Peter Thiel: Why Steven Pinker is Wrong About the Decline of Violence
Вставка
- Опубліковано 17 жов 2024
- Peter Thiel explains why famed linguist and author Steven Pinker is wrong about the decline of violence. #peterthiel #peterthielinterview #stevenpinker #violence #nuclearwar
Society isn't actually less violent than it was in past decades, and Peter Thiel explains why science illustrates that: Nuclear conflict could be right around the corner.
If you are interested in Steven Pinker's theory on the decline of violence, he talked about it on our podcast a few months ago. Starting at 24:17 ua-cam.com/video/AEkuMTWZR1M/v-deo.html
1:14 “I’m not sure we should be completely complacent”
Holy moly, the number of times Pinker warns against complacency makes me wonder if this guy has properly read Pinker’s work. I think one of his main goals besides informing the public with facts about the open society and how to think more rationally is to show us that we are in a privileged position to APPRECIATE the huge fortune that we in the West especially have inherited following millennia of far worse conditions. We religious and nonreligious in the West should be saying a daily dinner time moment of gratitude and appreciation for the privilege of being born today and with the freedoms that surround us. Unfortunately, it’s all too easy to get wrapped up in the petty squabbles of local politics to see how green our grass really is
Pinker analysis shows one _fact:_ from 1760 to today the world constantly became _more_ peaceful - less wars but even less murders, less shootings but even less fist fights.
Thiel "counterargument": Yes, but there is still the potential for violence. It _could be_ more violent.
But it is not. That's the point, Peter. We have more potential for violence, but less violence. That is exactly Pinker's point, there is no refutation there. To say that however we should not lower our guard, to remember that violence _could be_ back in spades soon, is a valid point but it is not a counterargument. Pinker never said: the World is more and more peaceful _and it will be even more peaceful tomorrow, ignore nuclear threats!_ You are fighting a very weird straw-man.
Well reasoned. Check out the rest of the podcast for the full conversation ua-cam.com/video/iF2la6FxVQc/v-deo.html
Is "We have more potential for violence, but less violence" Actually Pinkers point? I thought that it was that there was actually a decline in violence overall i.e. the system as a whole is trending positively. Thiels point is the system as whole is not trending positively and you can only reach Pinkers conclusion by taking a narrow view of history and the current state of the world. Or is Pinkers view more nuanced?
It’s amazing how often Pinker’s big points are misunderstood. I think also of his debate about human progress with Alan De Botton, who repeatedly argued against a non-existent point about perfection, one that Pinker pointed out again and again as something that was no-one arguing for
I'm just a guy who uses google Search. I just learned that in the late 1980s, the world contained 60K+ armed nuclear weapons. Currently, there are fewer than 10K. Together, the US and Russia account for approximately 3K of those.
Forty years ago, the US and Russia accounted for approximately 60K armed warheads. Theil? Where's your head?
Less violent for whom? Go watch unlearning economics and We're in Hell's videos... and maybe you'll get over your cosy liberal bubble-mentality.
Why the ad hominem attack on Pinker? It adds nothing to the validity of Thiel's point.
Didn't think about that but you're right. He could have simply said Pinker's view may be different to his own due to their backgrounds instead of putting him down unnecessarily. Comments like this could lead to more violence jk
Check out our interview with Steven Pinker here ua-cam.com/video/AEkuMTWZR1M/v-deo.html
He seems to be itching for trouble, a troll with money, like his other pay pal. Does he have a toupee?
Can you clarify that? How is he itching for trouble?
His other pay pal - very good!
People like Thiel believe that their words shape opinion. If Thiel says the world is dangerous, the world becomes a little more dangerous and he says it because he wants it to become so.The nuclear weapons rotting in their silos are not potential energy, fear and ideology are. The destruction of the world order policed by the US is. Thiel thinks he would benefit. He is an immature troll. @@jwadaow
@@jwadaow his company is using AI for military operations, more violence means he can sell his software to more clients, peace is bad for bussiness.