
Steven Pinker: Writing In The 21st Century - jamesbritt
http://www.edge.org/conversation/writing-in-the-21st-century
======
vanderZwan
> _What are the arts but products of the human mind which resonate with our
> aesthetic and emotional faculties?_

Ah, the old "mental equivalent of cheesecake" argument - Pinker explicitly
used that one for music IIRC, which supposedly hijacked our love of language.
The latter goes against fairly overwhelming evidence that music is a much
older "faculty" than language. Then again, Pinker is a philosopher (don't get
me wrong, a wonderful one), and philosophers tend to fetishize language. When
you look at the topic of the article that obviously applies to Pinker too. But
to give a specific example, look this quote:

> _The medium by which we share complex ideas, namely language_

THE medium? While extremely powerful, vocal or written language is a linear,
monotone string of abstract symbols, which has some severe limitations in
certain situations (but for comparison, check out sign language; three spatial
dimensions to play with, oh my!). We don't say "a picture says more than a
thousand words" because it isn't true. Similarly, music often _mediates_
emotions in a much clearer and directer way than words ever do. In turn,
pictures and music have their ambiguities in places where language shines of
course.

Anyway, so we supposedly have these "faculties" somewhere in the brain for
aesthetics and emotions, distinct functions evolved that way for some purpose,
and then these get hijacked by things that trigger it (art), like some
supernormal stimulus[0].

While it sure can be helpful to analyze things in these terms, and is
consistent within its own framework, I think saying art is "nothing but" this
is a bit too reductionist, greatly oversimplifying things. You simply won't
see the bigger picture with this approach. For example, Petran Kockelkoren has
argued that art is part of the process of "domesticating" new technologies,
societal changes, etc[1]. That is, the way in which we take something
"strange" and "unnatural" and make it "normal" and "natural" to us.

Having said all that, I love Steve Pinker, his writing and his clear thinking
and think it's a great article. Just this itty bitty point always ruffles my
feathers a bit.

[0]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_stimulus](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supernormal_stimulus)

[1]
[http://doc.utwente.nl/79298/1/Kockelkoren05art.pdf](http://doc.utwente.nl/79298/1/Kockelkoren05art.pdf)

~~~
jmcqk6
>. Then again, Pinker is a philosopher (don't get me wrong, a wonderful one),

He is a bit of a philosopher, but his ph.d. is in experimental psychology. In
other words, he's not just thinking here, but probably has a basis for what
he's saying in empirical tests. He is very much an empiricist.

~~~
vanderZwan
Fair enough, but that is perfectly compatible with my claim that he can be a
bit overly reductionist at times (I'm not denying that reductionism is a
useful tool of course - far from it). He seems to be either unaware or
ignoring indications that music is way older than language.

* We acquire language through prosodic or "singsong" language - you know, the way people tend to go up and down and exaggerate in their intonation when talking to babies.

* Conversely, it stays with us much longer than language does, and capable of "reviving" someone in a way language can't: [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyZQf0p73QM](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fyZQf0p73QM)

* Based on nerve size we know our muscle control of our vocal apparatus was at our "modern" quality long before we acquired the capacity for symbolic manipulation that is required for language - in the order of hundreds of thousands of years versus tens of thousands or years. We couldn't have used it for language, but we already were a social species so it stands to reason that we were using it for communication. So what other options do we have aside from language that still require such refined control of our vocal output but some singsong form of uttering "intentions" towards each other?

------
hawkharris
_We 're always being told that young people suck: that they are illiterate and
unreflective and un-thoughtful, all of which ignores the fact that every
generation had that said about them by the older generation. Yet somehow
civilization persists._

That sentence resonated with me. Of all the superficial prejudices, ageism has
to be the most hypocritical. By ostracizing someone for being too young or too
old, you're making fun of a condition that you have, have had or will have in
the future. You might as well swear at a mirror.

~~~
dominotw
>which ignores the fact that every generation had that said about them by the
older generation.

Not true. I can think of many examples where this not true. For early 20th
century Britain the world kept seeming better, country was filled with
optimism for new generation. New schools, electricity , motorized
transportation, universities, thriving empire.

~~~
vanderZwan
I bet many of people were complaining that young people didn't appreciate how
good they had it, how they were wasting these golden opportunities, etc.

------
mjfl
Steve Pinker, always mean-mugging the camera...

Brilliant writer, in my opinion. If you haven't read his other books, notably
'How the Mind Works' and 'Better Angels of Our Nature' I would check them out.

~~~
maroonblazer
I love both of those and then read "The Blank Slate" and was blown away. I
regularly go back to that book when needing to counter someone on the left or
right who hasn't done their due diligence.

------
jostmey
I am always struck by how much interpretation is required to understand the
written word. A lot of information is missing in the ideas that we share using
language, leaving it up to the receiver to fill in the gaps.

------
thisrod
I'm surprised that Pinker doesn't mention the book whose title and authors
change with each edition, but which keeps the words style, lessons, clarity
and grace on its cover. His book sounds exactly like it. Turner and Thomas,
the scholars he does mention, have their own book, _Clear and Simple as the
Truth_. It's a good one.

------
dfc
edge.org used to have this great video of Ken Kesey speaking shortly after
9/11\. Sadly it seems it has been lost. I contacted edge.org but never heard
anything back. Does anyone happen to have a copy or know someone at edge.org?

