Steven Pinker On Reason | Big Think
Steven Pinker On Reason
New videos DAILY: https://bigth.ink
Join Big Think Edge for exclusive video lessons from top thinkers and doers: https://bigth.ink/Edge
———————————————————————————-
Free will exists, but by no means is it a miracle.We use “free will” to describe the more complex processes by which behavior is selected in the brain. These neurological steps taken to make decisions respect all laws of physics.”Free will wouldn’t be worth having or extolling, in moral discussions, if it didn’t respond to expectations of reward, punishment, praise, blame,” Pinker says.
———————————————————————————-
STEVEN PINKER:
Steven Pinker is an experimental psychologist who conducts research in visual cognition, psycholinguistics, and social relations. He grew up in Montreal and earned his BA from McGill and his PhD from Harvard. Currently Johnstone Professor of Psychology at Harvard, he has also taught at Stanford and MIT. He has won numerous prizes for his research, his teaching, and his nine books, including The Language Instinct, How the Mind Works, The Blank Slate, The Better Angels of Our Nature, The Sense of Style, and Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress.
———————————————————————————-
FOLLOW BIG THINK:
📰BigThink.com: https://bigth.ink
🧔Facebook: https://bigth.ink/facebook
🐦Twitter: https://bigth.ink/twitter
📸Instagram: https://bigth.ink/Instragram
📹YouTube: https://bigth.ink/youtube
✉ E-mail: info@bigthink.com
———————————————————————————-
TRANSCRIPT:
STEVEN PINKER: I do believe that there is such a thing as free will but by that I do not mean that there is some process that defies the laws of physical cause and effect. As my colleague Joshua Greene once put it, it is not the case that every time you make a decision a miracle occurs. So I don’t believe that. I believe that decisions are made by neurophysiological processes in the brain that respect all the laws of physics. On the other hand it is true that when I decide what to say next when I pick an item from a menu for dinner it’s not the same as when the doctor hits my kneecap with a hammer and my knee jerks. It’s just a different physiological process and one of them we use the word free will to characterize the more deliberative, slower, more complex process by which behavior is selected in the brain.
That process involves the aggregation of many diverse kinds of information – our memory, our goals, our current environment, our expectation of how other people will judge that action. Those are all information streams that affect that process. It’s not completely predictable in that there may be random or chaotic or nonlinear effects that mean that even if you put the same person in the same circumstance multiple times they won’t make the same choice every time. Identical twins who have almost identical upbringings, put them in the same chair, face them with the same choices. They may choose differently. Again, that’s not a miracle. That doesn’t mean that there is some ghost in the machine that is somehow pushing the neural impulses around. But it just means that the brain like other complex systems is subject to some degree of unpredictability. At the same time free will wouldn’t be worth having and certainly wouldn’t’ be worth extolling in world discussions if it didn’t respond to expectations of reward, punishment, praise, blame.
When we say that someone – we’re punishing or rewarding someone based on what they chose to do we do that in the hope that that person and other people who hear about what happens will factor in how their choices will be treated by others and therefore there’ll be more likely to do good things and less likely to do bad things in the expectation that if they choose beneficial actions better things will happen to them. So paradoxically one of the reasons that we want free will to exist is that it be determined by the consequences of those choices. And on average it does. People do obey the laws more often than not. They do things that curry favor more often than they bring proprium on their heads but not with 100 percent predictability. So that process is what we call free will. It’s different from many of the more reflexive and predictable behaviors that we can admit but it does not involve a miracle.

@peaceloveandvtg
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
“Reason is the faculty which perceives and integrates the material of reality provided by the senses.”
-Ayn Rand
@Bastian-m3o
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
I agree with most of what this guy says, but I hate him
@gonzalovergara8511
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Reason, though valuable, cannot be the sole foundation of knowledge and morality. Philosophers like David Hume argue that emotion and intuition are crucial in decision-making. Furthermore, intuitive knowledge cannot be fully understood through reason alone. Regarding science, Thomas Kuhn posits that scientific progress occurs through paradigm shifts influenced by sociological and psychological factors, not solely by reason. Karl Popper also notes that scientific knowledge is provisional and always subject to revision.
Morality based solely on reason ignores cultural diversity and moral systems that cannot be evaluated purely rationally. Moral relativism and virtue ethics propose that different contexts require different approaches. The golden rule, while useful, is not universally applicable due to cultural and personal differences.
The imposition of Enlightenment values, such as democracy and reason, can be seen as cultural imperialism. Societies have value systems that may be incompatible with these ideals. History shows that imposing these values by force leads to conflict and resistance. Additionally, rejecting cultural exceptionalism implies there is no rational basis for one culture to impose its values on another. In practice, nations operate based on pragmatic and power interests rather than universal rational principles. In summary, reason and science are important but must be complemented by other forms of knowledge and understanding to effectively guide human action.
@geyerbrad1
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
The US is a corporate war machine ruled by thieves.
@puma14all
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
He’s quoting habermas on communicative rationality in the opening comment
@whitewolf5762
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Common dude we don't need Ur dumb libtardish rainbow ideology it isn't remotely as amazing as u westerners think it to be, So just calm down, do some exercise, don't be fat and stop colouring your hair stupid
@osks
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Your arguing Steven Pinker for a particular type of reasoning is an admission to the fact that human reasoning is entirely a SUBJECTIVE endeavour – this is evident in that all the great rationalists in the history of thought – Plato, Aristotle, Descartes, Spinoza, Leibniz, Kant and others, for all their clarity of thought and all their intellective acuity, all came to very different conclusions about important things as the nature of reality, being and of consciousness…
So, you arguing for pure ‘reason’ to bring us into possession of (true) knowledge ineluctably and unavoidably commits one onto the slippery slope of epistemological and moral relativism, from which there is no recovery, only suicide by a thousand qualifications!
Pure (unaided) reason, always self-destructs under the rigour of critical analysis!
@heywoodjablowme4612
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Tact – making a point without making an enemy.
@tigertiger1699
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
🙏
@kayokk-
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Distilled perfectly for my palate. I wholeheartedly agree that understanding the human condition is the doorway to everything else and this was demonstrated here beautifully.
@JohnWilmerding
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Why is it that when I read his books, he doesn't write "aaah" like he says it when he speaks?
@canismajor83
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
I don’t believe in a god. But I did hear about a connected universe. The universe being a hub and everything in it belonging to it in some way. If I was to have a discussion about god with a religious person it goes the same way as having a discussion with a scientist that mankind has never been into space. You get a lot of anger and sometimes violence coming straight at you.
@JacobFeldman
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
naive approach good for theory bad for real life
@guillaumedemare3769
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
I like Steven Pinker but to say that we are more advanced in terms of reason compared to the rest of the world is a bit much. What about the impact of colonialism? Also, if I'm not mistaken, intellectuals of the Enlightenment era were in fact inspired by other nations that are now part of what we call the global South
@petersisler1398
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Any reasoned structure has an unreasoned foundation.
That is, the foundation is chosen.
This comes from basic logic going at least as far back as classical Greek times.
Any doctrinal system must have a pre-rational foundation.
@srwhite1111
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Aren't Faith & Reason inextricably linked together?
@ronruddick2972
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
According to reason, that system must be virtual.
@Piterixos
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
In less than a minute he explained why presuppositional argument for the existence of god is prue bullshit.
@piersonjeanmarc
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Really surprising! …are we committed to reason? Maybe, to some extent. It seems we are still very emotional beings though…
@timrandall9479
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
I suppose all the objections to Pinker is from the same old left, in the 50s, 60s and 70s there was always a question mark after democratically elected. Our intelligence services made a morally ambiguous choice by supporting Right wing regimes. Regardless who ran their countries the people suffered under both. Communism was on the march and Kissenger, among others, chose to stop it. The people lost. In the end we one. Cest la guerre.
@samcopeland3155
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Steve Pinker doesn’t know what skepticism is.
@dennisr.levesque2320
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
(3:11) :"Faith means believing something with no good reason."? Who are you to define it that way? How can you call yourself a scientist, if you have no faith in science? What a paradox. (6:36) "No entity is special by virtue of being that entity."? There's different degrees of that. Look at snowflakes. All snowflakes have a lot in common, and yet they are "special" in their individuality. People are likewise. America as a country recognizes this.
@Raz.C
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Sir, I salute you. Furthermore, as a supernatural being I can guarantee you; if any of these pretend gods (jesus/ allah/ jaweh/ etc) try getting their grubby paws on you or what they unimaginatively call a 'soul', Woden the Allfather will fuck them up their arses for our amusement.
@tomthomas334
April 20, 2026 at 11:42 am
Steven Pinkerton could have played one hell of a joker in place of Heath Ledger R.I.P., they don't look alike but I think steve could not just play the part but on another level, maybe not Heath, maybe better, I will wonder till the end of time…..