Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

41–50 of 55 posts

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#41

Post by Graphon1 »

edblarney wrote: post #25
onion2k wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we should also carefully note whether we currently appear to be on an upward or downward trajectory (IMO, downward) There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society - it can be, and is, something that we can measure. You don't need an opinion about it. There's nothing subjective to think about and decide on. It's based on information. As such, your opinio…

"There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society" Yes, there is. Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence. Imagine you - the same person you are now - in that situation. It would be a completely different dynamic of 'violence'…

> Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence.

that conclusion is not warranted by the premise. How about this as an alternative outcome: "Imagine a society in which people actively defend community values for themselves and in cooperation with a community of similarly concerned citizens. It would quickly stabilize into a mostly non-violent community."

What are police, but a group of people specifically dedicated by the community to a specific task? Just because there is no dedicated, professional person filling a role, does not mean the role will not be filled.

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#42

Post by Graphon1 »

edblarney wrote: post #25
onion2k wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

we should also carefully note whether we currently appear to be on an upward or downward trajectory (IMO, downward) There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society - it can be, and is, something that we can measure. You don't need an opinion about it. There's nothing subjective to think about and decide on. It's based on information. As such, your opinio…

"There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society" Yes, there is. Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence. Imagine you - the same person you are now - in that situation. It would be a completely different dynamic of 'violence'…

> From 1960 to 1992 crime in the Western world grew by 800%

citation? Also, same question for your 600% number?

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#44

Post by edblarney »

Graphon1 wrote: post #42
edblarney wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society" Yes, there is. Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence. Imagine you - the same person you are now - in that situation. It would be a completely different dynamic of 'violence'…

> From 1960 to 1992 crime in the Western world grew by 800% citation? Also, same question for your 600% number?

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/427758/careful-panic-vi...

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#45

Post by oxymoron »

pierre_d528 wrote: post #6

http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/violence.pdf Pinker does not know how to count. What is this doing here?

It's a bit unfair to claim that a person can't have _anything_ interesting to say in regards to _any_ subject because you disagree with the statistical methods in one of his books, isn't it? Moreover, not all of Better Angels relies on a statistical argument, and so it might still be the case that Pinker has some interesting insights into the nature of violence.

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#46

Post by pierre_d528 »

oxymoron wrote: post #45
pierre_d528 wrote: post #6

http://www.fooledbyrandomness.com/violence.pdf Pinker does not know how to count. What is this doing here?

It's a bit unfair to claim that a person can't have _anything_ interesting to say in regards to _any_ subject because you disagree with the statistical methods in one of his books, isn't it? Moreover, not all of Better Angels relies on a statistical argument, and so it might still be the case that Pinker has some interesting insights into the nature of violence.

I think that your pseudo is a bit too long, could you remove the first 3 letters?

You see?

Also, the motto of Harvard is "Veritas" not "Bullshitass".

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#47

Post by oxymoron »

pierre_d528 wrote: post #46
oxymoron wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's a bit unfair to claim that a person can't have _anything_ interesting to say in regards to _any_ subject because you disagree with the statistical methods in one of his books, isn't it? Moreover, not all of Better Angels relies on a statistical argument, and so it might still be the case that Pinker has some interesting insights into the nature of violence.

I think that your pseudo is a bit too long, could you remove the first 3 letters? You see? Also, the motto of Harvard is "Veritas" not "Bullshitass".

So which parts of Chapter 7 and 8 - the ones that deals with the applicable neurology and psycology - do you disagree with? I presume that the chapter on inner demons felt very relatable when you read it, pierre? :) Please do elaborate on your concerns with the Blank Slate and The Sense of Style while your at it.

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#48

Post by return0 »

Graphon1 wrote: post #41
edblarney wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society" Yes, there is. Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence. Imagine you - the same person you are now - in that situation. It would be a completely different dynamic of 'violence'…

> Imagine a society without justice/police in which people must fend for themselves. It would quickly deteriorate to the point wherein there would be a fair bit of violence. that conclusion is not warranted by the premise. How about this as an alternative outcome: "Imagine a society in which people actively defend community values for themselves and in cooperation with a community of similarly concerned citizens. It…

> Just because there is no dedicated, professional person filling a role, does not mean the role will not be filled

And thats how you get Somalia. Police was invented for a reason i suppose .

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#49

Post by tunesmith »

onion2k wrote: post #5
Analemma_ wrote: post #3

The whole "better angels of our nature" optimism thing kind of seems like sticking your head in the sand to me. Of course we should have a sense of perspective about how bad things are currently (which seems to be what Pinker is saying), but we should also carefully note whether we currently appear to be on an upward or downward trajectory (IMO, downward), and more importantly, whether there are any forces or incenti…

we should also carefully note whether we currently appear to be on an upward or downward trajectory (IMO, downward) There's no interpretative reasoning required when you're looking at a graph of the level of violence in society - it can be, and is, something that we can measure. You don't need an opinion about it. There's nothing subjective to think about and decide on. It's based on information. As such, your opinio…

When I was learning piano in college, I reached a point where I hit a major wall, and where I actually got worse over a period of time. My playing got clunkier and less expressive, and I was unable to communicate as well as I had before. Extremely upset, I went to the old emeritus piano wizard of the faculty for advice. He had been listening and told me that I had actually been improving very quickly, but my musical awareness had been increasing even faster. So relatively, my perceptions were telling me I was getting worse.

I tend to think that is behind the feelings of things being more violent. We're still adjusting to globalism and the greater feelings of interconnectedness.

Re: Steven Pinker on Language, Reason, and the Future of Violence

#50

Post by skiplist1 »

The problem with people that believe that being reasonable is the reasonable thing to do is that many crucial moments of our lives depends on taking irrational moves. I remember someone saying that the way to win in a game in which both of you are chained together at the edge of a mountain and the first one to take rational moves lose is to dance while singing at the edge of the mountain. Like in poker we need some irrational moves to win in society. Also, America was discovered because someone make a trip to nowhere.
Post reply on HN