New Scientist
Read more: http://environment.newscientist.com/article.ns?id=mg19626241.900&feedId=opinion_rss20?DCMP=NLC-youtube
Renowned linguist Steven Pinker discusses concepts from his book, “The Stuff of Thought”
Source
Steven Pinker Interview
What purpose was there in asking the question when you've already made up your mind what the answer is?
it was a rhetorical question, but actually my mind is not completely made up
I was worried about that too actually.
I think I would love that book for my birthday…anyone?
woohoo!
Give him a high-five for me. He sounds very bright.
Nah – I'd say he's fine, I think he was just looking for exact precision, or it's an idiosyncrasy.
Wow – you have got to be kidding. Pinker is the last person you could accuse of this. He works incredibly hard to make his subject matter as transparent as possible. His writing is a model of clarity. (As for this clip – did "causality" and "pathogen" scare you?)
Hmmm. Maybe you have secret a crush on Pinker? The truth will set you free.
Check out Judith Butler for an great example of what you're talking about, joebloggsgogglebox.
Nooooooo!
My therapist wouldn't tell me. I had to hear it from Youtube 🙁
its actually really interesting stuff. Pinker's book is a good one, but you might like a book called 'metaphors we live by' by Johnson and Lakoff. Pinker is a bit pretentious but he means well. Certainly less of an ass than Chomsky. His work on this however is at least in large part is reproduction of work by other people (Lakoff, Johnson, Sapir, et al.) Its really more complicated than Pinker lets on, which is unfortunate considering he is still speaking as if no one will understand him
Pinker is not pretentious at all. That's simply entirely untrue. Have you read any of his books?
Give him a high-five for me too.
Its not so much the particular words he uses, it's the fact that he uses so many of them to say nothing. It's a tautology. When I say someone 'dimmed the lights' of course I know that the causation is direct, that is why I chose those words. All he is doing is re-explaining the meaning of some words (in a rather long way), whose meaning I already know.
Did you read my post or just see the word pretentious and feel like you had to respond in defense of your intellectual hero? Yes I've read a number of them. I've also read countless other books in the same vein, book that Pinker used for at the very least inspiration. I agree with joeblogs here, and that was what I was trying to say. He sounds pretentious here because he is telling us something that is obvious using language which he would normally be using to explain something more complex.
So profanity serves as a way of reinforcing a communal sense of disgust towards bodily functions which could potentially kill us, thus it is a mechanism of defense againt disease. Interesting spin.
Aha, now that's an interesting idea (though not stated explicitely by Pinker).
You are suggesting that swearing about shit, piss etc. helps us to remember to avoid these things and hence avoid disease right?
However to convince me that it's true I need more than just speculation, you'd have to show me some correlation between level of swearing and level of hygiene across different societies.
in order to bend your mind in the direction of the inference I walked away with from this video admittedly would require a colossal amount of research and yet we both would agree that "proof" will always ultimately collapse upon itself as nothing is ever inpenetrably failsafe. so i'll have to concede that i haven't the energy, time or wherewithal to convince you of what was but a mere adumbration to myself that flickered for a brief moment in time. However, if i were a younger man …
Well.. I don't think it would be too hard to conduct a survey of students of different nationalities, ask a few questions about hygiene level, amount of swearing, types of swear words, level of swearing in home country, perceived rudeness of swear words etc. It would be a start at least.
It would be a good idea for a Masters dissertation.
Any social psychology students reading this?
"lightweight" is an interesting twist of linguistic rope.
I don't know much about the man, but why would you say that?
Funny, isn't it? That's exactly the kind of word he spends 3 pages on in this book.
Well, in the book he focuses on language over time and how things have come to be the way they are. He explicitly mentions that our modern societies keep us separated from our effluence (shit, piss, blood, etc), but that our swearing comes from a past where disease was rampant due to unclean living standards. Our modern technologies quickly separate us from our shit, piss, and blood, thanks to plumbing and garbage removal. You only have to look at Hurricane Katrina's or the Tsunami's…
immediate aftermaths. Diseases that are absolutely not common in our modern western societies quickly spread to dangerous levels.
He's really offering a framework for how these body wastes could have developed into taboos and curse words. He's not saying, and I don't believe, that they are super flexible. Sure, they change over time, but the overall themes of body waste and copulation remain most prevalent in curse words across cultures.
I'm not interested in knowing the name of the book. I haven't read a book by Pinker. Maybe this makes me a lightweight. I revere linguistic study, and became marginally familiar with Pinker's work and reputation. As a philospher have you encountered the practice of computational linguistics in your field?
But the shit smells bad to us because we have evolved to avoid odors of materials that make us sick. Did you "learn" your general preference for salty, fresh foods and "learn" your repulsion to rotten milk? Get out of here with that pure behaviorism.
pwned.
Steve pwns all.
i feel smarter just by listening to him 😀
@asseeninYOURDREAMS because he's so stupid? lol jk. I really like his insights on behaviour and language.
In my culture, almost all swear words have something to do with religion. Almost none with sex and one about shit, but it's almost not really a swear word. That's because for a long time, religion had supreme power over our lives. We are now free from it but the swear words remain. They are: Christ, hostie, tabarnak, calice, ciboire, sacrement, etc… I'm from Québec.
Man, you are like a total ciborium! Pinker knows all about that sacrament, because he's Canadian, eh? Chalice! I know he's Jewish, but he digs the tabernacle, dude.
i like the dudes ideas but his eyes seem dead and he seems so sad internally when he speaks, makes me want to shed a tear for the poor guy.
similar with most the evo bio guys, dawkins being another offender.
@dwaynedibbly huh? ok
I read the Language Instinct a number of years and found it fascinating. The Blank Slate more thought-provoking – certainly one of the best books I have ever read.
he seems sad 🙁
@ElSameo erudite points my friend and it is the latter of your exposition that I was generally thinking myself as to the cause of his malady.
You can learn as much from Pinker's books about human nature as from Moby Dick about whaling.
holy pissnuggets this guy is crazy
Pinker, you interviewed yourself. It doesn't count.
omg this man is brilliant. He reminds me of Aristotle's categories.
OMG this guy is smart
Fascinating stuff. I'd be interested to hear Pinker discuss those languages that don't distinguish transitive verbs. Got to be loads. We're pattern seeking individuals, so I can see how our sense of moral responsibility is borne out with how causative verbs are employed.
exactly – and as my language, and brain is not English – I absolutely hate is when they say – Can you do me a favor? when in reality they are ordering me to do something.
Language doesn't govern morality. Morality governs language.