Why Some See Steven Pinker’s Thesis on the World Improving as Negative

Steven Pinker’s thesis that the world is continually getting better has sparked mixed reactions among scholars and the public. While many find solace in the idea of a better future, some question the very premise of Pinker's argument. This piece explores why Pinker's thesis might be viewed as negative and the reasons one might want him to be wrong.

Subjectivity in View of Improvement

The idea of "continually getting better" is inherently subjective. What constitutes progress can vary widely across different cultures, societies, and individuals. For Pinker, improvement might be measured in terms of advances in technology, healthcare, education, and human rights. However, others might argue that improvements in one domain come at the expense of regress in another. For example, an increase in global economic wealth might be viewed as progress, but equally, the environmental degradation it can cause is a significant negative.

Academic Critiques

Absent some ideological sympathy, one wouldn’t necessarily go along with Pinker's views just for the sake of feeling good. However, there are serious academic, historical, and cultural critiques of his argument. These critiques range from questioning the metrics used to measure progress to challenging the idea that the future will always be better than the past. Academic historians, for instance, might argue that periods of perceived progress are often followed by reversals or crises.

Why Someone Might Want Pinker to Be Wrong

Some might argue that if Pinker is correct and the world is continually getting better, it could lead to complacency. If we believe that things will always get better, we might be less inclined to take action to improve them. This attitude of "future optimism" can, in some cases, breed inaction. On the other hand, if one views Pinker’s thesis as overly optimistic, they might be motivated to present counterarguments and seek to change the present for the better.

Counterarguments and Realities

One of the most significant critiques of Pinker's thesis is that the idea of progress can be used to justify harmful actions. For example, some argue that the belief in inevitable progress can lead to paternalistic and colonialist attitudes, where decisions are made about the future without considering the perspectives of those affected. Additionally, concentrating on future progress can lead to an oversight of current issues, such as inequality, poverty, and climate change, which require immediate attention.

Conclusion

While Steven Pinker's argument for a continually improving world offers a comforting narrative, it also opens up important discussions about subjectivity, academic critique, and the nature of progress. Those who see Pinker’s thesis as negative often do so because they believe it can lead to complacency and overlook the pressing issues of the present. Understanding these critiques and addressing them is crucial for a nuanced view of the future.

In the end, the perspective one takes on Pinker's thesis depends on their personal and cultural values, as well as their understanding of the complexities of social and historical change.