Gravitahn
NOTE: This is a re-upload of a previous video, with much improved audio. Otherwise, the content is identical.
This is an excerpt of an April 22, 2005 debate between Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke on the subject of under-representation of women in science. This was at least partially inspired by an incident involving former Harvard president Lawrence Summers, whose public comments speculating on possible explanations for gender disparity in science were widely misinterpreted and taken out of context.
This video includes only Steven Pinker’s prepared portion. It does not include Elizabeth Spelke’s presentation, the dialogue between the two speakers or the Q&A section. You can view the entire 2-hour event here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-Hb3oe7-PJ8
The Science of Gender and Science
A Conversation with Steven Pinker and Elizabeth Spelke
April 22, 2005
===========================
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.
http://stevenpinker.com
Source
"If you repeat a lie often enough, people will come to believe it, and you will even come to believe it yourself."
The creed of modern SJWs. This quote is often attributed to Joseph Goebbels, and that is no coincidence. Political correctness and modern feminism is facism.
Very interesting, but there was no explanation given for the many highly intelligent men who never have children. Why would it be natural for evolution to weedle out the most intelligent men?
It must be remembered and considered that today's statistics need to be qualified by the influecne of 40 years of political and institutional repression of boys in education and even sports. Men have been pushed into the most risky occupations and actively discouraged in the classroom. (See books like "The War Against Boys" Christine Hoff-Sommers, and "Spreading Misandry," Nathanson, Young. The other issue of note is that as women move up in statistics of academic and career calculations, the continuity of society via child rearing has not only taken radical backseat, but the legal disadvantages of marriage for men has resulted in actual movements such as MGTOW that support young men who have abandoned the ideas of dating and pairing with females. (No, it is not a gay movment).
may i ask what truth is?
I adore Steven Pinker and his scholar books. My daughters, mother and sister are brilliant; my elder daughter (18) is an immature mathematician. My middle daughter empathic & brilliant teenage (14). She took a course at Duke TIP in International Policies this summer. My baby (11) is a STEM student. She can process her architecture in her topographic lobe in her brain. My mom is a metabolic geneticist. My sister is a research editor. Now, my female family is unique. I agree with Dr. Pinker; the general population of men veer towards science. The general of women veer towards social work.
"I am a feminist" This guy needs to have a talk with Karen Straughan.
No mention of higher male IQ , both the mean and the upper end of the distribution ?
10:50 not the difference but the ratio (also the drawing of the curves is horribly wrong).
Since Pinker is usually a stickler for correct wording i get the feeling that he doesn't fully understand the math here. If he does he should really know better.
This is music to my ears after hearing the overly PC BBC reaction to that sexist Italian physicist guy. lovin it:)
Anyone that says males and females are biologically indistinguishable should be immediately aborted. As they say, you can not fix stupid. These people should be dumped into a furnace labeled "Rejected genetic material".
Just hearing him walking on eggshells is quite funny
Its so funny for you, Pinker, isn't it.
"You opinion is statistically illiterate." That was true. But then he ends the video with an ideological statement completely divorced from, and in spite of the evidence he has just presented. It's like there's a disconnect between the rational, observational scientist part of his brain from that part that generates political conclusions.
i swear, if anyone in any exact science would ever say a study from 2005 is "as conclusive as our studies on gravity" theyd just laugh at that person for the rest of their life.
How are we even having this discussion? That's like arguing over whether the earth is a sphere or not.
26:40 Large differences in sex hormones, especially in the first 6 moths. Those moths were also found to be more prone to 'lamp fetishisms'
Amazing and very intelligent synthesis ! Pretty much everything has been said. Sadly, making the exact same speech in 2018 would probably result in a big backlash. There are many people refusing to acknowledge science today because of their political views.
Well, sexes are indisputably different, gender is a role.
Actually, women are better than men on STEM, and are even better at non STEM fields that require better skills in comprehension and expression.
So, in a friendly environment, as in developed countries, they chose according to their vocation, while in less accomplished and misogynistic countries they chose STEM because it give them access to better paid jobs. It is awesome! What drives women preferences is not their aptitude but economics!
Anyone that thinks men and women arnt different and arnt interested in different things is a fucking idiot.
There could only ever have been one group of people in the history of the world who could have been so utterly clueless enough to be surprised by these "findings." I am, of course, talking about post-60s intellectuals operating in the humanities and social sciences.
There comes a point when "progress" starts to look a lot more like degeneration.
Unfortunately no study so far on driving ability as that is certain to demonstrate the most difference between the sexes…
When you can't find it, I even know what it is you can't find. I know who it is. I even know what name that is. And that's the problem. I believe in what I see and know and experience.
It's a great talk as usual. 🙂
What I still don't quite get is why so many people care (or claim to care) about women in STEM, why would the gender of the person doing physics or whatever matter one bit? Isn't that the whole point of science, that it's just how things are regardless of who does the work? It's not like there's "Asian science", "Gay science" etc. It's just science so what difference does it make if women enter STEM fields or not?
Obviously women (or anyone else) shouldn't actively be kept out of STEM fields which they aren't as it is. It's not like we can just decide to change physics to make women more interested in it though, physics is physics, if you find it interesting then consider entering the field, if you don't find it interesting then enter another field. What's the problem?
Saying "We need more women in STEM!" honestly just seems like a cheap way to appease some people and/or maybe get a round of applause to me, it sounds good but when you dig a bit deeper it just doesn't make any sense, and I don't see how you'd do that unless you want to force uninterested women to enter the STEM field against their wishes.
Pinker- I choosed Childrens Lingusitics coz it turned me on
male is male female is female and they can not ever change roles
If Pinker made this presentation today he would be attacked in person and journalists would create hit-pieces to attack him periodically over many years.
haven't watched yet, has he had the balls to talk about brain size differences?
When did sex evolve?
This guy's supposed to be a scientist but his graphs and charts are about as clear as mud, and different conclusions to the ones stated can be drawn from the same data. On balance I'd say he's a charletan.
Remember the days when the post-structuralist religion was limited to Academia and hadn't invaded society yet? Now you can't even say any of this stuff out loud without losing your job.
Another "Dangerous Idea" from Steven Pinker. Love the book…
correlation does not represent causality… as this video hasnt actually enlightened the ideological idiots in the comments… gosh, how shit must it be for these scientists to be constantly recuperated by people that rather care about bashing on one another instead of generating actual honor, respect and peace. quit the judgements and open one another up, it's bothersome to see so much intelligence going to waste thx to people loving to amass hate. Back in the day it was so much more than lulz 4 teh trulz -_- i dont usually comment but scrolling down makes me lose hope in humanity. luckily there is still Pinker talking. Anyone bashing so enormously on others is making shit worse than it already is. Ridicule is easy and we will all lose like that in the long run – just like counter-culture has lost by acting exactly the same as you are now , try something else if depolarization and injustice is something you long for
Imagine the throngs of people rushing to their safespaces after seeing this lecture fourteen years on. How dare you micro-aggress me with your facts backed up by incontrovertible evidence!