Sign in with Facebook
Riku Sayuj's Reviews > The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
by
The Skeptic’s Peace
Pinker warns the reader upfront that the book is huge, and with more than 800 dense pages there is no question about it. It is so wide-ranging that it is fortunate it has such a memorable title - the reader might have easily lost track of where it is all supposed to be heading. Individually, any single section of the book is a throughly entertaining masterpiece, but as a whole, in terms of coherence, and on how the thesis and the direction of the arguments hold together, the book is not as much of a delight.
But it is an ambitious book and is in some respects a new sort of history - almost a moral history of the world and Pinker deserves praise for the attempt. The next such historian to come along has been given much to work with.
Pinker is very convincing about the fact that violence has indeed declined; he is even persuasive on why it was but bound to happen. But when it comes to explaining the phenomenon (which he spends most of the book convincing us is real) based on his strength (psychology and evolutionary biology), he comes up slightly short. Pinker says all the right things and spares no punches and doesn’t flinch from taking on the worst arguments the critics might throw at him but his arguments still seem to lack that knockout blow.
This is not to say that the arguments are weak. Pinker does a remarkable job in his survey of history, of stats and of a multitude of ideas. The scholarship is immaculate, the intentions are noble and the conclusions are plausible but I would still wager that Pinker would fail to convince the majority of his readers.
Why? Because he ignores the contingent nature of history and he forgets that the 'better angels' has not only made us a more moral society but has also made us a more skeptical society. I was disappointed that Pinker does not explore the preventive powers of sheer skepticism.
My own thesis, which was evolving as I read Pinker’s, is ultimately that the skeptical mentality is what the ‘civilizing process� (and the years of bloody wars) has ultimately given us - a conviction that there are no easy answers, no ‘final solutions�. And that is a powerful deterrent to most forms of drastic action, since now it is harder to justify them. This to me is the real cause for optimism (of the measured and skeptical sort, as is our wont now).
by
Riku Sayuj's review
bookshelves: history-civilizations, screened, science-evolution, science-gen, reference, r-r-rs, media-hyped, pop-history
Dec 05, 2011
bookshelves: history-civilizations, screened, science-evolution, science-gen, reference, r-r-rs, media-hyped, pop-history
The Skeptic’s Peace
Pinker warns the reader upfront that the book is huge, and with more than 800 dense pages there is no question about it. It is so wide-ranging that it is fortunate it has such a memorable title - the reader might have easily lost track of where it is all supposed to be heading. Individually, any single section of the book is a throughly entertaining masterpiece, but as a whole, in terms of coherence, and on how the thesis and the direction of the arguments hold together, the book is not as much of a delight.
But it is an ambitious book and is in some respects a new sort of history - almost a moral history of the world and Pinker deserves praise for the attempt. The next such historian to come along has been given much to work with.
Pinker is very convincing about the fact that violence has indeed declined; he is even persuasive on why it was but bound to happen. But when it comes to explaining the phenomenon (which he spends most of the book convincing us is real) based on his strength (psychology and evolutionary biology), he comes up slightly short. Pinker says all the right things and spares no punches and doesn’t flinch from taking on the worst arguments the critics might throw at him but his arguments still seem to lack that knockout blow.
This is not to say that the arguments are weak. Pinker does a remarkable job in his survey of history, of stats and of a multitude of ideas. The scholarship is immaculate, the intentions are noble and the conclusions are plausible but I would still wager that Pinker would fail to convince the majority of his readers.
Why? Because he ignores the contingent nature of history and he forgets that the 'better angels' has not only made us a more moral society but has also made us a more skeptical society. I was disappointed that Pinker does not explore the preventive powers of sheer skepticism.
My own thesis, which was evolving as I read Pinker’s, is ultimately that the skeptical mentality is what the ‘civilizing process� (and the years of bloody wars) has ultimately given us - a conviction that there are no easy answers, no ‘final solutions�. And that is a powerful deterrent to most forms of drastic action, since now it is harder to justify them. This to me is the real cause for optimism (of the measured and skeptical sort, as is our wont now).
Sign into Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ to see if any of your friends have read
The Better Angels of Our Nature.
Sign In »
Reading Progress
December 5, 2011
– Shelved
July 30, 2013
–
Started Reading
August 7, 2013
–
24.94%
"Pinker Vs Levitt (Freakonomics) showdown and Levitt is down for the count. What fun."
page
200
August 24, 2013
–
52.37%
"But any intuition that vegetarianism and humanitarianism go together was shattered in the 20th-century by the treatment of animals under Nazism. Hitler and many of his henchmen were vegetarians, not so much out of compassion for animals as from an obsession with purity, a pagan desire to reconnect to the soil, and a reaction to the anthropocentrism and meat rituals of Judaism. In an unsurpassed display of the [...]"
page
420
August 24, 2013
–
52.37%
"But any intuition that vegetarianism and humanitarianism go together was shattered in the 20th-century by the treatment of animals under Nazism. Hitler and many of his henchmen were vegetarians, not so much out of compassion for animals as from an obsession with purity, a pagan desire to reconnect to the soil, and a reaction to the anthropocentrism and meat rituals of Judaism. In an unsurpassed display of the [...]"
page
420
September 3, 2013
–
Finished Reading
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
history-civilizations
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
science-evolution
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
screened
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
science-gen
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
r-r-rs
December 22, 2013
– Shelved as:
reference
May 1, 2014
– Shelved as:
media-hyped
May 1, 2014
– Shelved as:
pop-history
Comments Showing 1-29 of 29 (29 new)
date
newest »
newest »
Warwick wrote: "My own thesis, which was evolving as I read Pinker’s, is ultimately that the skeptical mentality is what the ‘civilizing process� (and the years of bloody wars) has ultimately given us Yes. Inter..."
Thanks. I will try to expand on it after reading Herman's Idea of Decline as well.
Most of the reviews of this book that I've seen (amongst my friends on GR) are generally positive, Riku. But I'd just like to introduce another view from a friend of mine, one whose political views I am very much in sympathy with.He hated the book, for two of the five reasons that Pinker gives why this decline in violence has occured. http://www.goodreads.com/book/show/11...
I'm certainly not trying to generate controversy, would just like to hear your (and Warwick's) views on the points he makes. I believe he is very sensitive to the issues he brings up about the book, these issues being things that perhaps most readers (maybe from a bit more middle of the road political, and more pro-capitalist viewpoint) would not examine critically when reading the book.
Ted wrote: "Most of the reviews of this book that I've seen (amongst my friends on GR) are generally positive, Riku. But I'd just like to introduce another view from a friend of mine, one whose political views..."You might have forgotten to link the review and linked the book's page instead... But in advance, if I were to take a guess, I would say the 'politically sensitive' views would have to be about Pinker's definition of the spread of the 'civilizing' force and the role 'gentle commerce' played in it. These ideas are taken almost wholesale from Clark's Farewell to Alms, as Pinker points out many times. This could easily give rise to new sort of racism and Pinker does try to steer clear of that as much as possible without compromising his basic thesis...
Ted wrote: "Most of the reviews of this book that I've seen (amongst my friends on GR) are generally positive, Riku. But I'd just like to introduce another view from a friend of mine, one whose political views..."Ted, may I request the link (to the review) again?
Sorry Riku for the bad link, and I also missed your 9/3 post.This is the link to the review.
/review/show...
The review is pretty long and extremely negative (without being offensive). Certainly a view from the left, which is where I generally sit myself.
Ted wrote: "Sorry Riku for the bad link, and I also missed your 9/3 post.This is the link to the review.
/review/show...
The review is pretty long and extremely negative (wi..."
Thanks! And yeah, it is long... an anarchist perspective will be interesting.
"My own thesis, which was evolving as I read Pinker’s, is ultimately that the skeptical mentality is what the ‘civilizing process� (and the years of bloody wars) has ultimately given us - a conviction that there are no easy answers, no ‘final solutions�. And that is a powerful deterrent to most forms of drastic action, since now it is harder to justify them. This to me is the real cause for optimism (of the measured and skeptical sort, as is our wont now)."I disagree. Most of the public in the West is increasingly looking for simple solutions to crime. Namely putting more people in jail for longer. And this simple solution is spurred by the mistaken belief that crime and violence are getting worse and worse.
If you tell someone the recidivism rate of violent crime is 15 per cent, they're skeptical. But they aren't skeptical of the public myth that crime is getting worse and worse because we aren't tough enough on criminals, none of whom can ever be reformed.
Rob wrote: ""My own thesis, which was evolving as I read Pinker’s, is ultimately that the skeptical mentality is what the ‘civilizing process� (and the years of bloody wars) has ultimately given us - a convict..."I was talking in terms of wars. But yes, I agree with your argument. In societal and familial issues, we are still to gain the skepticism needed to understand that simple solutions are not enough.
'being tough on crime' must be on the manifestos of most candidates and reminds me of the 'city beautification drives' (by clearing slums) that some governments tries to indulge in - both are equally absurd and does nothing against the underlying issues.
What you call "skepticism" Pinker addressed in his book as "Reason" or "Enlightenment Humanism". The concept is first addressed on page 180 and is re-iterated many times in the book. You based your entire critique on Pinker's supposed ignoring of this point (as you said "I was disappointed that Pinker does not explore the preventive powers of sheer skepticism.") Therefore, your critique of the book fails.
John wrote: "What you call "skepticism" Pinker addressed in his book as "Reason" or "Enlightenment Humanism". The concept is first addressed on page 180 and is re-iterated many times in the book. You based yo..."Blind belief in the powers of Reason and the overly hopeful name of 'Enlightenment' are far from the skeptic's credo in my book. The sheer capacity of individuals and subjects to increasingly stand apart from what 'experts' tell them is not addressed in the book - and that is an important capacity, to avoid atrocities.
In any case, I have not tried to go into enough detail for this short review to be called a 'critique', call it a minor gripe, if you will. Thanks for stopping by and leaving a probing comment. Much appreciated.
An Astonishing Argument for Why Violent Crime Rates Have Dropped:Less lead. It’s ridiculous -� until you see the evidence.
I'll have to take a look at that, if I can find the issue of the magazine, since I get MJ. Like other magazines I get (except for The New Yorker), it often goes unread.
Ted wrote: "I'll have to take a look at that, if I can find the issue of the magazine, since I get MJ. Like other magazines I get (except for The New Yorker), it often goes unread."Do let me know if it turns out to be compelling... I wouldn't be too surprised if it is something as simple. Like less 'idiots' since Down's.
Unfortunately it was in the Jan-Feb 2013 issue,, which I probably threw out months ago.It is on-line however:
Fascinating article. And one of the most convincing on the subject that I've read.
Warwick wrote: "Fascinating article. And one of the most convincing on the subject that I've read."That is quite an endorsement!
Warwick wrote: "Fascinating article. And one of the most convincing on the subject that I've read."Yes, I'll chalk one up for Mother Jones, Warwick. I mentioned this all to my wife, and she was unsurprised. She much closer to health issues like this than I am.
Fascinating discussion. Thanks for the MJ link. I'm somehow not surprised at the correlation though I haven't seen this documentation before.
@ John: I read your comment and your rather derogatory remark to Riku. I also read your GR profile page.My question to you is: Aren't you a bit too full of yourself?
Lilo wrote: "@ John: I read your comment and your rather derogatory remark to Riku. I also read your GR profile page.My question to you is: Aren't you a bit too full of yourself?"
It is okay, Lilo. probably my mistake that I didn't explain how I was using the word and compare it with Pinker's usage of 'enlightenment'.
Pinker's prod continues to make waves:A new orthodoxy, led by Steven Pinker, holds that war and violence in the developed world are declining. John Gray argues that the stats are misleading and the idea of moral progress is wishful thinking and plain wrong:
A good read, if long. I have to say that from my point of view it seems likely that Gray is closer to the truth than is Pinker. We may unfortunately have the "ideal" laboratory in which to test the two hypotheses in the coming decades, as more and more states fail, as water in many parts of the world becomes scarce, as food supplies become inadequate, and as the effects of global warming (sea level rise, extreme weather events) mount up. 8(
Ted wrote: "A good read, if long. I have to say that from my point of view it seems likely that Gray is closer to the truth than is Pinker. We may unfortunately have the "ideal" laboratory in which to test the..."True. If it is truly a moral improvement then those problems should still leave us less violent...
This book is not dense.
I wanna embark on this book.. But I can't help but wonder before I do. What about data collection? I mean.. Don't we have more data now than ever before? Does he address this? I just can't fathom how he quantified this argument based on "then" and "now". What if he probably missed so many peaceful societies and civilizations that perhaps just didn't document whatever peace, happiness and euphoria they encountered?I am puzzled by this.
Can someone tell me what was Pinker's goal in the lengthy exposition of violence in the Bible?
Jim- I liked the book very much and this was perhaps my biggest issue with it! The quality of Bible coverage also seemed poorly researched, unlike the rest of the book.
Yes. Interesting idea.