17 ms·
Steven Pinker makes case for human progress in ‘Enlightenment Now’
- scosman 9y agoBill Gates is saying this is his favourite book of all time: https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Enlightenment-Now https://www.gatesnotes.com/Books/Enlightenment-Now
- colmvp 9y agoPinker was also on Ezra Klein's podcast which I thought was worth a listen: https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/e/53271830 https://www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-ezra-klein-show/e/53271...
- bornonline1 9y agoAlso on Joe Rogan's podcast very recently.
- arprocter 9y agoYep - JRE #1073
- Numberwang 9y agodownload link: https://rss.art19.com/episodes/df4a1409-16ca-464b-ba6c-1971bf1ca264.mp3 https://rss.art19.com/episodes/df4a1409-16ca-464b-ba6c-1971b...
- drb91 9y agoWell, it does completely validate his world-view and everything he has worked for. Not terribly surprising.
- autopoiesis 9y agoThis book is certainly being pushed very hard lately...
- grzm 9y agoIt's because it was just published. You see the same thing with many books, or movies. It's partly deliberate marketing, and partly because there are people excited about it. For that matter, there's been plenty of noise from people who disagree as well. But it all surrounds the fact that it was just released.
- maxniederhofer 9y agoI think there's more to it than that. The book proposes a return to a classical rational-modern worldview with typical liberal values ("Enlightenment"). That optimistic view of the future would be one way out of the tribalist identity politics that, fueled by fear, are ruining Western society. There are big power interests, both financial and cultural, that are interested in stability. Pushing Pinker's book is more than just marketing.
- User23 9y agoTribalist identity politics are inevitable in all multicultural societies. You can bemoan human nature, but you can't change it. That's not to say multicultural societies can't be successful, with discipline and genius it can be done. For example Lee Kuan Yew (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_Kuan_Yew) did a great job with Singapore.
- sambull 9y agoThen it just becomes secular identity politics.
- edanm 9y agoSo that we understand you better - what exactly are you proposing as the mechanism of these power interests pushing this book? Are you suggesting there are specific people who are actively pushing this book, who are not directly tied to the marketing of the book? Or that are directly tied, but since they are "power interests" or some such, they are trying harder than they do marketing other books? I mean, I think you're wrong. But more than that, I think you're not saying something well-defined. What does it mean that "cultural power interests that are interested in stability" (paraphrased) are pushing the book in a way that's more than just marketing? Who exactly is doing this? Is this coordinated? Is this more than just "some people like this book so are talking about it", which is a much more innocuous way to phrase that?
- danharaj 9y agoCritical review panning the book: http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2018/02/20/4806696.htm http://www.abc.net.au/religion/articles/2018/02/20/4806696.h...
- crusso 9y agoI can only read so much snark before I give up and wonder at when the actual reasoned review of the book will begin.
- danharaj 9y agoSnark and reason can coexist, you know. What exactly did you find unreasoned in the review?
- Karunamon 9y agoAs can reason and sincerity. Humans, being humans rather than Vulcans or robots, should understand that excessive snark serves to distract from the point and draw attention to the author.
- foldr 9y agoYou only have to look at the outrageously arrogant title of Pinker's book to see that the reviewer is being pretty restrained.
- Karunamon 9y ago"Enlightenment Now" is an arrogant title? It sounds remarkably generic to me. Anyways, that cuts both ways. If I believed that the book was going to be overwrought twaddle and then saw this review while deciding if it was worth my time, I'd be just as likely to dismiss them both as haughty wankers not worth listening to.
- foldr 9y ago
- maldusiecle 9y agoWorthwhile criticism of the book here: https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/02/unenlightened-thinking-steven-pinker-s-embarrassing-new-book-feeble-sermon https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/02/unenlight...
- KarenSatantsby 9y agohttps://stevenpinker.com/files/comments_on_taleb_by_s_pinker.pdf https://stevenpinker.com/files/comments_on_taleb_by_s_pinker... He addresses a lot of of John Grey's issues in the forward of his book. I think it is interesting that people have such problems with data.. its so Post-Modern. this book is for people real people not ideals of people - I cannot read philosophy I can even read this book I have to listen to it. I love how Grey tries so hard but when I read it I did not understand what Grey was saying.. so either I am stupid or he is not answering a question that I had.. about the book. Grey goes on about the US prison system .. uhh wow.. even that is getting better - The crackpot in charge of it had to make it worse.. so its getting better because why because we eat so much food we have so much more energy no.. its because we are getting better and we need to work harder to make things better the sun is shining we can progress because well things are considerably better than when I was a kid. Its still tough on American children but we can change this and we want to change it... I mean look at Germany - Look at what happened that place was nearly a nuclear wasteland but now It is a freaking garden of eden for civilization - things are even better in Mississippi - mostly because if you are born there you have a great chance of moving out and up to Colorado.. and things are not that bad yeah there are opiates and school shootings but less and less and less compared to when I was a kid. less childhood abuse less disease.. its a reality that cannot just be denied - I mean you can and Pinker explains why that is so easy and so delicious to our brains.. but hey its for you do do man
- JumpCrisscross 9y agoThe writer spends half the article getting offended at Pinker calling religion irrational.
- maldusiecle 9y agoIf by "half the article" you mean "one paragraph," then yes, yes he does.
- majormajor 9y agoA criticism by way of criticism of an article pushing it - https://fair.org/home/the-radical-dishonesty-of-david-brooks/ https://fair.org/home/the-radical-dishonesty-of-david-brooks... - from a "co-director of the Center for Economic and Policy Research in Washington, DC" FWIW. The overall thrust seems pretty damning (given how much technology improved recently, why hasn't that turned into more income and leisure time improvements for many?), enough to seriously dampen my interest in the book itself: > The problem with the Brooks/Pinker story is that we expect the economy/people to get richer through time. After all, technology and education improve. In the ’50s, we didn’t have the Internet, cell phones and all sorts of other goodies. In fact, at the start of the ’50s, we didn’t even have the polio vaccine. > The question is not whether we are better off today than we were 60 years ago. It would be incredible if we were not better off. The question is by how much. > In the ’50s, wages and incomes for ordinary families were rising at a rate of close to 2 percent annually. In the last 45 years, they have barely risen at all. -- from a bit later: > Should we celebrate this reduction in poverty rates over the last 33 years? Well, the [child] poverty rate had fallen from 27.3 percent in 1959 (the first year for this data series) to 14.0 percent in 1969. That’s a drop of 13.3 percentage points in just ten years. The net direction in the last 47 years has been upward.
- tryitnow 9y agoI agree with the criticism of Pinker's use of data. However, I think his main thesis still stands: humanism and science are winning strategies for human flourishing. I think this his main idea (the benefits of science and humanism) is an idea worth exploring and defending, but I don't think collecting a bunch of measures of progress and saying "see, humanism + science works!" is the best way of doing it. I'd rather see someone approach the problem by focusing on what is lacking, what are the major outstanding problems and then demonstrate that these problems persist because we have not attempted to tackle them using science to guide practice and humanism to guide our values. This approach seems more mature and sophisticated than just saying "gee whiz! look at all the goodies we got now!"
- wpasc 9y agoNot meaning to offend, but you're kind of leading in to exactly why Pinker writes the book. > (the benefits of science and humanism) is an idea worth exploring and defending He explores and defends those pursuits. > I don't think collecting a bunch of measures of progress and saying "see, humanism + science works!" is the best way of doing it. It's at the very least an objective method that doesn't rely on flimsier propositions. You use the phrase "measures of progress" which are a great way to measure progress... > I'd rather see someone approach the problem by focusing on what is lacking, what are the major outstanding problems and then demonstrate that these problems persist because we have not attempted to tackle them using science to guide practice and humanism to guide our values. He never disputes that there are still issues, he's just saying that if you only ever focused on things that are missing, you might lose an appreciation for the progress humanity has made. If you only watched the news (which he specifically rails against), you'd think we were going to hell in a hand basket. Of course we still have issues, but to buy into the "end is nigh" mentality espoused by the media and plenty of people (and some commenters here!) would be to ignore a wide variety of indications that humanity's scientific and social progress are improving.
- garyclarke27 9y agoI enjoyed Pinker’s last book and I enjoy Taleb’s books even more. Funny that Taleb really hates Pinker’s work - deriding his analytical skills several times in his latest book “Skin in the Game”. I think Pinker’s conclusions are too Rosy and Taleb’s cynical views are too negative. Both provide much tasty food for thought though.
- gtf21 9y agoJohn Gray wrote a fairly scathing review in the NS: https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/02/unenlightened-thinking-steven-pinker-s-embarrassing-new-book-feeble-sermon https://www.newstatesman.com/culture/books/2018/02/unenlight...
- originalsimba 9y agoI admire Pinker's optimism but the enlightenment was 300 years ago and the fact that humans are still lagging behind their own progress by 3 centuries is proof of something awful which it's maybe time we all acknowledge.