Robert Wright interviews Steven Pinker (1/7)

No description available.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• Steven Pinker
• evolution
• evolutionary
• psychology
• kin
• selection
• reciprocal
• altruism

[Tom45931]

"Is there really any evidence that the brain is a result of evolution?"

Yes, yes there is such evidence

..wipes eyes...

[BLacanette]

@stalinist666

Atheists aren't ignoring reason, they are ignoring convenient explanations that have no evidence to back them up.

[stalinist666]

Is there really any evidence that the brain is a result of evolution? The co-founder of evolution itself, Alfred Russell Wallace, was convinced that the brain was far too complex to have evolved in response to environmental imperatives, and that there must have been some divine planning involved in its creation. This is a rational position, but many Atheists will actually ignore reason if it points them away from a secular position - which, in my opinion, is a hypocrisy equal to that of religion

[huwrj]

@pawsoned Religion wants to claim special exemption from scientific and philosophical analysis by claiming to be supernatural and beyond the natural universe. That's just unacceptable in the 21st century, because religion draws its "authority" from supernatural claims and religious leaders seek power, influence, and subsidies in the form of tax breaks here in the natural world, they seek influence over their fellow evolved mammals. Therefore their claims about reality are fair game for science.

[huwrj]

@pawsoned Nonsense. Science contradicts the Bible. Science says virgins don't have children unless fertilized in vitro. Science says that men can't walk on water and part the Red Sea and that men can't ride a horse up into heaven like Mohammed, and that if men have dreams about God speaking to them then that is a psychological phenomenon, a neurological state, no more. Science has also completely disproven the Bible's version of biology, astronomy, chemistry and cosmology.

[Happypast]

@pawsoned By what logic does not doing research diminish the validity of the science he's presenting. I don't see how that follow. And I have watched a lot of other videos, he's rarely focused on religion. It's just not his main thing, don't pretend that it is. Again, people don't like him because he's atheist, they like him because he's sane and rational and he does a good job communicating interesting and important ideas in psychology, cognitive science and much more.

[pawsoned]

@Happypast Well, it seems to me that scientists do research, don't they?

The fact that Pinker writes bestselling books popularizing science (of other scientists) instead of focusing on doing his own experiments diminishes his scientific validity as far as I'm concerned. And don't pretend that Pinker is a lukewarm atheist. He is involved in fighting religion. Just watch more vids on YT.

[Happypast]

@pawsoned no. the books I've read (reading how the mind works and have read the blank slate) are good and I see no reason for why it would have to be his own research.

As for his own personal values I just don't see that at all, (ok, maybe the Art chapter in the blank slate) Pinker is unusually politically neutral and I just don't see it at all. What are these personal values that lie outside the scientific realm that he's trying to sell us?

[pawsoned]

Happypast I agree with you that he's a GOOD scientist and his focus should be on science indeed. Atheism may be his worldview and I have nothing against people holding such beliefs but imo when scientists speak for a certain worldview they present their own personal values that lie outside the scientific realm per se. I think that Pinker cleverly intertwines both in his writings and vids on YT. Moreover, his own original research mentioned in his books is very scarce, don't you think it unusual?

[Happypast]

@pawsoned I think it's a big difference between trying to understand the psychology of control that many religions use and being a militant-atheist with the primary goal of converting people to atheism. He's an atheist yes, but that's not his focus. People don't like him because he's an outspoken atheist, they like him because he's a good scientist and voice of reason. Some people may admire i.e. Dawkins simply because he's an outspoken atheist but I think very few have that relation to Pinker.