Your reaction?
Angry Angry
Cute Cute
Fail Fail
Geeky Geeky
Lol Lol
Love Love
Win Win

Political Rhetoric, Explained – Steven Pinker

Comments 37

  1. They're probably not well read enough (…not something to fling at others, since very few people are as well read as they think they are — alas, I've to include myself there). I've given his word less weight after reading some disturbing things he said about the genocide in Yugoslavia.

  2. The fictionalized reality of this bearing any semblance to a Republic has been thoroughly dispelled at this stage in the game and yet the theatre continue's. It's insulting.

  3. @skepticasts It's because he is just another modern day sophist and his pseudo-explanations are a whole lot of hooey that befuddle other people by constructing false data and presenting them as a scientific fact that is seemingly irrefutable. Who is he really? Not a philosopher or a scientist but only a linguistic maven who uses rhetorical gimmicks to dismiss ideas that he does not like.

  4. @ihatekhomeini …i kinda feel bad now. haha. I wouldn't say condescending, but more skeptical. Since his main field is psychology and linguistics, he's more than likely going to have a preference.

  5. @ihatekhomeini square words? deride? You are a fantastic example of empty rhetoric. "social remembering" and "not as advanced as they could be". You construct sentences like a fifth grader. Steven Pinker has his P.H.D. in Linguistics and Psychology. There is no "deriding" of the social sciences. Why would he mock his own field of expertise? Dumbass.

  6. The term liberal likely became an insult during the Regan admin. It's a term that Americans enjoy internally. They love a liberal lifestyle. But Americans do not like to be viewed as liberal in foreign policy. Meaning to the world….America is anything but liberal.

  7. Actually he argues that nuture (i.e. post-natal social experience) interacts with genetic dispositions, resulting in certain reactions in how innate drives are dealt with and certain products in terms of cultural behaviour

  8. Obama is a war tyrant and imperialist, who cares about the interest of multinational corporations, and special interests groups and his own power. People who support him are an example of the indoctrination of the ruling political institutions.

  9. It's a shame that we (America) keep getting dumb-asses running for office when there's smart guys like this out there. I'd much rather have Pinker on the phone with Vladimir Putin rather than Bush or Obama any day of the week!

  10. Why do I never see people attack Chomsky using honest argument? It always seems to be this holocaust denier/genocide supporter/stalinist bullcrap. 30 seconds of work would have been enough to find out that Chomsky has always been extremely critical of the Soviet Union.

  11. he did not meant that we literally and directly force them intentionally to use vauge and indirect speech he was saying that it is only their natural response to being put nder fire for saying things in direct and difinitive ways. Also by buying into it (like buying into Obama's promises) we create the atmosphere where such empty rhetoric is applauded and clearly succsessful. Listent o the whole thing again and stop qoute mining lolololol

  12. Pinker should switch to politics; at least then he can make a bit more sense [than his linguistic theory].

    WHat he says about the "CHANGE" thing was copied from Chomsky anyway – again.

Leave a Reply to Contol Contolgfk Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

log in

Become a part of our community!

reset password

Back to
log in