Spyke

Syndicated from the fediverse. Read and engage on the original instance.

View original on lemmy.world
progressivepolitics·Progressive Politicsbyarotrios

Steven Pinker on Revolutions, Rogue AI, and the Struggle for Reality

Dr. Steven Pinker is a cognitive scientist at Harvard, a 2x Pulitzer Prize finalist, and author of notable works like The Blank Slate, How the Mind Works, The Better Angels of Our Nature, and Enlightenment Now.

We discuss his research on the psychology of common knowledge and what it means for democracy in a time of infinite AI slop and social media confusion.

We also dive into deeper philosophical questions on AI consciousness and rogue AI — note that this was recorded before the recent Hugging Face incident, making our commentary especially urgent.

Steven Pinker on Revolutions, Rogue AI, and the Struggle for Realityhttps://tobias.substack.com/p/will-ai-wake-up-before-we-do-a-conversation?r=127g8Open linkView original on lemmy.world
1
Comments7

7 replies

EmilieEasie
fedinsfw.app

Istg I remember this guy's name as part of the early manosphere, anyone else remember?

2
EmilieEasiereply
fedinsfw.app

Oh, he's said some very awkward things about women and race in the vein of evolutionary psychology and is all over the Epstein files. That's what I'm remembering.

1
EmilieEasiereply
fedinsfw.app

For awkward things or for being in the Epstein files or both?

I think this article is an okay summary, but it's definitely editorialized in a way that is very clearly starting from a position of probably not being a fan of Pinker's.

https://newlinesmag.com/argument/the-academic-justification-for-male-supremacy/

You might like better hunting through the files yourself to see where and how he appears or googling, like, Steven Pinker evolutionary psychology racism or something, and then you might get results from defenders and detractors and end up with a more balanced view.

From my perspective, I definitely remember some really early misogynist skeptic type bros (if you're old enough and were online enough at that time, I'm talking the YouTube channels that started out as atheist commentary and then pivoted to OWNING FEMINISTS) to bolster their arguments about women just being bad at math and what have you. I do think he probably didn't push back hard enough on those types of people back in the day, and I do think he should answer for his relationship with Epstein and I'm not all that impressed by claims of ignorance about what was going on there.

But I also don't think that's the same as being Andrew Tate or even inspiring Tate-like figures of the modern manosphere. But there's so few people looking critically at him that it's tough to just provide any kind of nuanced source.

2
arotriosreply
lemmy.world

Thanks for the information. I wasn't aware of his connection. I assume you're referring to this:

This tone, which could be described as “be reasonable,” characterizes many of Epstein’s close academic associates, such as the Harvard professor Steven Pinker, who appears extensively in the files. Pinker, best known for his popular books such as “The Better Angels of Our Nature” and “The Language Instinct,” has written whole books drawing on biological explanations to explain human behavior, many invoking the evolutionary pressures of passing on genes. He has explicitly included male aggression and even rape in these discussions, suggesting that they are “natural” tendencies.

Pinker himself is careful to distinguish between such biological predispositions and moral concerns that make certain actions reprehensible, but Epstein clearly saw the potential in Pinker’s theories to justify his own worldview. He hosted the academic at dinners and parties, and the resulting photos suggest Pinker was comfortable in this environment.

And:

The files show that in 2007 he was consulted by Epstein’s lawyer (as “one of the world’s leading experts on grammar”), “to analyze the statute” of a law which criminalizes contact with minors for the purpose of sexual exploitation. When this emerged, during Epstein’s 2019 court case, Pinker claimed he didn’t realize it was for the defense of Epstein, but it is difficult to imagine what he might have thought his advice was to be used for — did he think his verdict, that the “sole rational reading” of the statute was that “communication must be the vehicle through which the persuading or enticing directly occurs,” was in defense of the “enticed” girls? It seems unlikely.

Needless to say, I'm disappointed, as I felt the interview was good and touched on some really interesting points about the flash point of revolutionary action, and I feel that Pinker's past overshadows what I consider a quality discussion. Without the context of Pinker's history, I found it a good listen.

Do I think Pinker is part of the manosphere? No, but it's clear that he didn't think through how his theories would be interpreted (or his friendship with Epstein, for that matter) and used to push an abhorrent agenda.

I'm leaving the post up, as I still think its a good interview from an intellectual standpoint, but also to preserve your commentary as it presents important context. Thanks.

2

You reached the end

Steven Pinker on Revolutions, Rogue AI, and the Struggle for Reality | Spyke