Steven Pinker, 1028 pages
Available for purchase from Amazon here
Reviewed by Foseti
I started this book 99.5% sure violence had declined over time. I finished it 65% sure violence had declined over time and 100% sure that Steven Pinker needs a more aggressive editor.
Everyone liked this book, but it rubbed me the wrong way. It’s also really long.
Here’s a basic summary. The book covers six trends that reduce violence: 1) the move to “agricultural civilizations;” 2) the rise of central authorities that dominate significant territories; 3) the humanitarian revolution; 4) the “Long Peace” following WWII; 5) the decline in organized conflicts more broadly; 6) the growth of the human rights movement.
Five historical forces are added to these trends to complete the explanation of the declining violence: 1) the leviathan; 2) commerce; 3) feminization; 4) cosmopolitanism; and 5) the rise of reason.
Once he lays these ideas, we begin a very long (seriously, it’s really long) analysis of just how violent old civilizations were.
I’m going to cut the BS right here. If you want to read some analyses of the good points of the book and how smart Pinker is, you can find such analyses all over the internet. I’m just going to tell you what’s wrong with this book and Pinker’s thesis that violence has declined over time. The fact that I’m only focusing on the bad should not be taken to mean that I thought the book was all bad – it definitely has some good portions and some very solid arguments.
Everyone liked this book, but it rubbed me the wrong way. It’s also really long.
Here’s a basic summary. The book covers six trends that reduce violence: 1) the move to “agricultural civilizations;” 2) the rise of central authorities that dominate significant territories; 3) the humanitarian revolution; 4) the “Long Peace” following WWII; 5) the decline in organized conflicts more broadly; 6) the growth of the human rights movement.
Five historical forces are added to these trends to complete the explanation of the declining violence: 1) the leviathan; 2) commerce; 3) feminization; 4) cosmopolitanism; and 5) the rise of reason.
Once he lays these ideas, we begin a very long (seriously, it’s really long) analysis of just how violent old civilizations were.
I’m going to cut the BS right here. If you want to read some analyses of the good points of the book and how smart Pinker is, you can find such analyses all over the internet. I’m just going to tell you what’s wrong with this book and Pinker’s thesis that violence has declined over time. The fact that I’m only focusing on the bad should not be taken to mean that I thought the book was all bad – it definitely has some good portions and some very solid arguments.
I may yet flip through it, as there might be some useful information buried somewhere in there.
. This always seemed odd to me, because human history and human nature are generally unfriendly to progressive ideas about how humans “should” be — because humans have always been sexist, violent and tribal — unless stories about human nature and human history are framed in the context of some transformational, up-with-people, “arc of history” progressive narrative.
