A review by bfraynt
The Better Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined by Steven Pinker

5.0

Quite frankly, this book ranks in the top 10 most important books I have read. This book is not just about why violence has declined, and I think Pinker is pretty convincing about the fact that it has, at least since people have had written records of killing each other. It also tackles some pretty profound questions about whether human nature is fundamentally good or evil (The short version of Pinker's answer is neither; we have both good and evil inclinations. However, our brains are programmed with an innate capacity to learn from our mistakes and make progress over time, as painful as that progress might be). Pinker also makes a pretty solid case for the benefits of modern living. Namely, that modern life is certainly imperfect, but there has been some stunning progress over time. For example, while slavery still exists in many places, it is generally illegal, underground, and sane people don't make public arguments that its a good thing or ordained by a divine entity. That was most certainly not the case even 100 years ago.

I've read a fair number of criticisms of Pinker's work, and they center around a couple of themes. Some of it is Pinker's irreverent and occasionally offensive tone. Pinker has no problem tossing some barbs at organized religion, extreme left and right wing politics, and over-protective parents. And honestly, Pinker does occasionally come off as an elitist and arrogant white dude. However, just because I'm not sure that I want to have lunch with someone or sign up to be their graduate student doesn't mean that they may not have a point. The bottom line is that even if 50% of Pinker's book is correct, and I think he has enough data behind him that that very well may be the case, then this is a book worth reading. Because if we can find even a few manipulable variables that prevent people from raping and killing each other, then I think most of us can agree that we should do everything in our power to start manipulating those variables.

The other big criticism I've heard about Pinker's work is that it is highly Eurocentric. That is probably the case. Many critics take offense at Pinker's argument that tribal societies are more violent than societies with a government. His data is a little shakier on this point. However, even if he is wrong about this, Pinker is still fairly convincing about the fact that violence has declined since societies developed writing. And the correlational evidence that increasingly literate, democratic, feminist, and free market societies appear to be more peaceful is also convincing. Since I think few people are arguing that we return to tribal living any time soon, one can disagree with Pinker's point about tribes and still agree that fostering cultures that are open to the exchange of goods and ideas, allow citizens to choose their leaders and place checks and balances on governmental authority, and treat women as autonomous beings who are not the property of men, might be the kinds of cultures we want to live in.

People also seem to get very huffy about Pinker's clear admiration for Enlightenment principles. Again, I don't think one has to agree with pinker completely to take something important from his argument. No, Enlightenment ideas may not be the only good ideas ever invented or the only factor that has contributed to increased cooperation among people. For example, Buddhist concepts of mindfulness and moderation may also be powerful contributors. However, it's hard to argue that the idea that individuals' happiness is sacred and important, and that all of us have inalienable rights, is a bad idea. It's also hard to argue that these ideas have not had an impact on violence.

So, what are the big take-aways from the book? On a personal level, the best ways for us to reduce violence in ourselves and our communities is to increase literacy, critical thinking, and perspective taking skills. On a policy level, advancing women's rights, investing in education, building sustainable democracies, and promoting non-exploitative trade relationships are likely to decrease wars and even government sponsored violence against citizens. These are ideas I can definitely get behind.

What I appreciate about this book is that it is not a Pollyannaish narrative about how people are destined to get better all the time. Nor did it dismiss the many ways in which violence continues to exist. But Pinker correctly points out that if people are doing things that are reducing violence, it is in all of our best interests to figure out what those things are and start doing more of them. This book begins an important conversation that I hope many people will continue.