Advertisement

Noam Chomsky pp 121-138 | Cite as

Chomsky versus Pinker on Human Nature and Politics

  • James McGilvray
Part of the Critical Explorations in Contemporary Political Thought book series (CEPT)

Abstract

The political writings of Steven Pinker and Noam Chomsky differ in style, audience, and content. Pinker is a stylist; he wrote a book (2014) advising others how to write. Chomsky’s fact- and irony-rich works demand the reader’s critical participation; they do not try to persuade or charm. Pinker’s work is welcomed by the establishment; Chomsky’s criticism is ignored or rejected. Pinker’s writing expresses few qualms about the social hierarchies, differences in power, capacity to dominate and acquire, and unequal rewards of capitalist economic systems—systems that by their natures and in practice induce considerable disparities in income, power, and wealth. Chomsky is an egalitarian who holds that everyone should have an equal say in economic and political matters that affect them, even suggesting that an ideal system would accord equal reward to all (1981).

Keywords

Natural Science Human Nature Evolutionary Psychology Political Ideal Political View 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Bibliography

  1. Bowles, S. & Herbert, G. (2011) A Cooperative Species: Human Reciprocity and Its Evolution. Princeton NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Chomsky, N. (1970, 1987) ‘Language and Freedom.’ Reprinted in James Peck, (ed.) The Chomsky Reader, New York: Pantheon.Google Scholar
  3. Chomsky, N. (1981) Radical Priorities, (ed.) Otero, C. P. Montreal: Black Rose.Google Scholar
  4. Chomsky, N. (1988) Language and Politics, (ed.) Otero, C. P. Montreal: Black Rose.Google Scholar
  5. Chomsky, N. (1995) ‘Language and Nature’, Mind, 104, 1–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chomsky, N. (1996) Powers and Prospects. Boston: South End Press.Google Scholar
  7. Chomsky, N. (2006) Failed States. New York: Metropolitan.Google Scholar
  8. Chomsky, N. (2009) Cartesian Linguistics (with new introduction by J. McGilvray). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chomsky, N. & McGilvray, J. (2012) The Science of Language. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cosmides, L. (1989) ‘The Logic of Social Exchange’, Cognition, 31, 187–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Tooby, J. (2005) ‘Neurocognitive Adaptations Designed for Social Exchange’, in Buss, D. (ed.) The Handbook of Evolutionary Psychology. Hoboken, NJ: Wiley, pp. 584–627.Google Scholar
  12. Descartes, R. (1637, 1984–1985) ‘Discourse on the Method’, trans. Cottingham, J. Stoothoff, R. and Murdoch, D. (trans. & eds.) The Philosophical Writings of Descartes (2 vols). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  13. Ferguson, R. B. (2013) ‘Pinker’s List: Exaggerating Prehistoric War Mortality’, in Fry, Douglas P. (ed.) War, Peace, and Human Nature: The Convergence of Evolutionary and Cultural Views. New York: Oxford, pp. 112–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fodor, J. (1998a) Concepts. Cambridge MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fodor, J. (1998b) ‘The Trouble with Psychological Darwinism’, London Review of Books, 20 (2), 11–13.Google Scholar
  16. Fukuyama, F. (1992) The End of History and the Last Man. New York, Free Press.Google Scholar
  17. Hauser, M., Chomsky, N. & Fitch, W. T. (2002) ‘The Faculty of Language: What Is It, Who Has It, and How Did It Evolve,?’ Science, 298, 1569–1579.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kahneman, D. (2011) Thinking, Fast and Slow. New York: Farrar, Straus, and Giroux.Google Scholar
  19. Kahneman, D. & Tversky, A. (1974) ‘Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases’, Science, 185, 1124–1131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Lewontin, R. (1998) ‘The Evolution of Cognition: Questions We Will Never Answer’, in Scarborough, D. and Sternberg, S. (eds.) An Invitation to Cognitive Science, vol. 4. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
  21. Marr, D. (1982, 2010) Vision. New York: Freeman and Co. (1982 edition). Cambridge: MIT Press (2010 edition).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. McGilvray, J. (2013) Chomsky: Language, Mind, and Politics, 2nd ed. Cambridge: Polity.Google Scholar
  23. Osborn, R. (2009) ‘Noam Chomsky and the Realist Tradition’, Review of International Studies, 35 (2), 351–370.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Pinker, S. (2002) The Blank Slate. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  25. Pinker, S. (2005) ‘So How Does the Mind Work?’, Mind and Language, 20, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pinker, S. (2011) The Better Angels of Our Nature. New York: Penguin.Google Scholar
  27. Pinker, S. (2014) The Sense of Style. New York: Viking/Penguin.Google Scholar
  28. Pinker, S. & Bloom, P. (1990) ‘Natural Language and Natural Selection’, Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 13 (4), 707–784.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Singer, P. (2011) The Expanding Circle: Ethics, Evolution, and Moral Progress. Princeton: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Wilson, E. O. (1998) Consilience. New York: Random House.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© James McGilvray 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • James McGilvray

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations