Steven Pinker: Why Smart People Believe Stupid Things

Subscribe to The Free Press: thefp.pub/43SoejB
Steven Pinker is a world-renowned cognitive psychologist, and is widely regarded as one of the most important public intellectuals of our time. His work delves into the complexities of cognition, language, and social behavior, and his research offers a window into the fundamental workings of the human mind.
Today, we talk to Pinker about why smart people believe stupid things, the psychology of conspiracy theories, free speech and academic freedom, why democracy and enlightenment values are contrary to human nature, the moral panic around AI, and much more.

[@Highwayman589]

At 30:50, he claims that women have no "urge to dominate" (in contrast to men). Granted, the female style of domination is different from the male one, but his statement is ignorant and pandering. If women have no urge to dominate then why, among most married couples, can the wife arrange the appearance of a room in the house with no fear of blowback from the husband, but not vice versa?

[@kbab679]

Maybe he means women have the urge to dominate men's affections/emotions, while men have the urge to dominate many people's resources. Physical aggression versus emotional aggression.

[@AdamJones381]

He hasn't seen Game of Thrones.

[@pointofthisbeing]

Practically any binary statements regarding psychology are bound to fall apart. History of opportunity affecting probability and all that.

[@pegm5937]

@@AdamJones381 Game of Thrones isn't real and is also written by a man. :)

[@AdamJones381]

@@pegm5937 thanks for letting me know, I thought it was based on a true story!

[@joe-fq1qp]

it's nice to live in a world where everything you believe is right

[@pradeepkumarm944]

Wow, lovely insightful comment. Thanks.

[@geodeveloper2]

You're being sarcastic, right?

[@youtubeuser4645]

That's what I got out of the interviewer too, there are undertones of socialism

[@matthewfuller9760]

@@youtubeuser4645 There is widespread disagreement about socialism, but also abortion, women's rights, sexuality, food regulations, trade and business regulations, and many more issues that objective descriptions of reality won't resolve because they have existed for millennia despite passionate claims of truth and reality.

[@youtubeuser4645]

@@matthewfuller9760 yeah tendentious presuppositions from marxists that keep the debates unresolved indefinitely and deliberately

[@iloveyoumadhuri]

It is not just that. A lot of so-called smart people hate not questioning, but hate being wrong. As a result, they want to have confirmation bias based on what they initially heard, stick to the belief, and oppose any rebuttal that comes their way.

[@felixmidas2020]

Nobody wants to have confirmation bias. They want to be confirmed and that provokes the bias.

[@jr.6199]

I dont think you understand smart people or the definition of smart. "Hate" is also inappropriate here.... But i wish you well, either way.

[@TheFlyingBrain.]

That's exactly the opposite of what the really intelligent people I know do, in my experience. What you've said, however, reflects almost exactly the kind of talk I've heard all my life from people of little education who resent other people's good fortune in having acquired degrees in higher education. FYI, people who are really intelligent are aware of their own confirmation bias, and are constantly on the alert for it. This is because real intelligence harbors a desire not just for real knowledge, but also for wisdom. The need for confirmation bias only gets in the way of acquiring both knowledge and wisdom. And so, btw, does the ego's investment in being right at any cost, which is what you are talking about. I'll grant you, there are people in academia who have this problem with egotism, but that is nothing unusual, as there are such people in every field of endeavor and type of work. The egotistical need to be right at any cost, however, is not a sign of "being smart." It's indicative of a particular lack of emotional development. It shows an unfortunate lack of grounded autonomy, and of the kind of self confidence that is born from the experience of natural self-transcendence.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

32:22 “Bringing about multiple simultaneous goals is what intelligence is. If you single-mindedly pursue one goal at the expense of everything else, that is idiocy.”

[@meisherenow]

Hypothesis: about topics that don't have immediate practical effects, people are not so much given to believing nonsense as they are to *saying* they believe nonsense.

[@pegm5937]

Genuinely out-of-curiosity question: Why would people solely pay lip service to said nonsense, though? (I'm assuming person-on-the-street 'people', not FoxNews anchor type 'people')

[@pegm5937]

@@ebog4841 Right. Good point

[@ValidatingUsername]

Imagine being just smart enough to talk shit about people who have solved more than your current understanding as a “public intellectual”

[@skyetatanka8864]

🎯

[@tarjei99]

Some of the problem with presumably intelligent people are that they might still have problems with basic math. In Norwegian I would call it tallskrekk (being afraid of numbers). Arguments that requires understanding the extremely advanced mathematical operations plus and minus are not understood. That is where being against nuclear power is. It is strongly irrational. There is basically no way we can decarbonise without nuclear power. The numbers does not add up.

[@1keinic1]

I was on board until he said “peoples beliefs don’t effect the conduct of their lives, but I get where he’s coming from

[@Ollies2CentsWardill]

He didn't say that. he said that conspiracy theories seem to prevail where wrong beliefs don't have an obvious impact on day to day life. For instance, one is more likely to believe Queen Liz was a reptile than think the cliff edge you'r heading toward is a CIA hologram.

[@slyjokerg]

For a long time, I thought it had to be more than just "Oswald did it." Now I know that that is indeed exactly what happened. Oliver Stone is largely responsible for the nonsense that people still believe about the JFK assassination. That movie is full of bullshit, lies, made up craziness, and baseless conjecture. It is still a pretty well made, entertaining film, but it is substantively fiction. (An exception to "well made"... check out Pesci's ever changing hairline in the hotel room scene.)

[@eligoitein6499]

after first 20 minutes, l just had to turn.t off / self-satisfied complacency of pinker a bit stifling. however i returned for a bit more to see if there was anything salvageably useful in his pronouncements. he seems mpe knowledgable than genuinely imsightful

[@afterthesmash]

My personal term for why smart people believe in stupid things is: batshit on the margin.

[@danielpaulson8838]

We evolved with fear and joy. People tend to believe what makes them feel joy over the truth. Truth isn’t concerned with feelings.

[@Eng_Simoes]

Your statement doesn't capture the nature of evolution. Those who had an innate impulse or ability to derive reward (such as "joy") from the right things were able to survive. The tuning of reward levers (what gives you joy) is a result of evolutionary processes hence grounded in reality.

[@danielpaulson8838]

@@Eng_Simoes My statement is exactly accurate. I didn’t put into it what you got out of it.

[@Eng_Simoes]

@@danielpaulson8838 the "joy over truth" part is wrong, at least in the evolutionary, long term context you mentioned. If you fail to see that you don't understand evolution .

[@danielpaulson8838]

@@Eng_Simoes people feel joy over fake things not the truth What do you think makes theists? People who prefer reality? We evolved, are still evolving as are animals out there today being driven by pleasure or pain. You wish to argue something I don't know what. How's about you going away?

[@c.alejo8846]

Well, Pinker, a very smart person indeed in many regards, supported the Catalan nationalist separatist movement. I am not sure if that is a stupid thing, but it is not taking into account the Spanish recent political history, the coup it was victim of through that movement, its constitution and the large amount of people who want to remain in Spain as Spanish citizens and receive an unfair treatment there in Catalunya.

[@harrisonandrew]

Thought provoking and entertaining in equal measure. Loved it.

[@godotkrull579]

probably far out again, but can we not just say: "this is not a conspiracy, cause they don't know what they do?"

[@AllenMorris3]

The main problem with AI is the electricity that it is using.

[@afifahhamilton8843]

Apparently Pinker has not heard of Thomas Sowell. My first intro to his work was 'The Vision Of The Annointed', and it's still a super important book for plonkers like Pinker.

[@johnnotgiven9219]

AI re[placing jobs: ~"we have to figure out a way for people to have money for rent and food.'" (24:00) And what of "the ownership society' and the gaping socioeconomic disparity we see even now? Where does politics intersect with such new technologies and what does it do when it does? Enlightenment values?

[@tomskimcdouglegaming806]

The most unlikely yet most insidious of the conspiaracy theories is the one that has the most institutional uptake, and that is critical race (conspiracy) theory.

[@Sad_Bumper_Sticker]

FYI for people with respiritory issues otolaryngologists sometimes recommend masks on high traffic conjestion proximity bike routes.

[@avenuePad]

Steven Pinker can definitely offer some expertise on this specific topic.

[@nuqwestr]

Once that belief is set, the subsequent revelation of fact will be difficult, and most likely painful, which in today's "Harm Reduction" framework, causes harm. Facts then get cancelled as harmful, not just to the greater moral value, but to the physical body. Isaiah 5:20: Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! Confucius: "The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their proper name."

[@lawrencecooper1375]

Don't agree with his argument about adding details to a story - because the other side can make the same argument. It just depends on what story you believe. For example they mentioned the JFK shooting. If you believe the CIA did it, then you would use Pinkers same argument that "the number of things to go right for" Oswald to have shot him make it less likely he did

[@darwinlaluna3677]

And how do u know smart ppl know when it’s time to play stupid?

[@DeanRusselldj]

Its always funny watching two people agree on the false premises they agree on.

[@eligoitein6499]

and also repulsive

[@aman57]

50/50 probability for Trump to end democracy doesn't look good in my book.

[@74357175]

Contextualizing the appeal of conspiracy theories in our pre-modern behaviors was very interesting.

[@madelinebock6469]

A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep. - Saul Bellow

[@pradeepkumarm944]

Thanks for sharing this. 😊

[@anonymoussteve7591]

Too true!

[@jljones6343]

and the rest of the quote"...The search for relief from the uneasiness is what is real in Israel. Nationalism has no comparable reality." - Saul Bellow

[@EurekaDoc]

If Pinker thinks democracy & freedom of speech are not intuitive to humans, I suggest reading “Hierarchy in the Forest” by Christopher Boehm. Boehm argues that throughout the great majority of our evolution as humans we lived in small hunter-gatherer bands that were essentially egalitarian, and made most group decisions by consensus, with all adults entitled to opine. Those tendencies remain deep in our genes. Unfortunately, civilization required much larger populations than can decide by consensus, and therefore a central authority. But we’ve always chaffed under such authority. It took another 5000 (mostly tumultuous) years for us to tinker our way back to democracy and free speech that can work for a large society. How long such a society can endure remains an open question.

[@Dan16673]

If you are saving things change greatly in groups over 150 people. The answer is duh

[@karagi101]

How did Boehm arrive at the conclusion that prehistoric small hunter-gatherer bands lived in egalitarian, consensus driven groups? We definitely don’t have any written records of this. If anything, we have archaeological records of the exact opposite- burial sites where it’s obvious that some people were buried in a much more elaborate fashion than the rest, indicating they were leaders.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

Pinker seems to think lots of things that are mostly wrong. I am not even antizionist at all and i find his gaza take here insane

[@karagi101]

@@emilianosintarias7337 How so?

[@Eng_Simoes]

Chimps are lead by the alpha, so I call bs

[@sunnyla2835]

Wonder if it ever occurred to Steven pinker that he's one of those smart people who thinks stupid things. Sam harris, too. The arrogance, the smugness, of smart people, like harris and pinker, who think stupid things😂

[@youtubeuser4645]

Bro when I was younger I thought pinker was a genius, after this interview I feel sad about him

[@StevenWebb]

It's more comfortable and convenient to find what we are looking for.

[@TheOldHippiebilly]

Excellent discussion. I'd love to hear more reasonable, intelligent, and nuanced conversations like this rather than the angry, fearful, hateful garbage to which we are constantly exposed.

[@Guy-Lewis]

Hear! Hear! Unfortunately, by dint of being much easier to generate, "angry, fearful, hateful garbage" is more plentiful AND is more click-propagated. More people want to experience heightened emotions than to have their intellects challenged.

[@larrydugan1441]

I agree. I greatly enjoy these long form conversations by intelligent people. But how does one engage with the political hyperbole and indoctrination that now passes for education?

[@jr.6199]

Change the channel and turn off the device occasionally.

[@larrydugan1441]

@@jr.6199 this is the advice from someone that finds it necessary to post on you tube?

[@TheOldHippiebilly]

@@jr.6199 I do. In order to maintain some semblance of sanity, I've limited my screen time considerably. Three hours per day, tops. Usually much less.

[@Peterkramer929]

First example of "stupid things": conspiracy theories. Funny.

[@ConanDuke]

The Irony.

[@denison298]

The Warren Commission? Trust it? You must be joking.

[@jr.6199]

Well at least you listened that far, without outrage and turning it off. Better luck next time, when someone tries to talk sense to you.

[@willmpet]

Do you know what a supported exit wound is?

[@TheAshoka2009]

Listen, listen, listen the very skill we all need to practice! honestly.

[@TheAshoka2009]

We all human❤ our nature and conditions are to be curious not skeptics? Trust others for good contemplative reasons. Good fortune to those, who could do just that.

[@AMERICANZOMBIETODAY]

Thank you. Look at the zombies on your comments, lol

[@orizmora5432]

They are basically convincing themselves that what THEY believe is true, regardless of evidence. Sad...

[@skyetatanka8864]

💯💯

[@yngbld_]

Pinker's data-informed views often come as a breath of fresh air, but I think he is missing a big part of the AI puzzle. The threat isn't that AI will have undesirable human tendencies baked into its "DNA", it's that AI increases humans' capacity to express those tendencies by orders of magnitude. Some humans are violent psychopaths. But the availability of high-powered firearms allows those humans to do a lot more damage than they otherwise would. AI could have a similar effect. In other words, it's not the semantic misunderstanding of the input phrase "Eradicate cancer" that threatens the world, it's the plethora of actually malevolent potential inputs. Having said that, we don't really have a relevant data set to refer to on this topic, so we're all just speculating.

[@martijntromm5349]

I think you are on the right track. The danger comes from people using AI not from AI itself. Where AI differs from the gun-metaphor is that it also can be used for good. Guns can only be used for bad (murder) or less bad (hunting), but not really good, unless using violence is characterized as necessary maybe. AI however can be used for generating misinformation but also recognizing misinformation.

[@arranpattison5809]

Yes... AI is a tool or a weapon. It comes down to the desire/s of the individual/s that are in control of it using it for good or evil as with most technologies... It's not that AI won't have the ability to 'take over', it's that it won't have the desire... unless it has been programmed to of course. And that is the danger...

[@user-gt8hv7cu5l]

The leverage AI can give to whoever for whatever? Interesting point.

[@NicholasWilliams-uk9xu]

His data points are cherry picked, we are going through a human driven mass extinction that will directly affect stability, and reach a point where wars and conflict amplify over resources do to population grow and compute driven competition. Which is why A.I is a problem (it increasing the degrees of movement in strategy space, and movements at higher frequency, allowing deception to become a business model increases uncertainty of finding correction).

[@jr.6199]

Can you also see how your's is a pessimistic view of A.I.? Safety will also be magnified by AI, not just the harmful traits of humans. So it inherently will be engineered for, designing in for the best safest outcome also.

[@raycassidy2047]

The reason conspiracies rarely exist is because the only way 3 people can keep a secret is if 2 of them are dead.

[@minkz4097]

If you live in a country that has been through a dictatorship you know this isn't true. In my country the dictatorship ended 30 years ago and the criminals took most of their secrets to their graves, much of what happened is still unknown.

[@davidpalmer5966]

That may be true for secret conspiracies, but what about the non-secret ones? Currently here in New Zealand we have a conspiracy in which the government and the legacy news media are flat-out denying that the death rate is far higher than it should be, and ridiculing those who point this out, notwithstanding the fact that the government's own statistics department is quantifying the excess deaths on its official website. This news blanket is by definition a conspiracy. I can assure you that the vast majority of people who know it's a conspiracy are still alive.

[@TheQuixoticRambler]

@@minkz4097 You're obviously right. What an incredible belief to have that governement, and other actors, are not capable of conducting business in private... when it is virtually impossible to uncover info on most of their dealings!

[@TheQuixoticRambler]

Hardly the case with government. So...

[@gedofgont1006]

Did you see that pink unicorn on the news, this morning?

[@freshfreenlovinit]

If you don't believe in any conspiracy theories that means you believe the media and the government always tell us the truth.... Oh dear.

[@PHanomaly]

😅you seem to think you are smart, but you just revealed you haven't even understood anything yet.

[@skyetatanka8864]

​@@PHanomalyactually it is you who just revealed that you understand very little yet you think you are "smart".

[@skyetatanka8864]

@freshfreenlovinit. Agree w your comment.

[@ricardosegundo6389]

Or, you lack common sense and specific knowledge.

[@indigenousnorwegianeuropa4145]

“The very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. Lies will pass into history” George Orwell

[@gzoechi]

I guess the problem is, there are no repercussions. In a tribe of 100, if you deceive someone, everyone learns it and if you do it more often you will be punished or kicked out. Nowadays it's rather a legitimate job to spread misinformation in marketing, as an influencer, or in state propaganda or even news agencies. There are no repercussions. If you are kicked out of one channel, there are hundreds waiting.

[@sj6986]

I do agree that lies are becoming a very normal part of public discourse. That said, lies have a very funny way to running into the physical realities of the universe.

[@wendybacin3488]

Unless your name is God.

[@gzoechi]

@@wendybacin3488 It's not a very common name, so ...

[@KushagraaDubeyy]

Because apart from a very few, countable on your finger things, there’s nothing as such that exists as pure objective reality. Anyone who prides himself too much about being a completely non attached, unaffected unbiased objective spectator to the TRUTHS of life then good luck to you, you’re god, leave us mere mortals with the limiting subjective perspective we’re born with and die with, a few deviations notwithstanding.

[@BFPolarBear]

Intelligence and wisdom are separate stats.

[@xaviperez26]

Brillant statement. People who lack both, don't know the difference between each one. At least you must have one, to know which of the two you have not.

[@randykintzley5923]

Maybe, but they are not orthogonal

[@emiliog.4432]

Orthogonal? That can be debated.

[@narieee2543]

My question is if one is intelligent but not wise, is he or she actually smart?

[@hartyewh1]

​@@xaviperez26 I'd say a lot of intelligent people are completely blind to and devoid of wisdom while some simpler minds have found paths to wisdom.

[@s.annehancock730]

Thank goodness for The Free Press. Journalism has got to get back to being as unbiased as possible. And free. Keep up the good work.

[@jr.6199]

Journalism always has had someone deciding what went to print, or for radio/tv - what the producer decided to air. That decision process can be described as bias.

[@artgalleryfidelio]

They are both on the same ideological lines of thought ! They simply want to intellectually reassured each other on their views of the world ! What a a naive and predictable interview. with no depth.

[@skyetatanka8864]

💯 two people exchanging a lot of empty words and hot air with the appearance of "sounding intelligent"....

[@goldwhitedragon]

Nice gotcha comment. Feel better now?

[@GrumpyYank26]

And academics, imo, are some of the least smart ppl i know. They are cerebral, ‘educated’, and confident (sort of) but smart ppl are as susceptible to willful ignorance as the rest of us. - old lady from a family rife w academics.

[@tristancelayeta6890]

Stupidity is endemic as Pinker demonstrates with his semi-hidden bigotry. Steven is totally unaware that he evidences his bigotry with his wiseassisms.

[@MrRoadWorrier]

I hope you're right that we should not be too concerned about Trump, but I don't think you can afford to be complacent when the stakes are so high. I wonder if similar conversations were had in the 1930s about the odds of Hitler becoming a problem. That worked out well.

[@goodtothinkwith]

Wait a minute… multiplying probabilities only works when the events are independent. Lawyers and conspiracy theories don’t always add details to a story at random and with things that are independent.

[@michaellipkin9430]

True. If events A and B are perfectly correlated than the probability of events A and B occurring is just the probability of one of them. If they are independent then the probability of A and B occurring is the product of their probabilities. If they are partially correlated it is somewhere in between. The point is that the probability of both occurring is always the same or lower, never higher then a single event occurring.

[@jenst.]

What Stephen Pinker here alludes to is not merely a conjunction fallacy. If two of your neigbhours conspire to hide the arrival of your last amazon order from you, there is a reasonable high chance that they succeed (mostly because packages get lost all the time). If you believe that the post office is doing it with every package you order, there is both an extension in time and the number of people involved. Every interaction has the chance of going wrong not only logistically but also regarding the motivations of the people involved. It thus a lot more unlikely. Many c-theories ignore this entirely by excluding alternative explanations and concluding from "it is possible" to "therefore it is probable".

[@mastersclassfitness3359]

Steven is a brilliant guy with an excellent system for applying reason to find truth. He doesn't always follow his own system. He points out the "fallacy of composition", and notes how each additional detail makes a claim less likely... but he ignores the legal standard of "preponderance of the evidence"- where no single fact makes a case, but an overwhelming number of facts tips the scales. The case for an assassination conspiracy against JFK can't be dismissed with a handwave. No honest person can seriously state that the investigating commission was on the level- especially after seeing how the J6 commission was run. There really are genocidal monsters who will use AI to cause havoc and destruction. All it takes is someone with a school-shooter's mentality to jailbreak the program. Steven should know this. And the 2020 election WAS rigged. The amount of empirical evidence is staggering. Denying it all with a shrug because some courts refused to hear the case is dumb. They cant rule on things they refuse to look for. Steven's optimism frequently blinds him to reality.

[@jr.6199]

"Some courts" meaning 65 courts where no evidence was presented for rigging the election? Or the court case where it was proved that Fox News knowingly lied to its viewers by airing "the rigging" stories? How they admitted it was "not for the Red or Blue but for the green" ( money)! So Fox paid a $787 million settlement to Dominion for lying, was the Fox settlement also a part of the conspiracy too. Your J6 Commission concerns are also just as weak. Whats next you try to claim that their all Republican witness pool was "deep state " Dark Brandon" operatives involved there. Please, Trump lost and he tried to subvert the transfer of the Presidency- corruptly. I empathize how you can't accept that he duped you too. I wish you well.

[@user-wr4yl7tx3w]

This interviewer is so biased with regard to Israel.

[@BeBoppin2000]

And I suppose you consider yourself unbiased...right?

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

@@BeBoppin2000I’m biased in favour of Palestine and against dizrael

[@milletrad8871]

Totally pertinent topics to discuss. Strange to mention: TFP has, for me, taken on the informative-analytical role that, at one time, NPR had.

[@moonshakedesign7633]

I would suspect that was something akin to their mission when founding it!

[@yj9032]

lol, no

[@twelvecatsinatrenchcoat]

"Cherryil Jackson is a non-binary gender non-conforming trans humanist bipoc lesbian who owns a cat cafe in the Bronx, our reporter Sanjidiv Manvipolocomonicka caught up with her after a harrowing experience involving her hobby of building tiny doll houses for transgendered squirrels to live in."

[@INSMRHS]

Me too

[@mightyluv]

Second that. I used to be an NPR listener, but my local news station seemed to fall into a “progressives-only” club, giving free mic to anybody that fit that description.

[@platero814]

it really sounds like two oldies peddling their political views in the disguise of sophisticated conversation

[@jr.6199]

Listen closer then. Not every discussion on science is political.

[@dreday1222]

These guys are saying absolutely nothing. What is smart? Smart is not having to say you’re smart. 😂 Read a book and study psychology. Throwing out words and changing the subject every minute seems like propaganda . 😂

[@jr.6199]

@@dreday1222 was it hard to follow ?

[@candidlens]

The large role Conspiracy played in English politics and the American founding is well documented, as one example. This is good gaslighting, though.

[@jamesdewane1642]

Of course! WTF was the midnight ride of Paul Revere, if not the coordination of clandestine activity against a government?

[@Ollies2CentsWardill]

@@jamesdewane1642 Oh dear. Way to prove Pinker's points.

[@jamesdewane1642]

@@Ollies2CentsWardill Can you explain that in detail?

[@JD-hh9io]

You mean Mr Rogers wasn't a sniper?

[@rodcameron7140]

😂🤣😂

[@DaboooogA]

Great discussion thanks - if any enlightenment value cease to be taught in schools and universities that will truly be the end.

[@danielarista1352]

I understand the normative axioms of probability (Kolmogorov, Cox, etc.). I understand that 'conjoining' the probability of two events is done by multiplying them (necessarily leading to a smaller number/lower probability). However, let's consider the concept of evidence, particularly the concept of a 'preponderance of evidence'. Is evidence thought to be no longer a matter of probability but of certainty (P=1)? So, in the case of Linda the bank teller, it would be probable (not less likely) that she is a feminist than not a feminist given her other evidenced traits. Those traits may not have a bearing on whether she's a bank teller (or not) but they may have a bearing on whether she is feminist, volunteered for a 'social justice' cause, voted Democrat, etc. That is it could 'add weight' to making some conclusion actually more probable ... but not necessarily 'any' conclusion (eg. she likes cilantro). I think Judea Pearl's work in Bayesian nets/conditional probability tried to fix this problem with frequentist probability. I'm not an expert but he showed that not only did more occurrences (i.e. evidence) increases the probability for an event, event's could increase the probability of other events. For example, having more symptoms related to some illness increases the likelihood for diagnosis, they don't consecutively decrease it b/c your less likely due to how probability are conjoined. Having more traits can increase the likely hood that you have some other trait due to a causal structure; in this example some illness having caused the symptoms. Each symptom adds to the probability of a diagnosis due to a causal structure. Going back to the Linda, if we've have enough evidence to believe with high certainty that she is politically and socially significantly left of center, then this should be cause to believe she is more likely to have further leftist traits than not. Just like once we've got enough evidence to believe there's an infections it increases the lieklihood that we'll find a raised white blood cell count justifying a blood test. What am I am I missing here?

[@emilianosintarias7337]

you're assuming Pinker is speaking in good faith, out of intellectual curiosity, and a desire for discourse.

[@jr.6199]

Maybe your missing understanding his simple point and how it kinda relates to Occam's Razor. So your point about adding evidence to a theory is different.

[@ЦенительТЗ]

Pinker is just rationalizing his somewhat ungrounded optimism while judging other's biases. A rather overrated intellectual, so it seems to me (and his most famous Russian proponent Ekaterina Shulman happens to exhibit exact same flaws).

[@AbuSous2000PR]

is the Haavara Agreement...an antisemitic conspiracy theory? 😊

[@ABARANOWSKISKI]

I like listening to Steven Pinker, I feel smarter listening to him speak, lol. I saw both of these men in person recently, at the "Dissident Dialogues" in Brooklyn, New York, on May 3-4th. I wonder if this interview was recorded there? Regardless, it was a pleasure to hear Mr. Pinker speak in real life.

[@rostamr4096]

Great conversation...Thannk you, I have become a big fan of this channel

[@daydays12]

Oh dear! What vague twaddle and misinformation...I didn't know Pinker or his interviewer before. I don't want to know either of them now.

[@thesheeplelookup]

Smug condescending gaslighting? Does Africa exist actually?

[@sj6986]

Doesn’t seem to be much of a Free Press if it looks like the interviewer and interviewee are about to make out anytime now. It isn’t even a conversation, this is bromance, not journalism. This is intellectual self pleasuring masquerading as an academic discussion.

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

?

[@AbuSous2000PR]

so true... rarely, Pinker was challenged

[@dgh5760]

Eh, no. 2 dems discussing social issues will inevitably put their own biases forward as fact.

[@knicksprop]

Was just listening to this on my subway ride home. Excellent conversation gentlemen.

[@skyetatanka8864]

A lot of hot air, empty words exchanged trying to sound intelligent

[@SuperMayhem81]

Two “smart” men, while discussing why smart people believe stupid things, discuss stupid things they believe. Very meta.

[@eileenjohnston6835]

Good point!

[@foop9]

What stupid things do they believe? They primarily discuss ideas and other people's arguments

[@robertaglass]

@@foop9He was friendly with Jeffrey Epstein & aided Jeffrey Epstein’s defense

[@JackSmith-qi7dr]

For example?

[@robertaglass]

@@JackSmith-qi7dr Pinker literally supported Epstein’s defense fund.

[@mandalorianmoggie7108]

he believes Trump lost in 2020...smh

[@John-bravooo]

US Jew hatred is insane

[@candidlens]

Hatred or distrust?

[@John-bravooo]

@@candidlens you distrust the babies in tel aviv? Albert einstein? Are you baked in ovens? Living in a bomb shelter?

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Free Palestine 🍉😭

In my long life I have observed time and again that people read ONLY the papers that agree with their opinions or prejudices.😂

[@eligoitein6499]

pinker himself a perfect examplle of a 'smart" person - i/e/ harvard-credemtialled professor / who is actually quite stupid in his credulity re warren comission / single gunman hypothesis

[@eligoitein6499]

absolyrly - what a paradox that somronw trained to respect factual evidence should simply ignore it in jfk case. do hard to respect pinky finger pin krt s blind thesis herein how he presents hi

[@asynchronicity]

Naive as heck about the potential of deepfakes. Yikes.

[@Sfpgg7480]

That what I always ask reading Pinker himself :)

[@davidsmith7653]

One of the problems with smart people is they are better at rationalising false views until they get what sounds like a logical reason to believe them. Dumber people come up with less convincing reasons but are also easier to fool, whether by others or themselves. The necessary skill is critical thinking and being prepared to change your mind and admit to mistakes. Everyone has beliefs which are wrong but I like to think I'm not wedded to any of them to the point I wouldn't change my mind if I received new data which was from a more knowledgable source or capable of verification.

[@troyevitt2437]

I had no idea Woody Harrelson interviewed Henry Winkler.

[@jamesdewane1642]

Yep! Just two actors putting in a day's work to collect a paycheck, soaking up people's free time leading them out into nowhere.

[@troyevitt2437]

@@jamesdewane1642 Indeed! They're not the real guys. They're clearly from Zeta Reticuli...

[@tomskimcdouglegaming806]

That's Willem Dafoe

[@gorryd]

So I assume he has taken the Covid-19 jab

[@ricardosegundo6389]

Its wrong to say that we didnt understand the Covid Pandemic. We didnt know the virus at that point, but we (Veterinarian Epidemiologist) DID understand the principles of biosecurity, and viral transmission.

[@NotAnEvilPersian]

He talks from experience!

[@DarrylMiglio]

'we want to believe a good story over the truth' Pinker expresses some great thoughts

[@JamilaJibril-e8h]

Live your truth 🙏💖🙏🙌....

[@DarrylMiglio]

@@JamilaJibril-e8h there's just one truth, not yours and not mine. Just the one truth.

[@JamilaJibril-e8h]

@@DarrylMiglio live it .... Don't make things up ... Live your own truth ...

[@DarrylMiglio]

@@JamilaJibril-e8h Its a binary, truth or not truth

[@randykintzley5923]

There is no such thing as "your truth". You can have your opinions, but you are not entitled to your own facts.

[@davehobson6156]

Steven, What is the logical fallacy when an intelligent person thinks they are a subject matter expert on something you have no experience in? Please do a deep dive into AI technology. The experts are telling us to worry because they don’t even understand how it will work. You know AI hallucinations. It’s okay to say you don’t know. Respectfully yours

[@dylanjayatilaka8533]

There is a sense in which Pinker is a "bean counter" saying that the current Gaza situation is much less important compared to the Syrian conflict, since less people were killed. This would be fine if you believe that all lives are equal. I hate to say this, but there should be a recognition that there is a notion of *culture* being preserved, like the last of a species. We hope that, eventually, displaced Syrians would recognise and rehabilitate their culture(s) in a way which was more stable and tolerant. Elsewhere in this discussion the topic of population reduction was briefly mentioned, it would be great if Pinker could turn his mind to that, since I think it is necessary. But what I'm trying to say is that the world needs to preserve culture. And by implication, all living species that have struggled to make it this far to now, especially insects, plants, corals, things at the base of our ecosystems. I guess I'm advocating preserving what we have for a long time, I'm a "conservative" in the sense of conservation, but not against change, as long as it can conserve "diversity". Because diversity means creativity. It means choice. Options.

[@jamesdewane1642]

Hmm. Diversity, options. Except when powerful people are pulling an operation like crown viros recently. Then censorship to the max is OK with him. When will Pinker ever say something about it? Or what will he say in the middle of the next big op? Pinker is a choir boy who does not sing off-script when powerful interests are involved.

[@Ollies2CentsWardill]

@@jamesdewane1642 Firstly, he said exactly the opposite about censorship. Secondly, seek help, conspiracy Boy.

[@jamesdewane1642]

@Ollies2CentsWardill If you give a timestamp for his censorship comments, I'll give a listen. Even if he's saying the right things now, the test is what he was saying during the critical time when qualified scientific and medical opinion was being banned. And still now, yt scrubs channels that contradict the cdc.

[@youtubeuser4645]

​@@Ollies2CentsWardillwhy do Muslims go to European countries refuse to assimilate and demand shria law ?

[@pjs2]

Fantastic writer, one of our greatest public intellectuals. The Blank Slate, How the Mind Works, Enlightenment Now, Rationality are all tremendous contributions.

[@emilianosintarias7337]

Pinker is totally wrong about Gaza. I am not even anti-zonist but the evidence is that it's not a war and that gazans are de facto Israeli subject whom they are offing on purpose. You can say that it was triggered by Hamas' own atrocities but Hamas aren't a people, palestinians are

[@bernardofitzpatrick5403]

Free Palestine 🍉from Disrael

[@toddsstuff1268]

Within the first 30 seconds of this video the missed the most most well known principle of moral theology described as "the end of means". Where people don't do what is immediately beneficial, Often humans do things for an end result of their actions. So how can this dude write books that this conclude this is "stupid"?

[@CHGLongStone]

You don't need conspiracy when you've got blind obedience to orthodoxy.

[@Ollies2CentsWardill]

What does that mean? Who is "blindly" obedient to orthodoxy? What is orthodoxy? perhaps what you would regard as orthodoxy is the view most supported by the weight of evidence. I've noted that the most frequent objectors to the "mainstream", "orthodoxy" or "prevailing narrative" are those pushing theories without a convincing evidentiary basis.

[@CHGLongStone]

@Ollies2CentsWardill homodoxy is "same same thinking", orthodoxy is homodoxy with enforcement. These are both anchored in the system 1 learning pathway (narrative & mimetics) and fall within the domain of social proof. This is the reason "science advances one funeral at a time". Widely held doesn't mean rigorously proven.

[@sarashann]

I thank him for his observation about the nature of females among our species and the relationship to power and domination.

[@OBGynKenobi]

Because some people are weak minded and just go along.

[@davehobson6156]

Listening to these two is becoming painful. They both have no idea what they are talking about.

[@imikalfunangongo]

Forgot to ask: 1. Why does the Harvard board of governors think that SKIN COLOR/GENDER is component to cognitive power?? 2. Why didn't Harvard's board of governors collectively resign over Claudine Gay's plagiarism and testimony before Congress??.

[@yj9032]

Why are people who believe that 2000 years ago a guy turned water into wine allowed to teach science or be a scientist?

[@jamesedward9306]

I REALLY want to hear a well reasoned explanation to #1. All you will ever get is "you're a racist/misogynist" or slavery or "systemic racism". Brilliant question that will go unanswered forever. '

[@imikalfunangongo]

@@jamesedward9306 "WELL REASONED" begins with principle. From Biology 101: Not one genome on the face of the Earth displays the so-called "race" marker. Thus, the term "race" is empty of meaning and exists only as a political expedient for those who do not care about objective reality. This also means that phrases like "critical race theory" (CRT) have a fallacious middle term. Therefore, CRT is not a theory. CRT is nothing more than a SLOGAN with political purpose, leveraging those who failed Biology 101. Furthermore, sloganeering like "systemic racism and reparations" not only ignores objective reality, as demonstrated by the foregoing, but ignores three easy to understand PRINCIPLES: 1. GUILT is no more than one generation deep. 2. RESPONSIBILITY is no more than one generation deep. 3. One's status as VICTIM is overcome in less than six months when THE PRINCIPLE of self determination is applied to productive ends. These PRINCIPLES are affirmed by Booker T. Washington who asked his fellow ex-slaves, in his time: "Why do you choose SLOTH over personal industry?". True then as it's true today. Finally, please consider this: Abstractions of invention, abstractions of innovation, simulacra whether simulations or dissimulations, and the 900lb gorilla... moral authority, the sum of all this (and much much more) are NOT FOUND in the skin, NOT FOUND in gender, NOT FOUND in sxxual praxis, but are prominently featured among those who pridefully exercise merit in their intellectual/cultural endeavors, demonstrating, therefore, WHY the science of Anthropology is bifurcated into two great fields of study... physical/cultural (never to breach that very significant boundary).

[@gzoechi]

​@@jamesedward9306It's just virtue signalling

[@emiliog.4432]

Plagerism? Do some research. Gays ouster was a concerted racist attack fomented by Bill Ackman. Pinker is right. People believe stupid things. There’s always more to a story than what is written.

[@MrBeen992]

Pinker is a great example of that

[@afifahhamilton8843]

The ivory tower effect, in action. And it is so funny that the irony is totally lost on Pinker (and probably the other chap too).

[@rasmus6818]

Their discussion on AI was a good example of smart people believing stupid things. How could you possible believe that the arguments on AI risk are that simplistic and easily dismantled ? Pinker is a brilliant man, and I have enjoyed reading several of his books, but the topic of AI is clearly not one he is knowledgeable on.

[@theJellyjoker]

This is misinformation.

[@peterhendriks4736]

AI taking over> You can always unplug the computer.

[@MottiShneor]

I am so disappointed of this talk with Steven Pinker. He answered the questions alright, but the "elephant in the room" was very swiftly avoided, and the hard questions were just never asked. I hoped that Prof. Pinker - whose work I really admire - would rectify by answering questions in broader sense, and attempting to hit the elephant somewhere - but he too, enjoyed very much avoiding the hard questions. Science has gone wrong so many times (It is part of the deal! it is part of the struggle towards the truth) that at any moment it can only provide a questionable theory - "that's what we think we know now". Yet no one in Academia stops the ugly wave of "science-based" authoritarianism. Nobody says that "scientific consensus" is an oxymoron. With the immense investment in the fallacy of "regenerative energy sources", and the horrific suggestions to directly attempt to manipulate the Earth's climate, with the HUGE lie of humanity effect on global warming (if there is such...) "Science" is no longer immune to critique on the POLITICAL stand of Academia. I don't see Mr. Pinker yell "No - we DO NOT know these things" (with all the terrible things Progressives/Democrats hold now as "scientific truths". The overall view of "Enlightenment" values raising the whole world standard of living - The HUGE blind spot is of course - politics, and the sustainability of those enlightenment values. You draw one arrow - from "Enlightenment" to "Better living conditions". But you seen an hour mumbling without ever admitting the terrible truth - that there is another arrow pointing opposite. "Better living conditions" in China, Russia, North-Korea and Iran - not only ALLOW FOR, but also SUPPORT the attempt (political, armed, Jihadi, cultural) to destroy and storm those Enlightenment values. That Mr. Pinker and his likes have mean 1.7 children per couple, but the self-proclaimed enemies of him and his "Enlightenment" have 5 kids per couple. That they demand control over HIS land and home and history and everything else. This talk is so smooth and sweet, I feel really bad. And worried. I thought Prof Pinker a much higher-level intellectual than he shows here.

[@mightyluv]

12:30 I think this is where most of our problems lie. You need to provide indisputable facts for your argument while I need only to provide hearsay. It’s as if arrogance and deep-seated competitiveness have taken over the soul of the world. Winning IS everything, losing equals weakness, the louder you are the “righter” you are. The whole world needs a Dad slap. Maybe two.

[@EmperorsNewWardrobe]

38:00 this question and answer are very interesting

[@hvrtguys]

I don't have a problem believing that Oswald killed Kennedy. But I don't think that he was alone. That part does not make sense. If you are going to kill someone you would have some sort of exit strategy. I think that Oswald was expecting a waiting car to take him away. It never showed up.

[@wsegen]

posner credible? pinker loses me with that.......he needs to get out more....harvard should be ashamed.

[@blakebortles23]

Geez interviewer is so impatient. Mumbling into the microphone while Pinker is talking. Needing to vocalize his understanding over his guest’s every sentence. God forbid you let him teach you something. Can’t hear when you both speak. Why record and post if this convo is just for you buddy?

[@eduardouchoa307]

I am a big fan of Pinker, having read many of his books. However, I cringe at his arguments against the existential AI dangers, especially the one that women have no desire for dominance! The big AI danger is not that it decides alone to wipe out humanity to maximize the output of paper clips. The danger is that very smart AIs in the hands of bad people can devise devastating weapons. Similarly, Singularity based on machines creating more and more powerful machines alone, for the sake of it, is not likely. However, an AI arms race between the US and China can accelerate enormously the pace of AI development, creating dangers comparable to a nuke arms race

[@TheFlyingBrain.]

Personally, I'm 20 min in, and this was an awful lot of opinion spouting with great hair, and not much in the nature of out of the box thinking. Outta here -- got way better things to do with my time.

[@andrejsmith]

With respect to the presenter and guest...may I suggest that here we have 2 smart people not understanding how closing beaches during a pandemic is a management problem. It is hard enough managing a primary school sports day let alone the complex variations that manifest as beaches all around a sea based country. How do you tell some folk that their remote beach is fine to stroll along when the densely populated beach close by is closed? What happens when those denied migrate to the less dense beaches? The only way to avoud a cultural and management disaster is to blanket exclude all beaches. In South Africa, for example, this was potentially a political nightmare as many unpopulated beaches are seen as being only for the privileged. I thought this to be a small example of how 2 very bright thinkers are buying into a seemingly obvious conclusion...without thinking. 😊