Gravitahn
Steven Pinker is a professor in the Department of Psychology at Harvard University. He conducts research on language and cognition and has authored ten books, including:
The Language Instinct
How the Mind Works
The Blank Slate
The Stuff of Thought
The Better Angels of Our Nature
and most recently, The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person’s Guide to Writing in the 21st Century.
Full video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5eo3ZC1Sc2w
Source
The current politically correct definition of "far right" in European countries: A term that refers to any individual, group or publication that objects to their country allowing the free inflow of illegal aliens and/or being surrendered to the cult of Islam.
People for free speech are "right-wing" simply because all leftopaths are inveterate hypocrite liars.
I live at the Right Pole and from there all I see is commie pinkos and their fellow travelers.
this is not "how progressives define right wing".
this is how Steven Pinker describes how progressives apply the label of "right wing" to certain things.
baaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa
Nothing ironic. Progressives can’t stand dissent.
The sad part is that this fanaticism is coming from the Professors, the Administrators, the Media and the Government regulators. The kids are really just responding to the indoctrination they have been programed to believe in. When I ask where are all the adults in the room? in this madness, I have to remind myself that it is the authority figures who have created this mess and perpetuate it.
In a society it is the unpopular opinions which need to be protected from censorship. The popular opinions do not need protection.
Ah, how it is, ah, always happens, ah, those ah people cannot just, ah, ask their question, but ah instead have to tell ah the whole story?
Yep, lefties are insanely stupid and dangerous; we knew this.
The ONLY people who think academics are special are academics. People who have to produce in the real world have nothing but contempt for these people.
What is Pinker saying?
That right wing views are the problem in government and certain MSM.
That academia/tertiary education institutions have left wing problems.
Go figure…
Pinker is so successful as a author that he can rist his academic job without fear – they wouldn't dare try to take him down.
Easy definition for right wingers. They deceive for gain.
The Right-Wing Intelligentsia has won over the entire world with just two memes: Political Correctness, and Everybody Gets a Trophy = Snowflake.
That's all it took.
Everybody buys it and everyone has fallen for it.
What they call right wing was middle of the road 20 years ago.
You support free speech? NAZI!!!
This man is a legend
It’s simple: the right tolerates more free speech because they have a basic view of the world and principles to stand on.
The left has an ever shifting world view and think everything is socially constructed so he who controls the narrative controls the ideas. So the left has more at stake in controlling speech and thought.
I can not take hoff summers seriously after her prageru video
Although there is no doubt that this phenomenon happens, i think it is erroneous to suggest that this represents the left generally.
He's wonderful
Human beings are living WAY too good in this day and age. We've got an abundance of food, water, supplies etc.. Technology has spoiled a lot of young people to the point of them now actively LOOKING to be offended (a.k.a excitement). People feel accomplished by being sensitive nowadays & social media is a huge part of this. SJW culture is simply a thing because we’re too comfortable & got too much security. Pretty much we don’t have enough real sh*t to worry about. Our basic human needs are met, so now let’s look for something extra.
I'm a philosopher so I'll tell you now: the difference between Right and Left (the two LARGEST categories, and thus with the widest category differences that ) are: the Left has a central political value of equality. It is equalitarian in nature, not egalitarian. Equalitarianism is "valuing making society or economy becoming more equal".
The Left vales equality centrally, whereas a "right" philosophy can also have a value in equality, but it is not central to the philosophy. For instance: modern "rightist" conservatives view equality of opportunity as a value, but they are not equalitarian in nature: they do not see the need to level all people in material or social circumstances. They see difference is natural, and do not seek to change that condition.
So what you really have is a central idea (equality) and the various ideas and values that differ from it: it's not really "right-left", it's a center that everything else diverges from. The "right", by definition, has more diversity in ideology because wholly divergent ideas can be had, just so long as they don't have equality as the central value. For instance, libertarians and Nazis are opposites, but both "rightist" because they don't value equalitarianism as a central value.
It also means that very similar ideologies can be set against one another. Nazis and Communism are one version of that: very similar in many ways, with both sides even learning and adapting their system based on learning from the other system (!), but the Nazis believed in difference and the Communists believed in equality.
Thus, even the "right-left" divide is not very helpful or even very instructive, many times. Both the Nazis and Communists were socialists, and in both systems the totalitarian socialism was their central defining characteristics, not their place on the political divide. Soviets and Nazis had nearly all in common, and had only very superficial differences dividing them.
So the question "is the right-left divide very useful?" needs to be addressed. Unfortunately, most people do not know what the actual divide is, so it ossifies into current political moments. People think "oh, he's (whatever), so he's on my side!", when in reality more might politically and ideologically divide you from someone on your side than someone someone technically "on the other side".
Remember. It's "equality as a CENTRAL value". Not equality as a value. That is the difference.
Somewhat sophistic, in that an intolerance of intolerance is not itself an intolerance in the moral or ethical sense. If more on the Right were less hysterical and more accommodating their betters might not reject and condemn them so.
It's mainly in the humanities. I don't know if their courses ever did teach them to reason and think critically but the courses now produce "dogma robots" who when confronted with a counter argument become confused. They don't understand the difference between a well reasoned argument with supporting evidence and a bland statement of opinion. They seem to judge a statement's "truth"
by how it "feels" to them.
Humanties courses should be defunded.