us light is both a wave and a particle which is an explicit paradox you do not blink an eye. However, morality a much more complex issue you expect simple answers, simple books, and a simple God. most of these paradoxes are resolved by context with a little effort. The violence and laws in the bible are really just a reflection of our true nature. The real issue most people have with the bible is that we want to decide what is good and evil for ourselves we do not like to be told what to do and gods are supposed to serve us not the other way around. which the bible concedes, in the first few pages. The fact that you even discuss the issue of morality is a biblical concept and worldview because for most of human history and in most civilizations morality was not even a concept anyone cared about.

[@majhee55]

Bible was written by pagans and polytheists that practiced brutality, rape culture, pedophilia, etc. Christianity is modern day polytheism

[@eprd313]

​@@midnightwatchman1what on earth are you talking about??? Morality has been addressed by all cultures, in one form or another. The confucians and Daoists would have though that the Israelites were immoral savages if they had read their book. The fact that morality is relative to the culture doesn't mean that you are right in thinking you own the truth to absolute morality or something like that. And please don't compare the "conflict" in quantum mechanics to the conflict of having to reconcile "turning the other cheek" with "hang their heads against the sun"

[@jwbjpb1338]

@@jeremyserwer2586 Yes because they just made stuff up because they wanted to control their people with scary religion.

[@jursamaj]

15:50 The richest individuals didn't get that way by being greatly concerned about things beyond profit. To expect them to suddenly turn around is … naïve at best. You *might* manage to catch one in the "I'll die soon, better polish my halo" phase, but it's unlikely.

[@fbcpraise]

I’m not really sure that’s true. Jobs and Gates weren’t striving for wealth, they wanted to change the world. Rockefeller was actually quite passionate about kerosene being the most economical way to keep people warm. Robert Woodruff of Coca-Cola gave away a fortune because he wanted to see Atlanta prosper. I’m sure you’re right about many; money is neither righteous nor evil- but we are.

[@donnydarko7624]

You're not completely wrong, McKenzie Bezos is having a difficult time actually getting rid of the money she got from the divorce because how much is in the fund actually generates on its own @@fbcpraise

[@sbaumgartner9848]

I didn't know Steven Pinker talks about religion. I find the study of the origin and comparison of languages very interesting.

[@OmniphonProductions]

I think anyone who dedicates any significant time and effort to the study of human well-being _must_ eventually study the local, regional, and global impact(s) of religion, especially if one genuinely wants to _improve_ the quality of life for as many people as possible. After all, in very broad terms, there are many things Religion does right...and many things Religion does _wrong._ If we can objectively catalog which is which, then it would go a long way to streamlining the journey to better future. Yeah? As for the origin and comparison of languages, it is _indeed_ fascinating! Evolution of Vocabulary: Caesar, Kaiser, and Czar are all derived from the same Greek root word.

[@joshscott6914]

@@OmniphonProductions "Religion" isn't even a coherent, transhistorical category.

[@willmpet]

I realized how violent the Old Testament was when I listened and watched President Bartlet talk to Jenna Jacobs on the West Wing and describe just how ridiculous the bible was though he was a Christian! I listen to that often.

[@homewall744]

The energy "market" failure is because energy has never been a free market, but has always been a "national interest" and thus full of taxes, tariffs, wars, regulations, permits, embargoes and sanctions.

[@eottoe2001]

A little off-topic: the question I'd like to ask Steven in his fewer war deaths theories is, does that number include deaths resulting from economic sanctions? Also, what does he think about population displacement and refugee disruption?

[@helgeroth1532]

Pñ

[@afterthesmash]

Great Retreat (Serbia) of October 1915: _The retreat took the remnants of the army together with the King, hundreds of thousands of civilian refugees as well as war prisoners, across some of the roughest terrains in Europe in the middle of winter, enduring harsh weather, treacherous roads, and enemy raids. Between November 1915 and January 1916, during the journey across the mountains, 77,455 soldiers and 160,000 civilians froze, starved to death, died of disease or were killed by enemies._ Serbian soldiers 77,455 dead 77,278 missing Serbian civilians 160,000 dead Habsburg POWs 47,000 dead So I'm guessing Pinker thinks that baseline level of population disruption more than 100 years ago is hard to surpass. That's just one march, from one country, in a war that spanned the world. _Estimates of the total number of deaths in the Syrian Civil War, by opposition activist groups, vary between 503,064 and about 613,407 as of March 2023._ You watched the Syrian Civil War on your cell phone. Chances of the afflicted finding refuge: high. You did not watch the Serbian Great Retreat on CNN. Nobody did. Much smaller population (circa 4.3 million). Chances of the afflicted finding refuge if you didn't survive the march: low. I doubt this calamity was much covered at all in its true horror until long after the fact. What you don't know until far too late can't hurt you. Half the point of the book was to factor out availability bias. There's a human tendency to believe we're living in end times. But it's objectively not true. What is true is that the sword hanging over us is far more deadly than ever before. So the risks are worse, but the reality is better. Risks are hypotheticals until they actually happen. I'm sure that book came out before the main event of the Ukraine crisis. The disruption in the Ukraine is horrific. But many Ukrainian refugees drove to Poland, where many found modern housing and employment, or they climbed on board modern jet aircraft and flew to Canada (which already had a large Ukrainian community). If they flew Air Canada, they suffered the small packets of peanuts and the overpriced airline pillows. The Serbian refugees trudged in winter through frigid, snow-clogged alpine mountain passes with insufficient clothing and all too soon, no food at all. Not all plights are created equal. Concerning Syria and Ukraine, one common factor is Putin trying to roll back time to the glory days of the Stalinist 1950s, and largely succeeding. Trump is also a fan of the 1950s, which he recalls fondly. He hasn't yet succeeded in rolling America back to the dark ages, but he's still trying. Trump is old, and Putin is no spring chicken, either. I personally classify both as transient flashbacks from a bygone era, but I totally understand if others chose to view them as symptoms of present malaise.

[@eottoe2001]

@@afterthesmash I started reading Doctor Zhivago and was a bit amazed at the targeting of civilians even then. There are all kinds of "non-war" disruptions to agriculture and fuel production that also kill people. In the Indian wars the way the US generals thought to end it was to cut off the food supplies which meant killing the buffaloes. The people starving to death probably weren't counted. Thank you for such a nicely answered answer though the topic wasn't nice.

[@teslashark]

Bashir Assad: "It's not my problem Idlib starves"

[@eottoe2001]

@@teslashark on a human level I don't understand it. It's like Madeline Albright not having problems with children dying in Iraq. Like all the people drowning in Mediterranean near Italy, do they count as casualties?

[@DJFAmenHeavy]

Humanity is horrifying. The bible reflects human nature.

[@AL_THOMAS_777]

Yup. "humanity" simply is b e s t i a l i t y ! Words can hide so much . . . .

[@SnakeAndTurtleQigong]

Thanks so much

[@tor5457]

One of my favorite people in the world.

[@glennmitchell9107]

How much coercion is Steven Pinker willing for the state to use in order to move forward his program of enlightened progressivism? How much of his program is voluntary and how much is mandatory?

[@markj.heinicke]

huh?

[@Marian_Rusnak]

thanks God for an honest man

[@alohaoliwa]

Insane amount of ads on this channel. Pinker is a genius

[@albertowachsman]

Use an ad blocker and you will not have to suffer the ads.

[@markofsaltburn]

I agree with you in association with Intel.

[@bakedbean37]

"Insane " For a modicum of sanity install an ad blocker. I swear I'd have to cut my internet connection without one.

[@noodlechrist4958]

KZbin has been degraded by ads

[@matthewkay1327]

19:00 the irony is not lost on the writers of the Bible.

[@trevorallen838]

Unfortunately it is on the readers. And they are a bigger issue.

[@daydays12]

The writers of the Bible had a sense of humour, mastery of irony? Just like Jane Austen eh?

[@matthewkay1327]

@daydays12 if you allow the Bible to be and not add your preconceptions, it is full of humour and irony.

[@kenashcom7580]

There are no markets without governments.

[@ALavin-en1kr]

Atheists promote reason over all else. Reason alone can have a Frankenstein vibe. We need reason and feeling in balance, not separate. Too few promote this. Religion is seen as, and it is, non-rational. Religion is a useful curb so reason doesn’t run amok and reason is a useful curb so religion doesn’t run amok. Why do so few see this? Are we doomed to be forever one-dimensional in our thinking, not being able to get off the either/or bandwagon.

[@afterthesmash]

18:02 The LEGO Bible illustrates the story of Dinah, complete with LEGO foreskins rolling around on the floor, and distressed LEGO men seeking respite from striding around by gluing themselves to the nearest horizontal or vertical surface. It's supposed to signal that your tribe has gained mastery of exceptionally sharp objects since some long-forgotten generation, _way_ before the day you were born, so don't mess with me (or us). The adult scar sends the opposite message: that you just fell off the turnip truck, and you can be duped into doing the most ridiculous damage to your own person. Possibly the ritual was invented to stop the women from complaining all the time. "Hold your tongue, woman, about that small curse, or we'll go after your foreskin, too!" Except that the female foreskin shares its development path with the male scrotum, so the presumptive equivalence was inaccurate, if at the same time entirely up to the standard of everything else they "knew" back in the era of savage Hebrew morality which many among us continue to commemorate.

[@teslashark]

The mohel era?

[@tonybanks1035]

the bible is still one of the most profound works ever delivered in this earth. As for the "savage hebrews" the biased view is just mind boggling. I could think off the top of my head of at least 10 examples of moral horrors of the very modern 20th/21th centuries that would utterly shock any ancient hebrew at any time in history. You and your culture are the last sources I'd use for a decent morality. I'd pick ancient hebrews any day of the week.

[@dannyferguson1427]

the leftist critique of Pinker isn't that things haven't gotten better because of corruption - thats a strawman. rather, the critique, properly formulated, is that while things have gotten better and better over time, there is a consistent and inescapable historical trend of things not being made as good as they could be because of corruption. somewhat related, a marxist critique might point out that the logic of capitalism means that people can only be engaged with as statistics. stats go up cuz that's how we understand people in relation to the economy/society. but does a laborer today really have any more control? the ways in which things have improved limits growth necessarily. workers can get all the rights and protections they want, they will still never have the economic democracy that could fundamentally change their relationship to production itself. really, the problem is just that Pinker is a liberal through and through. he can note and praise incremental increases in quality of life, but is incapable of imagining a world in which quality of life is not about how comfortable your leisure time is, but about having a connection to your labor and your production which brings deeper fulfillment the broader point being that change can be bigger, and should already have been. Steven Pinker is like an abolitionist who successfully abolished indentured servitude patting themselves on the back while chattel slavery is still legal. and there's not really wrong with patting yourself on the back for him, doing something good, but the way he formulates his talking points makes it seem like its enough, that we should be satisfied with the (relative) pittance we get simply because its better than before. his words are designed to inspire complacency and trust in the larger forces that move society, cuz of course they have your interests at heart, just trust them to make things better :)

[@eveastardust3747]

💯

[@ColonelFredPuntridge]

Here's something I have often wondered. PG Wodehouse's novel JOY IN THE MORNING features a character called Harold Pinker. The narrator tells us that when he was a schoolboy, Harold Pinker's classmates often called him "Stinker" or "Stinker Pinker". My question is: did anything like this ever happen to Professor Pinker? Did anyone ever call him "Stinker Pinker", and if so, who?

[@wowjef]

What an absolutely pointless schoolboy comment.

[@ColonelFredPuntridge]

@@wowjef I have been wondering about this for a very long time. More than two decades, at least.

[@tonybanks1035]

this was a profound one-dimensional analysis by one of the most profound shallow thinkers of modernity. Thanks Professor Pinker!

[@thespiritofhegel3487]

Someone had to say it.

[@thanksforbeingausefulidiot9016]

@@thespiritofhegel3487 Sorry guys, your break is over, get back on the salesfloor as we have women's pumps at 20% off today.

[@afterthesmash]

The shallow side is yours. Networks tend to scale on the square. When you go from 2 billion people to 8 billion people in roughly 100 year (a factor of four), you would expect 16× as many problems. That's basic network allometry. You would also expect 16× as many solutions. Relative to the problems people cared about solving 100 years ago, the solutions have greatly outpaced the problems. Relative to the problems people care about now, the ratio is less convincing. But how is that supposed to work? Do you have a time machine up your sleeve I don't know about? Solutions lag behind problems. Is that a hard concept to master? If you don't get that, I suppose you would find Pinker shallow: he's looking backward and finding little evidence of solutions preceding problems. What a dim bulb indeed!

[@afterthesmash]

To expand on that thought, if things were physically constructed, they might scale linearly. But I've been informed by the noisiest flock of seagulls in human history that everything that matters in 2023 is socially constructed. On social networks, things scale on the square. Another factor here is that as you go back further in history, is the great frequency of atrocities that nobody even bothered to tot up. No-one had time for pushing beads. The survival algorithm was to grab your abacus and run like hell. The first time I encountered this rank BS was in the People's Church in Toronto in the early 1980s. I believe this was the first evangelical church in Toronto to televise it's Sunday services. I believe it also ran a private school on the side. They invited prominent guests such as Hal Lindsay. I saw a few of these, because I was rooming at the time with a devout member. One of these guys stood up there with the thesis that you could that end times were near because of the great proliferation of new diseases. This is right around the time that HIV became a thing, and might have dog-whistled some devout gay bashing. Why did we have so many new diseases in the early 1980s than in 1950? I'll give you one guess and it rhymes with x-ray. Yes, the advent of advanced medical diagnostic tools caused medicine to realize that many conditions previously lumped together (and treated rather badly as a result) were actually distinct conditions, each of which needed a different therapeutic course. What we now know about all the things in the world trying to kill us has expanded 10× if not 100×. The knowing of all this was hard work that occupied generations of human kind. But I suppose you would argue that by naming these things we created these things-conjured them up out of pure language. That would put you in the Hal Lindsay boat (though I'm not sure you would make good eschatological bedfellows). If you think that we created thousands of distinct cancer diagnoses merely by naming them, then all that hard work was regress not progress. I see your point. Very sophisticated. Not shallow at all. Worthless, but not shallow. That's the important thing.

[@tonybanks1035]

@@afterthesmash Looks like I managed to get misunderstood in merely one sentence. I’ve never denied the intrinsic difficulty of problem solving in real time. I question the means by which one diagnose a problem. Given Pinker’s interpretative framework I really doubt a time machine would be of any help. He has the awareness of a goldfish when it comes to realizing what kind of metaphysical paradigm underlies every single aspect of his thought. He uses rationality and common sense like a child who’ve got an A in math and tries to lecture his classmates in English literature. He ignores he’s the product of a postmodern environment in which over access to information inflated his self-perceived knowledge. That’s the story of how one ends up reducing a deep human problem (political stability) to an engineering problem (cure diseases, preventing natural atrocities, physically surviving) His lack of awareness doubled with a poor knowledge of the human condition (he once suggested that easy access to entertainment is a step towards happiness) renders him utterly unable to appreciate the human intricacies underlying the development of moral and political philosophy in history. The sheer difficulty in translating an individual’s ideal into an ideal governance has a continuous and rich conceptual history since antiquity. It has evolved dialectically through history and cannot be bypassed in order to contextualize our current situation. A simple “bible bad, enlightment good” won’t do it. The contempt Pinker has for ancient thought prevents him from seriously studying those subjects (a very common issue in our day and age), blinding him irreversibly.

[@kmcq692]

28:48 “language is a virus”-William Burroughs via Laurie Anderson, and Hermetic Magic is the Practical Magic of Words -Thomas Moore through James Hillman’s Alchemical Psychology and other Magi. Whoohoo!

[@dimitriosfromgreece4227]

Thanks brother for the video ❤️ love from sweden Stockholm

[@davidwilkie9551]

Exceptionally entertaining, thank you.

[@LifeofHum]

Thanks, Steven!

[@vijay-1]

Insightful

[@MS-od7je]

Iterate away from the Mandelbrot and go to dust. The rules map precisely. Bayesian information cause wild disagreement. 1. What was the function of the protein that was first coded by RNA or DNA from which a selection could be made? 2. If the fewest genes that a cell can have to sustain life is around 400 but it has to have additional DNA to have reproductive function how can RNA or DNA have primacy ? 3. If a flatworm can be multiploidy and maintain function and morphology how does DNA have primacy? 4. How is it that a cockroach and rats can reproduce, after nuclear radiation,with mutations such that they become multi ploidy in order to maintain morphology and function and RNA or DNA have primacy or a selective function? 5. Why are a dog and a Tasmanian wolf or completely different genetic plants nearly identical? To what are they “converging “? 6. There can be any number of ways that a thing in nature can be the shape of a sphere but how many possible ways are there that a thing in nature can be the shape of a Mandelbrot set? Why is the brain a Mandelbrot set? How is a Mandelbrot set selected for from an infinite number of fractal patterns? 1.The Mandelbrot set is a mapping of Julia sets. 2. Mandelbrot and Julia sets gave the same equation of iteration but the Mandelbrot start point of all iteration is zero for z; whereas the Julia sets are random. 3. The coronal cross Section Of the brain is the shape of a Mandelbrot set with the outer bubbles turned inward which match the fissures and sulci of the brain. The most notable are the large side bulbs and their tendrils matching a folded inward pattern. 4. The caudal cross Section Of the brain match a 4 lobed Julia set exactly where such a Julia set would be mapped onto a Mandelbrot set on the coronal Mandelbrot brain image. 5. The Mandelbrot set and Julia sets both feature period matching which would correspond to neurons crossover pathways. Some pathways of neurons are ipsilateral and some contralateral which corresponds to ipsilateral and contralateral point correspondences in both Mandelbrot and Julius sets 6. There are an infinite number of ways in which a thing can be a circle or a sphere. But there is only one way in which anything can be shaped in the shape of a Mandelbrot set. It is very specific. It is a special and specific non random fractal pattern. There are an infinite number of fractal patterns but this is the one pattern that the brain is in the shape of.

[@willmercury]

Is this the right place for that?

[@MS-od7je]

@@willmercury the Mandelbrot is pertinent to everything

[@Bronco541]

My mathematician friend disagrees. In fact he says its just a curiosity and ideas that its somehow the key to the universe is just a pipe dream by people who dont really understand it.

[@Bronco541]

I mean your trying to tie a huge host of super comlex things together in a very simple way. I dont think it wise.

[@notreallydavid]

Nano-thing... - Organism X is polyploid. - Organism X exhibits polyploidy. ('Poly' is a better prefix than 'multi' - 'poly' keeps the word wholly Greek. All best

[@thespiritofhegel3487]

'Enlightenment itself, however, which reminds faith of the opposite aspect of its separated moments, is just as little enlightened about itself. It has a purely negative attitude to faith so far as it excludes its own content from its purity and takes that content to be the negative of itself. It therefore neither recognizes itself in this negative, in the content of faith, nor for this reason does it bring the two thoughts together, the one which it puts forward itself, and the one to which it opposes the first. Since it does not recognize that what it condemns in faith is directly its own thought, it is itself in the antithesis of the two moments, only one of which - viz. in every case the one opposed to faith - or it acknowledges, but separates the other from the first, just as faith does'. - Hegel, 'Phenomenology of Spirit', 1807.

[@thespiritofhegel3487]

@@NSOcarth ​ It is because of the complexity of their ideas. 'I adhered scrupulously to the precept of that brilliant theoretical physicist L. Boltzmann, according to whom matters of elegance ought to be left to the tailor and to the cobbler'. - Albert Einsten, Preface to 'Relativity-The Special and General Theory', 1916, Paraphrased as: If you are out to describe the truth, leave elegance to the tailor.

[@chessmaster2649]

The OT setting was bronze age. Naturally there was violence and a limited understanding of higher powers.

[@njhoepner]

All the more reason to leave it behind...no good reason to still run our lives based on bronze age rules.

[@dianahill5116]

Everyone is born atheist. Religion has to be taught. Atheism doesn't have to be taught.

[@scambammer6102]

many people would just make it up. projecting agency is a human thing.

[@daydays12]

trigonometry important for gunnery

[@sherrieludwig508]

WHY does energy production HAVE to be "scalable"? Why cannot the production of energy be local, with mixed wind, geothermal, hydro, solar, in a mix tailored to the local conditions?

[@kmcq692]

Yes! I think we need to pull back from the thinking that there is only one Utopia. As David Graeber once said, “Utopias? Sure. The more the merrier.”

[@subcitizen2012]

Scaling locally is still scaling.

[@theboombody]

@@kmcq692 Probably too easy for hostile forces to take over if energy is concentrated in one spot. Wherever there's the human fallibility of desire at the expense of others there will be the potential for hostile forces. Man cannot create a utopia. After millennia of attempts there are still bad apples in the bunch and there's no indication anywhere that we will one day be able to live without any bad apples.

[@wasdwasdedsf]

nobody remotely concious mentions wind on anything... its beyond a joke

[@annarboriter]

Because the financier class won't be able to seek rent from such a system

[@treefrog3349]

Steven Pinker has made an incredibly lucrative career by telling people what they want and need to hear. Mankind has been capable of the most astounding, discoveries, creations and inventions. That is true. What he skillfully manages to circumvent is all the man-made horrors he made in the process. The precarious state of the Earth itself is a man-made "contribution" of the human species. But he circumvents that hard fact but then encourages everyone about the inventiveness and resilience of the human species. Telling people what they want to hear, in spite of the evidence to the contrary, is duplicitous, exploitative, self-aggrandizing and suicidal. At lest he will die wealthy and beloved by many. Well done, Steven!

[@rgaleny]

SEE THORIUM REACTORS

[@devilinthebelfry7292]

Thank you, nuclear power IS the best and cleanest source of energy we can make.

[@johnstewart7025]

GOP should be in favor of nukes and realize the upside of climate change for them. But, no.

[@DashieDe]

7:40 Abolish trigonometry, return to probabilities!))

[@fireballfitness170]

19:00 to 22:40 ... horrifying 32:35... trade off between speakers and listeners... 34:20 the ability to think in the absence of words...

[@SP-ct2rj]

Unfortunately Pinker has a very simplistic approach to Bible reading. The Bible doesn't show you people's lives so you can emulate every detail. But rather it shows the truth that even the heroes in our past were deeply flawed human beings and need improvement. Only very few are shown to be blameless individuals (e.g. Joseph son of Jacob, Jeremiah, Mary and Joseph, and possibly John the disciple). All the rest have their failures on display, sometimes very spectacularly like David, Peter and Paul). It shows that only Jesus could reconcile us with God and that if left to our own devices our hearts would turn on our brothers and sisters like Cain did on Abel. Also it's not the Bible which teaches morality (books don't speak) but rather the interpretive authorities (in Judaism formerly the priests and today the rabbis, and in Christianity the bishops in communion). Apart from that it was an entertaining conversation!

[@katiedotson704]

You are correct. The Bible does not teach moral behavior. Nor do it’s authors. What is moral about mass genocide? Not only of the offensive humans but every other creature walking, crawling, swimming, and flying. What is moral about forcing a woman to marry her rapist? Or allowing Your most faithful follower to be tormented and tortured for years so that You can win a bet with your adversary? So God sent his only begotten son to pay for the sins of the people that He had created, knowing that he had created a flawed creature. I guess there is nothing a little human sacrifice won’t cure. Can you tell me why Satan is blamed for the evil that God created? The best part of the Bible is that it is a collection of myths and legends that has very few facts within the covers.

[@SP-ct2rj]

Also extremely simplistic. Your perspective is wrong: because they were raped they were seen as less valuable because no one would have wanted to marry them after that, and so to spare them an impoverished future the rapist was forced to marry her and provide for her. It wasn't a punishment of the woman but a punishment of the rapist. The story of Job was to work through how to understand suffering. It might seem that God is simply making a bet with Satan and that's it, but there's much more going on. Suffering is redemptive and can make us better people if we let God work in us. Try not to be too simplistic too

[@johncarroll772]

My favourite Bible story is Lot and his 2 daughters 😊

[@johncarroll772]

​@SP-ct2rj a punishment for the rapist 😅😅😅 forcing a woman to marry her rapist, yous are sick minded.

[@SP-ct2rj]

Great. Another simplistic approach. Did women have equal rights just 20 years ago? How about blacks and whites? Now imagine at a time when people thought the greatest empire ever was the size of Switzerland. Imagine a time before Roman law or Babylonian law. Most sound minded people wouldn't want to live then. Now see the law from that perspective.

[@kmcq692]

I wonder if our (human) systems/patterns/processes of relating to other life/matter on Earth would be affected by the Mandelbrot growth pattern. Can we try to evolve and understand and discern next right steps in “roundabouts and spirals” instead of hard straight walls?

[@modestmouse2889]

cowards NEVER HAVE ANYTHING BAD TO SAY ABOUT THE KORAN

[@AL_THOMAS_777]

[@discoveringthegardenofeden7882]

The simplistic method espoused by Steven Pinker led to all the horrors of the 20th century. Sounds good but it does not lead to wisdom.

[@dtsai]

Chinese is a hard language and we all got tricked into thinking who smart a person has to be to learn it. But a good language needs to be easy to learn so everyone can use it. I would argue that everyone in China couldn’t understand each other and that caused all the wars and rise of communism dictatorship because the language was upon everyone. If it was easy then they wouldn’t have had to been forced and so much blood shed.

[@fjalics]

Nuclear is very expensive. Look at Vogtle 3 and 4, Summer 2 and 3, Flamanville, Hinkley Point C. It's going to be wind, solar, and storage.

[@TheCALMInstitute]

The arrogance of economists knows no bounds. Everybody is irrational except this guy. Journalism isn’t as accurate as economics. Every person should know Bayesian statistics. I don’t disagree with the biblical criticism, but this guy is not an expert on everything, and neither is the rest of the economics field. Give me a break.

[@eyespymenu]

42:20😢 see Tony Heller.

[@anorian7992]

The bible is not the source of morality, looking at the great majority of the very religious it is easy to understand why there is so much hate and abuse in the world. After all only the true believers know the true and will be saved when the world is destroyed and all others are cast into hell... How loving and moral is that? The few nice things in the bible are there to just confuse the reader, and give the believers something trite to quote. These platitudes are always ignored when it comes to real life, just look at the "true believers", they love to hate and subjugate in the name of god and true religion.

[@racerx4152]

there will always be false religion, and then true faith. your throwing out the good with the bad. it is not hate to confront evil. the bible is the source of morality and those who ignore it pay the price. this is proven by how evil america has become. we are in worse shape than ever before. this is what happens when you have a anything goes attitude. freedom without responsibility leads to anarchy. the bible is not horrifying, our behaviour is. your monologue is nonsense.

[@maggiebarrett7300]

Anyone who can read the christian genocide manual, aka the bible, and not recoil in horror and revulsion at the gratuitously cruel atrocities committed or commanded by the brutal, barbaric, bloodthirsty god therein, has suspended all pity, empathy and compassion.

[@AndreyBogoslowskyNewYorkCity]

Please give me suggestions for a name of this new character a #gingerARTmonster no human #language

[@jamestobler8473]

My dinner with Andre?

[@teslashark]

Dude, Pinker, you are the curse words guy.

[@robertuchman1716]

Lol 25%

[@jamshedfbc]

❤

[@trevorallen838]

Great podcast. Just one problem. He doesn’t seem to be informed that the biggest existential problem facing mankind is not GHG and energy but the collapse of our oceans from pollution

[@lancewalker2595]

And you don’t seem to be informed that the biggest existential problem facing mankind is not the collapse of our oceans from pollution but the question: to be? or not to be?

[@wasdwasdedsf]

what.....

[@lancewalker2595]

@@wasdwasdedsf You don't understand the question "to be or not to be"?

[@peterbroderson6080]

Old Testament is Jewish, and the New Testament states Jesus Two Commandments clearly and it's not his teaching if it disagrees with either of them.

[@srglepore]

Yes religion is messed up. But why aren't you talking about the current religion of money as horrifying. Monetary economy systems is the last detriment keeping mankind from moving forward to making this an awesome world. Look up Jaques Fresco of the Venus Project.

[@TapurokNatureFarm]

Or the religion of the self.

[@elizabethk3238]

Because the central theme of the conversation is The BIBLE. You obviously need to learn about critical thinking.

[@srglepore]

@elizabethk3238 You don't know critical thinking." Ok Mrs tight cheeks. I've seen many talks by S. Pinker. I even have one of his books aka How the Brain Works. His main topic over the span of many years is how we are now in a better place than our ancestors. He compares us to those who lived in medieval times. Well, sure. I knew this when I was 13 years old. Thanks to our education system. I'm pushing the topic of ok, let's get over this wall already. It's too big a subject here but I am following the history of 1. God worship to 2. Divinely appointed king worship. 3. The Aristocracy 'worship' - I know this sounds odd but in a sense we still seem to need or want on a subconscious to be ruled by a higher class... nevermind a deity already. It's the 21st century. 4. The mercantile stage which gave us banks and all the stuff that comes with it and overtime undercut the previous stages. So now we are all still beholden to money and......still too many are still beholden to the God of the Bible. S. Pinker could step up to the plate like Peter Joseph or Jaques Fresco or even Noam Chomsky for God's sake to address the real elephant in the room like say how war and money go hand-in-hand. And this is just one of the many pathological behaviors that are running things....I recommend reading some of the literature regarding the state of things on the big scale which has gotten you I warrant under its thumb. Watch where you worship. Dip. Pip. And cheerio.

[@kmcq692]

Loved the idea of letting millennials, after teaching them all the Bayesian stuff, and those pesky moral and logical problems, decide for themselves how to behave in regards to their existential crisis.

[@user-SBURCHILL]

...common sense is measured by how...? On separate scales to achievement and ability. Prof Pinker has never been, or could be described as silver spoon academic....most illuminating concepts emerge through 99% perspiration...the other 1% from inspiration....so, by distinguishing between academic high performance and common sense....to attend a seminar in a mid morning theatre....follow these steps ..1 set your alarm night before 2 get out of bed next morning.....beyond the remaining, or subsequent steps, concentrate for two hours collect references read references deduce thoretical concepts and perhaps if you do these common sense particulars....then perhaps Prof Pinker will get around to your propositions re common sense....perhaps not if he recalls the luncheon in your erudite manneristic mannerisms ..

[@jenskruse1475]

I thought I was going to hear intelligent people talking. 1. Markets are deeply flawed. 2. Democracy is flawed because of inequality (marked flaws) 3. Nuclear is not a solution. Because of the limit of Uranium and the costs.

[@patricksee10]

Steve talks incessantly about humans being a species and about the idea that humans are progressing. Both ideas are mind narrowing and are distinctly argumentative.

[@BlacksmithTWD]

In what sense is considering humans to be a biological species mind narrowing and argumentative?

[@patricksee10]

@@BlacksmithTWD the most important and obvious aspects , which are we are intellectually and morally bound. The idea that Pinker promotes is the these most fundamental aspects can be considered as no more than features of any other creature. No more fundamental that the behaviour of snails or sharks.

[@BlacksmithTWD]

@@patricksee10 Biology is one of the hard sciences and as such a scientific model of reality, not a moral model of reality. I'm not sure what you mean with 'intellectually bound' but to be an intellectual requires the ability to read, are you excluding the vast amount of human beings who can't or couldn't read? Had Pinker stated something like that we were 'nothing more than a biological species' you might have had a point. When I say that a stop sign is an octagon, it doesn't negate the function of the sign nor does it propose an argument in favor or against stop signs, it merely describes it's shape. A short necked giraffe and a mute human being both lack the main characteristic of their species, and as such their chance of having fertile offspring is greatly reduced. Whithin the realm of biology there is no fundamental difference I can think of.

[@patricksee10]

@@BlacksmithTWD a stop sign is nothing but paint on metal in different colours. That’s what it’s in physical objective terms. That stop sign has zero connection with motor vehicles stopping in a certain location or indeed any other meaning. The stop sign has no meaning of itself. Biology is not that. Biology is brimming with philosophy and morality

[@BlacksmithTWD]

@@patricksee10 I guess you happen to apply quite a different dictionary when it comes to the word biology. Mine sais : "biology : the science of life or living matter in all its forms and phenomena, especially with reference to origin, growth, reproduction, structure, and behavior."

[@danielschulman4909]

Its so interesting (and educating in the large sense) to contrast Pinker's relationship to the Bible (Torah) and someone like Aviva Zornberg who dives so deep into the many layers of imagery and interpretation this canonical text (as is the case with ALL canonical texts - by definition - and by design) . . . its quite a contrast - they I would say, represent to radically different polar ends of human consciousness . . . you should get them together in the same room to really see what is even possible (if its even possible). They may not even be able to speak to each other!!! . . . kzbin.info/www/bejne/f3KtnJyLfc6tns0 . . . in fact, there are '70 faces' of Torah . . meaning there are acknowledged to be 70 possible interpretations of every word in the Torah . . Pinker is choosing but one.

[@eoris12]

There are many more interpretations of Torah. If you say 70, that's another dogma pinker puts into the same bag. Torah and any other text us no different that any other story we make up. It has abundance of memetic historical layers and we can dissect them forever, not once making them either real or superior to anything nature can do through its cleverest species (plural).

[@JohnnysCoolStuff]

"Scientists are the easiest to fool," said James Randi.

[@daydays12]

He was fooled when he said that.

[@scambammer6102]

and yet nobody claimed his prize

[@mavrosyvannah]

Every should dumb the Paris Accord not jut the best President America ever had.

[@bobkat8765]

His anti-woke nonsense is a real turn off. If ANYONE should have seen “woke” as an early warning sign of rising fascism, it should it should have been Pinker (and Haight, et al). “We must always take sides. Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim. Silence encourages the tormentor, never the tormented.” Eli Wiesel "Tolerance of intolerance is cowardice.” Ayaan Hirsi Ali “There is a huge difference between being tolerant and tolerating intolerance.” (Avaan Hirsi Ali) “I have seen great intolerance on the name of tolerance” Samuel Taylor Coleridge “The Paradox of Tolerance Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant.” Karl Popper “The real point is that you cannot harbor malice toward others and then cry foul when someone displays intolerance against you. Prejudice tolerated is intolerance encouraged. Rise up in righteousness when you witness the words and deeds of hate, but only if you are willing to rise up against them all, including your own. Otherwise suffer the slings and arrows of disrespect silently.” Harvey Fierstein

[@sayresrudy2644]

“oh my god, when i fellate Pinker, i realize how great and huge he really is, how stunning and awesome and overawing. i remember every bite he took at our first lunch together, it was like brushing Zeus’s hair…”

[@daydays12]

yes...I've got to the lunch bit and can't stand more...turning it off ..NOW

[@glennmitchell9107]

Pinker proves he is not a scientist when he relies on scientific consensus. Scientific consensus is an oxymoron.

[@markj.heinicke]

consensus is not the same thing as unanimity; you can have consensus without unanimity. It is true there are areas of science where there is neither consensus nor unanimity. Some of the social sciences are that way. It depends on the subject. There's pretty much consensus on Newton's laws of gravity as modified by Einstein being true. For example, there are possibilities that Dark Matter (among other unknowns) violates the conclusions of that consensus on gravity, but it's very unlikely.

[@glennmitchell9107]

What is the value of consensus in science? If observation conflicts with consensus, which do you go with?

[@alittleofeverything4190]

I know how to get carbon dioxide out of the air.

[@jamesruscheinski8602]

Christ salvation to follow divine authority instead of human authority

[@dwitus]

To say, as your interviewee does, “it’s a big mistake to think of the Bible as the source of our moral values,” dispels any reasonable claim that this person, as brilliant as he is in so many ways, has more than the common sense of a clam. The reason is very simple. It’s not a mistake because, for better or worse, for a very large swath of the world’s population, not just today but since the dawn of homo sapien mastery over the planet, it’s a reality. Reality in the sense that people have chosen to read the Bible and explore its teachings, meanings, values, horror stories, love stories and old wives’ tales in search of present-day inspiration, parallels, comparisons, contrasts and convolutions. So it is not a “mistake,” it’s what happened in a far deeper way than Mr. Pinker can apparently appreciate. For better or worse. Could it have not happened that way? Is that a question even worth pondering, a few millennia later? Bottom line, for anyone to show up wearing an “I’m a humble but incredibly smart and insightful person” hat on their head (and he does wear it well) and to then say that, in the course of no matter how illustrious a career, is to realize that the utterances of even the deepest of thinkers can be completely misguided and borderline moronic. It’s not just about moral values. That’s simply one of dozens of things a person could find in these long-revered ancient books - which, by the way, became that because through the collective perspective gained by all of us by being members of the human experience. All of which will always be far greater than the mind of any single public intellectual, in this or any other time, no matter how brilliant.

[@matthewkay1327]

Love God with your heart, soul and mind and love others as yourself. Unless you get that you didn't read the Bible.

[@woodygilson3465]

Talk about cherry-picking! 🤣

[@rsr789]

@@woodygilson3465 Yup, it's al a la-carte.

[@spitfireresearchinc.7972]

Even reading ONLY the new testament will not lead you to that conclusion. And reading the old testament will NOT lead you to that conclusion!

[@BlacksmithTWD]

@@spitfireresearchinc.7972 "Even reading ONLY the new testament will not lead you to that conclusion. " As Hitch used to say : "That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence." However the contra evidence is clearly there: Just reading matthew 22 : 37-39 within the new testament already provides : "37 Jesus replied: "`Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.' [2] 38 This is the first and greatest commandment. 39 And the second is like it: `Love your neighbor as yourself.'" Perhaps you should try include an argument for your conclusions before posting them.

[@spitfireresearchinc.7972]

@@BlacksmithTWD there's plenty of damnation in the new testament- you can't just cherry pick the nice parts. In Matthew, Jesus is particularly hard on hypocrites, which is fair enough. Not that argument about the books people wrote about their imaginary friends is of much use either way.

[@tonyb6485]

Bullshit

[@AmarAsrrak]

Why the bible is horrifying? I didn't hear anything related to the Bible in this podcast. Why the image of the video is that?

[@michaellong6002]

the Bible is an owners Manuel......explicit about humanity and war and sin and salvation

[@raysalmon6566]

so again what was so horrorifying about the life of Jesus was it raising Jarius 12 year old daughter from the dead

[@acdude5266]

He went off the rails a while ago, unfortunately.

[@computerhelpcc]

and yet the Jews have adapted, survived and made net positive contributions to civilizations they lived in and survived beyond. Persia, Alexander and co, Rome, Christian Europe and the Islamic empire… Somehow they’ve made Bible observance and practice work.

[@skeletorlikespotatoes7846]

Damn i thought Pinker was actually one of the competent thinkers.... 😂 Turns how hes another bill nye 😅

[@BlacksmithTWD]

He is a competent thinker whithin his field of expertise. There are many experts capable of being a competent thinker whithin their field of expertise but not so much outside.

[@aaronfrank9649]

These guys are smart but they have already come to conclusions about climate change, meanwhile talking about science. Not so smart all the time.

[@Ploskkky]

The scientific consensus is very clear about this topic.

[@karagi101]

Their conclusions are based on the solid conclusions derived from the work of climate scientists.

[@Ploskkky]

@@NSOcarth "There Is No Climate Emergency, Say 500 Experts in Letter to the United Nations" That is typical social media garbage. You have not looked into that nonsense at all, have you? Virtually none of those that signed that garbage are climate experts. A 2021 report by Cornell University found that 99.9% of more than 88,000 climate change studies agree that humans have accelerated the phenomenon, largely due to carbon emissions. That, my friend, is the real scientific consensus of actual experts! Stay on social media, if you want to slowly turn into a demented idiot.

[@Ploskkky]

@@NSOcarth Part 2: The two main Dutch actors behind the declaration are Guus Berkhout, a retired geophysicist who has worked for OIL GIANT SHELL, and journalist Marcel Crok. Both have been accused of receiving money from FOSSIL FUEL COMPANIES to finance their climate-sceptic work. When looking closer at the list of signatories, there are precisely 1,107, including six people who are dead. Less than 1% of the names listed describe themselves as climatologists or climate scientists. Eight of the signatories are former or current employees of the OIL GIANT SHELL, while many other names have links to MINING COMPANIES. One of the signatories is Ivar Giaever, a joint winner of the Nobel Prize for Physics in 1973 for work on superconductors. However, he has never published any work on climate science. According to an independent 2019 count of the declaration's signatories, 21% were engineers, many linked to the FOSSIL FUEL INDUSTRY. Others were LOBBYISTS, and some even worked as fishermen or airline pilots.

[@karagi101]

@@NSOcarth Ok If you say so. I guess the tens of thousands of climatologists are wrong and these “experts” know better. Lmao