"Distinguish causation from correlation and coincidence" That's something people really need right now. I see so many people that don't distinguish these and jump to shaky conclusions based on very little evidence because of it. I'm sure I've done it in the past, too. I had to learn to break that easy connection idea by listening to people discuss/debate social issues. I never learned to consider that in school.
Sitting on a high horse of academia inside the most elite and rich circles of knowledge, this oration sounds mostly hoodwink. An Imperial scientist trying to convince us "The world is Getting Better. All we have do is believe" Duh ! Refugees, War, Climate Crisis, Ice Melting, Forced-Migration, violence against women and minorities aside, we are to believe this elite bullshit ! We all LOVE Feel_Good-White-Chauvinism.
@kookoo Instead of calling people Dumbo and making stupid claims - Check some facts - 1. A century ago there was clean air, water, oceans and rivers full of fish and marine life. Now we are witnessing the beginning of 6th Mass Extinction. 2. A century ago or even earlier there were 1.8 billion people. Now there are 7.1. Many of them facing hunger, starvation, forced migration, dislocation, refugee status etc etc. 3. A hundred years ago people were warring over stupid religion, colonised lands and ideology. Today they are doing the same thing with even deadlier weapons. Killing children and civilians in dozens of nations as of Now. Today 4. There are approx 66 million refugees in the world today, and their numbers climbing every month. During the worst wars and calamities in the last 100, 200 or 300 we never saw that kind of holocaust. Feel good hoodwink lectures by these elite white scientists is ok. But reality is completely the other way around. Listen to Chris Hedges, an american journalist and writer explain you why Steven Pinker is bogus and just another capitalist vassal. Now get Lost, back to your white consumer hope and hoopla.
@@AudioPervert1 White this, white that...gosh, you sound like such an improvement on the kind of (fill in the blank)-ism that you'd like to fool others into believing that you yourself eschew. Really just another hate filled emotionalist though, is all that you really are.
Sometimes I think about you in particular Paul as my digestive system, so its funny this is the video of yesterday. I am often absorbing lots of these conversations but my B-/C+ intelligence doesnt always allow me much insight despite some nominal understanding. But then I watch your videos and its like you are my stomach enzymes and bile and you extract that which is important for my survival and then i integrate that into my information body. I will wait for your video on art next to give my full take on that. But briefly, as an artist, this whole thing gets more complex. I find my whole salience landscape shifts away from TLC when i am crafting or working on a project. My mind needs to silo itself away to be productive. then I fall behind and out of touch!
That's something we should all agree on (as nationalists) we want our people to be as well as possible. It is a beautifull outline of why I would argument liberalism can do so. Strength in every person through education and freedom.
Peterson is nothing more than the physical manifestation that Christopher Hitchens is no longer here to shut down A.S.S. (Anti-Scientific Superstition). Hitchens was the disinfectant that would have prevented Peterson ever opening his mouth in public. Without the Hitchens innoculation, the Peterson infection is free to spread.
@@DIOULASSO I happen to think that both Steven Pinker and Jordan Peterson are very important thinkers. The two of them think in quite different ways which are equally important to consider - I am only slightly bothered by the fact that the level of popularity of Peterson has taken some of the attention away from other brilliant speakers, however he is quite charismatic and respectable. Pinker is just such a nerd and genius that I wish more people would be listening to him.
two rules no business can be conducted on continental ground & all markers must be honored are all that separate us from beasts... Rules & accountability = civilized society
I would say they also lack trust in eachother? To be free from tyranny you must care about your fellow peoples freedom and trust them to do the same. Libertarians propose that a simple game of trust based on all benfiting is enogh, but so or so this trust that your fellow citicen want to be free rather than to themselves gain power is vital- otherwise all it can ever be is a game of who can have that power.
Ofc you need to know what others think, but the main thing you need to know is that you don't need to fight for power, because neither party wants power over eachother. That's foundational in a sense.
Oh, agreed. I wounder why tho? It's something to do with human realtionships I am now relativly certain. Just by comparison of how I view political disagreement with my fellow german people when I know they act out of a care for (our) people and how I react to the same arguments by somone I only dis-/agree with politicaly in america. It's like with our people the basis of any interaction is love what predates any political thoght. There political thoght is just a tool for the well-being of us. If anything is politics it becomes harder to susutain a level of abstraction to oneself that is then necessery that aknowleges that one does not know everything best, that others motivations are good and that they (assuming one is right in the judgement of them) would in the worst case of outcomes of there actions likly turn against them too. That's vital. It's also ofc toxic, because of the way the opposing sides never highlit the best parts of eachother and never try to amplify them in there criticism but make them out to be the worst dooms possible. That might be natural but I don't think it virtus. It divides and makes people fear eachother and belive the worst of eachother. That is never a good deed. It helps to be more civil even just in ones mind while thinking through issues. That said on the issue of abortion and importance of democracy (even in the aknowlegment of ones loss) there's little towsides to me. There's one that is wrong and one that is right. The left has those issues too, expecilly as maybe I exprimced it in germany already at a more advanced degree. But for most issues it's possible. That's good enogh to mostly feel civil to me.
well thank heavens for that, just for a moment there I thought he was perfect. I can tell you though, that his quotes taken from David Deutsch (The Beginning of Infinity) are entirely accurate and provide the best explanation we have so far on how knowledge progresses ...
This is important. George Gamow was a brilliant scientist and deserves proper credit to his work. Also, people who want to look up this book should know who actually wrote it so there is no confusion. The interpretation of this comment as some sort of attack on Pinker is part of the problem with our society. We are ready to jump at bland statements of fact--such as George Gamow wrote this book, not Isaac Asimov--as if they are attacks. I confess to not being sure that, if the subset of people who would watch this kind of video cannot have a coherent and logical discussion, there is much chance for the population at large. Sarcastic responses to a simple correction are not a good indicator.
@@astronomianova1 It didn't come off as sarcastic to me - I'm pretty sure it was a simple joke about the relief one should feel when recognizing that their heroes or role models are, in fact, human. It's proof of a mind that has opened itself to thinking critically.
"understand what universities are for *SMACK*" "free speech is important *SMACK*" "people always try and stop me from freely smacking my lips*SMACK*" I'm starting to doubt the value of free speech LOL jk
Why is it, that people always turn to Popper without knowing what he actually means... He was an induction skeptic. That is to say, in his view, no knowledge can EVER come from induction.
Does that mean that deductive arguments can't prove anything, since the reason we believe that they're always correct is that they've never been wrong before (i.e., an inductive argument)?
@@GOffUnit No one has ever made de argument that the reason to believe deductive arguments is, that they have never been wrong. Instead, they argue, that the reason to believe it is because of how semantics work. Now a lot of people argue, that semantics is a very problematic thing, because words are not static and so on, but that is another discussion all together.
Ok... Let's be honest... For once! The issue of Free Speech in this our modern era has very little to do with the merits of free speech, it's intention and the intentions of our founders and EVERYTHING with power. Now, it can be argued that the reason for free speech is about power. That's a fair argument. After all, it primary goal of establishing the first amendment was to address a specific issue the founder faced in their time. To be able to speak out against the king and the powerful ruling class without fear of persecution. Also, freedom of religion was wisely placed in this amendment and right after speech is because of the last and current persecution of those that didn't adhere to acceptable state religion. A religion like the Church of England. It wasn't until. Much later that free speech became out yelling fire in a theater. A SOTUS ruling and argument almost always misunderstood or misrepresented. Or, it became about Nazis marching in Skokie or feces on the virgin Mary in so called "art". And or course, it became THE issue for young liberals and radicals in Berekly in the 60s which should be looked back at now as admirable. None of these are why the subject is being debated today. Today, the root cause for this debate is simple. One political party and it's idiological fellow travelers as well as a federal government infested with unelected bureaucrats also motivated by ideologies cynically being forwarded by our university system. These individuals has have becoming an incredibly powerful movement whose power stucture was threatened. Threatened by an outsider and a silent majority that threaded the hold on power they wrestled away from the people one Autumn day if Dallas in 1962. The day the experiment in self rule our founders faught for and Americans died for then and in wars after. Our govt was taken for us the one they always are. Violence and lies. Now, it's become almost easy for a political movement to use the weakest and most vulnerable as political weapons. Weapons to bludgeon not only their political opponents over the head but ordinary citizens. It's. It about hate speech or hurt feelings. It's about wrestling back power that came under theat in 2016. It's not about gay rights, trans rights or abortion! It's about silencing those that would dare challenge the ruling elites. Its simple, if you actually believe in your positions and are able to argue them...then free speech is your powerful tool to express your beliefs. It you are either certain in your beliefs or, are honest and want to challenge yourself then you have no reason to fear free speech. The only reason you would want to shutdown free speech is fear. Fear that you will be discovered for exactly what you are. Power mad! Now... Don't misunderstanded me and suggest I'm advocating for one party or the other. It believe both are failures and have failed us. Also, I'm not advocating or saying I support who was elected in 2016 that brought all this madness to light. I'm merely pointing out what happened and when.
@@EmperorsNewWardrobe It's been a while since I commented on this video, but Ayn was a relative genius, and Steven is, in my opinion, too much an apologist for the Left's and, I would argue, Progressive's, assault on free speech. I, and Rand, would KILL for free speech. No animal wants their life to be coerced by constraint. Freedom exists tangibly, and ethereally. Tangible constraint is, for example, incarceration. Ethereal constraint, if you will, is that of thought, and its natural expression, free speech. Free speech is sacred for an animal that understands the sanctity of life and freedom of life. It is so sacred an idea, as to move an intelligent animal to tears, in its conception. The price for freedom of speech.........................idiots, with bad ideas...............a price worth paying.
@@EmperorsNewWardrobe You're gonna make me work for this, are you? I generally find his tone too tepid on free speech. I get much more animated and passionate and angry, when free speech is under threat. Maybe he doesn't have it in him, to be strong. That wouldn't surprise me. These intellectuals generally lack the physical strength to convey that same kind of passion that I think appropriate to the actual physical battles it takes to establish civil rights, e.g. free speech. Our founders put their lives and property on the line, in the interest of establishing a country with unprecedented civil rights. That requires intellectual and physical strength. And I generally don't feel Pinker has the moral certitude about freedom that, for example, Ayn Rand had. And, having come from that shit hole, Russia, she conveyed a passion about freedom, that Pinker lacks.
Craig Castanet, D.C., so, by ‘articulation’ you meant his style, not his actual arguments. Fine, maybe, but let me know if you have criticisms of his actual content because I’d be keen to hear if and where he’s wrong
It's fully possible, but okay. My issue is anyway the part where people are raped or don't have the right to there photos (revenge porn). If any distributer of any form becomes liable for thos it'd be just fine with me.
@@cincinat18 not rlly. There's way too many ppl who go "heands in my ears, I can't hear you" when you try to explain to them that there's a very big very uggly problem with sex trafficing
"Discomfort is another word for tolerance"
Begins at 6:27
What a clear thinker and great rhetorician - thanks for sharing
"Distinguish causation from correlation and coincidence"
That's something people really need right now. I see so many people that don't distinguish these and jump to shaky conclusions based on very little evidence because of it. I'm sure I've done it in the past, too. I had to learn to break that easy connection idea by listening to people discuss/debate social issues. I never learned to consider that in school.
6:20 for our Steven
our Steven :)
Sitting on a high horse of academia inside the most elite and rich circles of knowledge, this oration sounds mostly hoodwink. An Imperial scientist trying to convince us "The world is Getting Better. All we have do is believe" Duh ! Refugees, War, Climate Crisis, Ice Melting, Forced-Migration, violence against women and minorities aside, we are to believe this elite bullshit ! We all LOVE Feel_Good-White-Chauvinism.
@kookoo Instead of calling people Dumbo and making stupid claims - Check some facts -
1. A century ago there was clean air, water, oceans and rivers full of fish and marine life. Now we are witnessing the beginning of 6th Mass Extinction.
2. A century ago or even earlier there were 1.8 billion people. Now there are 7.1. Many of them facing hunger, starvation, forced migration, dislocation, refugee status etc etc.
3. A hundred years ago people were warring over stupid religion, colonised lands and ideology. Today they are doing the same thing with even deadlier weapons. Killing children and civilians in dozens of nations as of Now. Today
4. There are approx 66 million refugees in the world today, and their numbers climbing every month. During the worst wars and calamities in the last 100, 200 or 300 we never saw that kind of holocaust.
Feel good hoodwink lectures by these elite white scientists is ok. But reality is completely the other way around. Listen to Chris Hedges, an american journalist and writer explain you why Steven Pinker is bogus and just another capitalist vassal.
Now get Lost, back to your white consumer hope and hoopla.
@@AudioPervert1 White this, white that...gosh, you sound like such an improvement on the kind of (fill in the blank)-ism that you'd like to fool others into believing that you yourself eschew. Really just another hate filled emotionalist though, is all that you really are.
Was looking for this comment. Thanks!
Sometimes I think about you in particular Paul as my digestive system, so its funny this is the video of yesterday.
I am often absorbing lots of these conversations but my B-/C+ intelligence doesnt always allow me much insight despite some nominal understanding. But then I watch your videos and its like you are my stomach enzymes and bile and you extract that which is important for my survival and then i integrate that into my information body.
I will wait for your video on art next to give my full take on that. But briefly, as an artist, this whole thing gets more complex. I find my whole salience landscape shifts away from TLC when i am crafting or working on a project. My mind needs to silo itself away to be productive. then I fall behind and out of touch!
"What's your favorite book?"
*Steven Pinker proceeds to list 58 books*
"I could probably come up with more."
George Gamow's 123 infinity is an old favorite of mine too.
Oh I wish our schools would become like Pinkers outline.
That's something we should all agree on (as nationalists) we want our people to be as well as possible. It is a beautifull outline of why I would argument liberalism can do so. Strength in every person through education and freedom.
Similar as with femnism (it should not sperate us) it is good to strive to be rid of anything that would devalue us or make us weeker.
One of Pinker's best presentations.
I think that after all of them
Prof. Pinker actually added a lot condition to "Free Speech", baiscally people should be well educated.
Pinker is the wisest man around still. Peterson stealing all thunder with his sharp attitude. Pinker is a breath of fresh air and full of wisdom.
Peterson is nothing more than the physical manifestation that Christopher Hitchens is no longer here to shut down A.S.S. (Anti-Scientific Superstition). Hitchens was the disinfectant that would have prevented Peterson ever opening his mouth in public. Without the Hitchens innoculation, the Peterson infection is free to spread.
@@DIOULASSO I happen to think that both Steven Pinker and Jordan Peterson are very important thinkers. The two of them think in quite different ways which are equally important to consider - I am only slightly bothered by the fact that the level of popularity of Peterson has taken some of the attention away from other brilliant speakers, however he is quite charismatic and respectable. Pinker is just such a nerd and genius that I wish more people would be listening to him.
Try David Deutsch! th-cam.com/video/lX-K63pVPTM/w-d-xo.html
@@DIOULASSO so true peterson is the deepak chopra of christianity. hitch would´ve destroyed his obfuscating meandering nonsense in seconds.
@@symmetrie_bruch quit worshipping Hitchens. Sheldrake already destroyed him.
two rules no business can be conducted on continental ground & all markers must be honored are all that separate us from beasts... Rules & accountability = civilized society
Blasphemy laws are indeed outdated.
Clearly you haven't been to a scifi convention and listened to star trek fans go toe to toe with star wars fans.
All victimless crimes are.
When was this recorded please?
April 4th, 2018
Yea, I actually need to explain that to my grandfather in Russia.
I would say they also lack trust in eachother? To be free from tyranny you must care about your fellow peoples freedom and trust them to do the same. Libertarians propose that a simple game of trust based on all benfiting is enogh, but so or so this trust that your fellow citicen want to be free rather than to themselves gain power is vital- otherwise all it can ever be is a game of who can have that power.
Ofc you need to know what others think, but the main thing you need to know is that you don't need to fight for power, because neither party wants power over eachother. That's foundational in a sense.
Oh, agreed. I wounder why tho? It's something to do with human realtionships I am now relativly certain. Just by comparison of how I view political disagreement with my fellow german people when I know they act out of a care for (our) people and how I react to the same arguments by somone I only dis-/agree with politicaly in america. It's like with our people the basis of any interaction is love what predates any political thoght. There political thoght is just a tool for the well-being of us. If anything is politics it becomes harder to susutain a level of abstraction to oneself that is then necessery that aknowleges that one does not know everything best, that others motivations are good and that they (assuming one is right in the judgement of them) would in the worst case of outcomes of there actions likly turn against them too. That's vital. It's also ofc toxic, because of the way the opposing sides never highlit the best parts of eachother and never try to amplify them in there criticism but make them out to be the worst dooms possible. That might be natural but I don't think it virtus. It divides and makes people fear eachother and belive the worst of eachother. That is never a good deed. It helps to be more civil even just in ones mind while thinking through issues.
That said on the issue of abortion and importance of democracy (even in the aknowlegment of ones loss) there's little towsides to me. There's one that is wrong and one that is right. The left has those issues too, expecilly as maybe I exprimced it in germany already at a more advanced degree. But for most issues it's possible. That's good enogh to mostly feel civil to me.
In answering a question, Pinker recommends George Gamow's book "One, Two, Three Infinity" but mistakenly attributes it to Isaac Asimov.
well thank heavens for that, just for a moment there I thought he was perfect. I can tell you though, that his quotes taken from David Deutsch (The Beginning of Infinity) are entirely accurate and provide the best explanation we have so far on how knowledge progresses ...
mistakes happen to the best
This is important. George Gamow was a brilliant scientist and deserves proper credit to his work. Also, people who want to look up this book should know who actually wrote it so there is no confusion. The interpretation of this comment as some sort of attack on Pinker is part of the problem with our society. We are ready to jump at bland statements of fact--such as George Gamow wrote this book, not Isaac Asimov--as if they are attacks. I confess to not being sure that, if the subset of people who would watch this kind of video cannot have a coherent and logical discussion, there is much chance for the population at large. Sarcastic responses to a simple correction are not a good indicator.
Virgil Reese, thanks for the clarification. Not sure why others are feeling so antagonised by it
@@astronomianova1 It didn't come off as sarcastic to me - I'm pretty sure it was a simple joke about the relief one should feel when recognizing that their heroes or role models are, in fact, human. It's proof of a mind that has opened itself to thinking critically.
45:41 on universities squashing free speech
17:23 “into totalitarianism” say it out loud, that’s a tough one lol
Steven Pinker RULES
59:13 my dudes shirt has
vitiligo
"Bitch and moan". I for one am shocked, shocked......
33:56 it always bothers me how some people are so eager to laugh in academic settings
The interviewer is just speaking bunkum
The audience shamefully doesn't seem so broad, even though collectively they may represent all people's interests
"understand what universities are for *SMACK*"
"free speech is important *SMACK*"
"people always try and stop me from freely smacking my lips*SMACK*"
I'm starting to doubt the value of free speech LOL jk
Why is it, that people always turn to Popper without knowing what he actually means... He was an induction skeptic. That is to say, in his view, no knowledge can EVER come from induction.
I'm ready to be corrected, but I tough it was old-fashioned (Pre-F Bacon) DEductive reasoning brought forthwith nothing new. Help.
Why is it that... (no comma until after the "that")
That is correct. Pinker understands Popper just fine though. What is your objection?
Does that mean that deductive arguments can't prove anything, since the reason we believe that they're always correct is that they've never been wrong before (i.e., an inductive argument)?
@@GOffUnit No one has ever made de argument that the reason to believe deductive arguments is, that they have never been wrong. Instead, they argue, that the reason to believe it is because of how semantics work. Now a lot of people argue, that semantics is a very problematic thing, because words are not static and so on, but that is another discussion all together.
Ok... Let's be honest... For once! The issue of Free Speech in this our modern era has very little to do with the merits of free speech, it's intention and the intentions of our founders and EVERYTHING with power. Now, it can be argued that the reason for free speech is about power. That's a fair argument. After all, it primary goal of establishing the first amendment was to address a specific issue the founder faced in their time. To be able to speak out against the king and the powerful ruling class without fear of persecution. Also, freedom of religion was wisely placed in this amendment and right after speech is because of the last and current persecution of those that didn't adhere to acceptable state religion. A religion like the Church of England.
It wasn't until. Much later that free speech became out yelling fire in a theater. A SOTUS ruling and argument almost always misunderstood or misrepresented. Or, it became about Nazis marching in Skokie or feces on the virgin Mary in so called "art". And or course, it became THE issue for young liberals and radicals in Berekly in the 60s which should be looked back at now as admirable. None of these are why the subject is being debated today.
Today, the root cause for this debate is simple. One political party and it's idiological fellow travelers as well as a federal government infested with unelected bureaucrats also motivated by ideologies cynically being forwarded by our university system. These individuals has have becoming an incredibly powerful movement whose power stucture was threatened. Threatened by an outsider and a silent majority that threaded the hold on power they wrestled away from the people one Autumn day if Dallas in 1962. The day the experiment in self rule our founders faught for and Americans died for then and in wars after. Our govt was taken for us the one they always are. Violence and lies.
Now, it's become almost easy for a political movement to use the weakest and most vulnerable as political weapons. Weapons to bludgeon not only their political opponents over the head but ordinary citizens. It's. It about hate speech or hurt feelings. It's about wrestling back power that came under theat in 2016. It's not about gay rights, trans rights or abortion! It's about silencing those that would dare challenge the ruling elites.
Its simple, if you actually believe in your positions and are able to argue them...then free speech is your powerful tool to express your beliefs. It you are either certain in your beliefs or, are honest and want to challenge yourself then you have no reason to fear free speech. The only reason you would want to shutdown free speech is fear. Fear that you will be discovered for exactly what you are. Power mad!
Now... Don't misunderstanded me and suggest I'm advocating for one party or the other. It believe both are failures and have failed us. Also, I'm not advocating or saying I support who was elected in 2016 that brought all this madness to light. I'm merely pointing out what happened and when.
Challenge: see if you can find a commenter that opposes Pinker and actually counters one or more of his arguments.
No you.
Compared to Ayn Rand's understanding and articulation of the sanctity of free speech, Steven is...................a lightweight.
How so, specifically?
@@EmperorsNewWardrobe It's been a while since I commented on this video, but Ayn was a relative genius, and Steven is, in my opinion, too much an apologist for the Left's and, I would argue, Progressive's, assault on free speech. I, and Rand, would KILL for free speech. No animal wants their life to be coerced by constraint. Freedom exists tangibly, and ethereally. Tangible constraint is, for example, incarceration. Ethereal constraint, if you will, is that of thought, and its natural expression, free speech. Free speech is sacred for an animal that understands the sanctity of life and freedom of life. It is so sacred an idea, as to move an intelligent animal to tears, in its conception. The price for freedom of speech.........................idiots, with bad ideas...............a price worth paying.
@Craig Castanet, D.C., he’s an apologist for the Left’s assault on free speech? How??
@@EmperorsNewWardrobe You're gonna make me work for this, are you? I generally find his tone too tepid on free speech. I get much more animated and passionate and angry, when free speech is under threat. Maybe he doesn't have it in him, to be strong. That wouldn't surprise me. These intellectuals generally lack the physical strength to convey that same kind of passion that I think appropriate to the actual physical battles it takes to establish civil rights, e.g. free speech. Our founders put their lives and property on the line, in the interest of establishing a country with unprecedented civil rights. That requires intellectual and physical strength. And I generally don't feel Pinker has the moral certitude about freedom that, for example, Ayn Rand had. And, having come from that shit hole, Russia, she conveyed a passion about freedom, that Pinker lacks.
Craig Castanet, D.C., so, by ‘articulation’ you meant his style, not his actual arguments. Fine, maybe, but let me know if you have criticisms of his actual content because I’d be keen to hear if and where he’s wrong
As it is not possible to distinguish between nude art and pornography, so it's impossible to differentiate between harassment and a free speech.
It's fully possible, but okay. My issue is anyway the part where people are raped or don't have the right to there photos (revenge porn). If any distributer of any form becomes liable for thos it'd be just fine with me.
@@catsaresocute650 Well, we all hope for it.
@@cincinat18 not rlly. There's way too many ppl who go "heands in my ears, I can't hear you" when you try to explain to them that there's a very big very uggly problem with sex trafficing
@@catsaresocute650 well, some believe Earth is flat
The epitome of erudite
TRUMP2020
I wanted to hear Pinker, not the introduction. Waste of time!