The Higher Angels of Our Nature: Why Violence Has Declined
$0.99
Value: $0.99
(as of Jan 18, 2025 13:51:39 UTC – Particulars)
“If I might give every of you a commencement current, it will be this – probably the most inspiring guide I’ve ever learn.” – Invoice Gates (Could, 2017)
Chosen by The New York Instances Guide Evaluate as a Notable Guide of the Yr
The creator of Enlightenment Now and The New York Instances bestseller The Stuff of Thought affords a controversial historical past of violence.
Confronted with the ceaseless stream of stories about warfare, crime, and terrorism, one might simply suppose we reside in probably the most violent age ever seen. But as New York Instances bestselling creator Steven Pinker reveals on this startling and fascinating new work, simply the other is true: violence has been diminishing for millennia and we could also be residing in probably the most peaceable time in our species’s existence. For many of historical past, warfare, slavery, infanticide, baby abuse, assassinations, packages, ugly punishments, lethal quarrels, and genocide had been odd options of life. However right now, Pinker reveals (with the assistance of greater than 100 graphs and maps) all these types of violence have dwindled and are broadly condemned. How has this occurred?
This groundbreaking guide continues Pinker’s exploration of the essence of human nature, mixing psychology and historical past to supply a outstanding image of an more and more nonviolent world. The important thing, he explains, is to know our intrinsic motives – the interior demons that incline us towards violence and the higher angels that steer us away – and the way altering circumstances have allowed our higher angels to prevail. Exploding fatalist myths about humankind’s inherent violence and the curse of modernity, this bold and provocative guide is bound to be hotly debated in residing rooms and the Pentagon alike, and can problem and alter the best way we take into consideration our society.
PLEASE NOTE: While you buy this title, the accompanying PDF might be accessible in your Audible Library together with the audio.
Clients say
Clients discover the guide insightful and well-researched. They describe it as a implausible useful resource with an articulate, masterful writing model. Readers recognize the exploration of violence discount and the creator’s dedication to neurological and evolutionary psychology. The guide is written with a refreshing humorousness that makes its observations extra accessible.
AI-generated from the textual content of buyer opinions
Gregory J. Casteel –
The most important book written in a very long time
One of these days I’m going to sit down and make a list of the Top 100 nonfiction books that everyone absolutely must read if they really want to understand the world we live in. And, when I do, this book by the noted experimental psychologist and cognitive scientist Steven Pinker will definitely make the Top Ten. In fact, I’m even tempted to say that this might very well be the most important book of the 21st century thus far.Okay, I’ll admit that I might be just a little bit biased in this assessment, because this book deals, in large part, with my two main areas of study as a political scientist: international relations, with a focus on war and international security, and comparative politics, with a focus on political development and modernization. In fact, this book bridges these two topics by showing how modernization has helped make the world more peaceful. (And if you don’t believe that the world is a lot more peaceful today than it was at any time in the past, you really do need to read this book.) When I was in grad school (where I studied under John A. Vasquez and James Lee Ray, two of the world’s leading experts on war and peace, both of whom are cited in Pinker’s book) my main focus was on the scientific study of international militarized conflict, using quantitative methods such as statistical analysis and game theory in order to better understand why nations go to war and what it takes to maintain the peace. This particular subfield of international relations (which is sometimes referred to as “peace science”) aims to identify historical patterns and trends in international conflict, to find variables that correlate well with war (or with peace), to assess the probability that an international crisis will escalate to the use of military force, and to evaluate foreign policy alternatives to see which are more likely to provoke war and which are more likely to promote peace. Although peace science is usually viewed as a subfield of international relations (which is itself a subfield of political science), it is really an interdisciplinary field that draws on a number of different academic disciplines, from political science, to sociology, to psychology, to econometrics, to mathematics, to systems engineering and beyond (in fact, the generally recognized “founder” of the field, Lewis Fry Richardson, was a physicist, mathematician, meteorologist, and psychologist). And peace scientists no longer limit themselves to studying international conflict alone, but are now applying their methods to the study of civil wars, ethnic conflict, terrorism, and other forms of politically-motivated or “group-on-group” violence. Over the past few decades, peace science has discovered a number of things about what leads to war and what keeps the peace. Unfortunately, the general public is largely unaware of these discoveries because they haven’t been well publicized — at least not until now. In this book, Steven Pinker tries to bring some of the key findings of peace science research to the public’s attention.Although a number of excellent scholarly works have been written by researchers in the field of peace science, most of these are aimed specifically at an academic audience that is accustomed to reading and interpreting quantitative research. These texts tend to be highly technical and rather dry; and most of them presume that the reader already has a strong background in the fundamentals of the subject. So they are unlikely to be of much interest to lay readers. And even the few books on the subject that are written so as to be reasonably accessible to non-specialists still tend to be written in the academic style of the scholar, rather than the more relaxed style of the popular writer; so they’re unlikely to find their way to the top of any bestseller list. But this book is different. It was written specifically for a general audience rather than for professors and grad students; so it tries to keep the tone light and informal, avoiding the arcane language of statistics in favor of simple descriptions and visual illustrations. You don’t need to know what a “chi-square” or a “Pearson’s r” is in order to understand the research findings summarized in this book. All you need is university-level English literacy and the ability to follow a trend line on a graph. That’s one reason why, if I had to recommend just one book for anyone interested in finding out the most important lessons we’ve learned from the scientific study of war and peace, this is the book I’d have to recommend — not because it’s the best, or the most comprehensive, or the most in-depth; but because it’s the most accessible. (Of course, I intend this as no slight to any of my colleagues and former professors who have written their own books on the subject — in particular my dissertation advisor, John A. Vasquez, whose seminal work, “The War Puzzle”, which has recently been revised and updated as “The War Puzzle Revisited”, is one of the best books ever written on the causes of war, and is worth reading even if you have no background in international relations. Yet, I still feel that Pinker’s book is more accessible to lay readers.)You might find it a bit strange that I would recommend a book by Steven Pinker as your introduction to peace science. After all, Pinker is not generally recognized as a “peace scientist” in the strictest sense of the term — i.e. he has not devoted his career to studying the causes of war. Rather, he is a world-famous experimental psychologist and cognitive scientist who is best known for his work on how the mind works and, especially, how it processes language. His previous books (which are well worth reading, by the way) have all focused on these subjects. This new book is Pinker’s first foray into the field of peace science. But he does an excellent job of summarizing what peace science has discovered about war and peace in language that is clear and easy to understand; and he manages to put the findings of peace science into a larger context of what is known about violence in general — a topic that is perhaps best explored by a psychologist such as Pinker. Perhaps more importantly, Pinker is an excellent writer who is able to present scientific findings to a general audience in a way that makes sense, but without in any way “dumbing down” the material. Unlike many other academic writers, Pinker’s writing style is engaging and entertaining — his tone is conversational rather than professorial — and yet he is careful to give proper citations for every substantive point he makes (he includes 41 pages of end notes, and 33 pages of bibliography). I should also note that Pinker is very thorough in his analysis. This is a very lengthy tome, running for nearly 700 pages (not counting the front matter, end notes, bibliography, etc.). It may take you a while to read; but it’s worth every minute; and, if you’re anything like me, you’ll actually enjoy it.Since my background is in peace science, my review has thus far focused on what Pinker has to say about war. But that’s just one part of what this book is about. This is really a book about violence — all types of violence, both large scale and small — and war is just organized violence on an extremely large scale. War is arguably the most important form of violence; but it’s not the only form. As it is usually understood, “violence” can include anything from full-scale war, to limited military action, to genocide, to ethnic conflict, to government oppression and human rights abuses, to religious persecution, to slavery, to terrorism, to lynching and other hate crimes, to murder, to capital punishment, to torture, to rape, to spousal and child abuse, to assault, to dueling, to bullying, to animal cruelty, to the spanking of naughty children. Scholars who study international conflict tend to focus on the unique geopolitical factors that lead nations to send soldiers into battle — factors that are not relevant to our understanding of violence committed on smaller scales. But might it be possible that the root causes of large scale violence are to be found in the very same pathologies of human nature and human culture that give rise to honor killings, witch hunts, blood sports, hazing rituals, and even bar fights? Pinker believes that it is; and he marshals a considerable body of evidence to support that view.He argues that all acts of violence, regardless of their scale, begin with decisions made by individuals; and, like all decisions, the decision to use violence is the product of cognitive processes that take place in our brains. And understanding how these cognitive processes work is Steven Pinker’s particular area of expertise. Based on this understanding, Pinker is able to show how our brains make the decision of whether or not to use violence, and what factors influence this decision. There are a number of factors that work to push us towards using violence, and a number of other factors that work to restrain us from using violence. Some of these factors are internal (or internalized), such as our natural instincts for self-preservation, our moral values, and our capacity for empathy, self-control, and rational thought. Other factors are external, such as the norms of the society we live in, the constraints imposed on our behavior by various social institutions, and the specific demands of the situation we happen to find ourselves in at any given time. A violent act is the end result of a complex cognitive process — most of which takes place below the level of our conscious awareness — which takes all of these internal and external factors into account. That’s why violence is not a constant. Sometimes people are violent; sometimes they’re not. An individual might use violence under certain circumstances but not under others. Some people are more prone to violence than are others. Some places experience more violence than do others. And some historical periods have been more violent than have others. Violence is variable. It waxes and wanes in response to various influences. Understanding these influences is the key to understanding violence of all kinds, and how to bring it under control.Violence will always be a part of the human experience; but it need not be its defining feature. We’ll never completely eliminate violence from our world — there will always be occasional muggings, rapes, murders, human rights violations, acts of terrorism, and even wars — but we can reduce these things to the point where people need not live in constant fear for their safety. And we’ve already made a lot of progress in this direction. Using a wealth of statistical evidence, Pinker shows that we are living in what is perhaps the least violent period in the history of the human race. All forms of violence — everything from war, to genocide, to religious persecution, to murder, to rape, to capital punishment, to torture, to animal cruelty, to the spanking of children — are at historically low levels; and most of them have been in a state of nearly constant decline for centuries (with a few temporary setbacks in the 20th century). This may be hard for many people to believe, since our popular culture and the 24-hour news media are constantly bombarding us with images of violence, and since most people have a rather poor grasp of history; but if you take an objective look at the level of violence we see in the world today compared to the level of violence our ancestors lived with in centuries past, it becomes quite clear that we are now living in a golden age of relative peace and security that our great great great great great grandparents could never have imagined.What is the cause of this decline in violence? This is the main question that Pinker tries to answer in this book. I won’t attempt to summarize his findings here — it’s better if you read Pinker’s argument, and the evidence he presents in support of it, for yourself. But I will say that it has a lot to do with my second field of study: political development and modernization. The world is becoming less violent as it modernizes and becomes more politically developed. This also helps to explain why some parts of the world are much more violent than others, even today, since political development has not been uniform around the globe. The least developed countries tend to be the most violent, and the most developed tend to be the least violent. You might suspect that this is simply a matter of economics — i.e. that violence is a byproduct of poverty, so richer countries would tend to be less violent than poorer countries — but it’s actually a lot more complicated than that. (After all, the United States is a very rich country; but it’s a lot more violent than Canada, Western Europe, and other parts of the First World.) So the real explanation has more to do with politics and culture than with economics. I’m not going to try to summarize in a few sentences what Pinker spent nearly 700 pages trying to explain — you really do need to read the book for yourself — but I will note that Pinker’s theory is consistent with what we know about political development and modernization, and is certainly consistent with my own personal views on the subject. I think that Pinker’s explanation for why violence has declined over time is essentially correct, and needs to be taken seriously.If you want to understand the historical decline of violence you really must read Pinker’s book. I would recommend it to almost anyone. However, I ought to point out that there are things in this book that some people may find disturbing or offensive. For one thing, in order to fully convince the reader that the world is much less violent today than at any time in the past, Pinker catalogues, in gruesome detail, forms of brutality that were quite commonplace at one time, but that are simply unimaginable today. He describes sadistic methods of torture and public execution that were once deemed perfectly just and proper, but that utterly shock the conscience of the modern reader. He discusses military tactics that were considered perfectly normal centuries ago, but that would be condemned as war crimes or acts of genocide today. He even talks about various acts of animal cruelty that our ancestors would have viewed as entirely unremarkable, such as the common pastime of torturing cats to death, which was a popular form of public entertainment in Medieval Europe. The book also includes very frank discussions of rape, domestic violence, and abuse, which may not be suitable for some readers, who may find some of this material disturbing, or perhaps even triggering. Some readers may even be offended by some of the things that Pinker has to say. He is not a fan of “political correctness”, and refuses to censor himself or to sweep inconvenient truths under the rug simply to appease those who might not like what he has to say. He is willing to challenge the conventional wisdom if it is not supported by adequate evidence; and he even has the temerity to debunk some of the popular myths about violence that routinely get cited as “facts” in the media, in public discussions about violence, and even (sadly) in academic literature. Pinker’s objective in this book is to set the facts straight, even if he has to ruffle a few feathers in the process. He has some harsh words for religion, which are bound to offend some believers. While he does not condemn religion wholesale in the manner of the so-called “New Atheists” like Richard Dawkins and the late Christopher Hitchens, he does strongly criticize the ancient moral codes that many of the world’s major religions are built on. Pinker draws our attention to the many barbaric passages in the Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) that, for example, command God’s “chosen people” to slaughter every man, woman, and child in the cities they conquer; that prescribe death by stoning as the appropriate punishment for all manner of petty offenses and unconventional sexual proclivities; and that even permit men to own slaves and to obtain wives and concubines by abducting and raping foreign women. Pinker is careful to point out that most modern Jews and Christians ignore these troublesome passages, and utterly reject them as guides to moral behavior in the modern world. He insists that his purpose in highlighting the flaws in the biblical conception of morality is not to cast aspersions on modern-day believers, but simply to illustrate how far we’ve come in our understanding of right and wrong — particularly when it comes to the use of violence and how we treat other human beings — since the Hebrew Bible was written. But he does call our attention to the dangers of trying to base one’s morality on these ancient texts, which reflect pre-modern values that most people today — including most contemporary Christians and Jews — would find not only abhorrent, but ungodly. So, some believers will likely take offense at Pinker’s comments, especially if they’re not accustomed to viewing their faith traditions and their scriptures with a critical eye. But you can’t please everyone; so it’s better just to speak the truth as you see it, and not worry about who might take offense. That’s what Pinker does; and I have to admire him for it.Anyway, this is one of the best books I’ve read in years. I highly recommend it.
David S. Powell –
From Black Dungeon of Violence to the Lofty Heights of a Peaceable Era–for Now
From Black Dungeon of Violence to the Lofty Heights of a Peaceable Era–for NowMany complex life forms have used a life strategy of cooperation, and this has been especially true of socially disposed Homo sapiens. A theory of mind, moral sense, intricate emotion package, superior forethought–all , combine to make humans a complex social being capable of avoiding the zero sum character of violence . Add with these attributes a civilizing process– and a generous portion of gentle commerce, a dash of democratic government, and a thick slice of Enlightenment ideas through the published word–and one forms a ready recipe for a non violent world. With such, western civilization gradually made humanitarian reforms: gloved fist and blunted foil replaced gladiatorial battle axe; Adlerian therapy sessions for the criminal replaced breaking him on the wheel. Indeed, although still as wired for violence as ever, the better angels of our nature–empathy, self-control, moral sense, fairness, reason–have overtaken our more negative makeup. At least, so says Steven Pinker’s, much discussed book, The Better Angels of Our Nature. In this stout 800 page book–full of graphs and figures and 200 pages of notes– he reveals to the scoffer, who suffers from historical myopia, how violence has drastically declined over history.Pinker sets the process out through several sections. After presenting a perceptual contrast between present peaceful times and the profoundly violent archaic times of non-state societies, he examines six major declines of violence: The Pacification Process, The Civilizing Process, The Humanitarian Revolution, The Long Peace, The New Peace, The Rights Revolution. I will let the earnest reader discover for himself the fascinating particulars and engrossing historical details that Pinker devotes 700 pages, but some important points from the book can be stated and given interesting comment. I’ll begin with a few contributors to non violence and conclude with couple of things that keep it going:*Civilization and the consolidation of central states were important steps toward lessening violence.As civilization emerged, tribes coalesced into chiefdoms and villages grew into city-states. Rulers, annoyed and hampered by domestic aggression and feuding, implemented their own brand of criminal justice and attempted to monopolize the violence. Justice, uniformly administered and consistently enforced, allowed for efficient governing while cutting down the causes of violence–predation, self defense, revenge. (These 3 causes come from Thomas Hobbes’ book, Leviathan, and Pinker gives a good discussion of these.) The consolidation of petty states and fiefdoms into central states brought long stretches of relative peace. These “paxes” allowed centralized states to build an infrastructure of commerce, finance, and transportation improvements. Economic systems with smooth operating commerce and trade meant those involved had to give consideration to the intentions and desires of the other. Certainly, one would not exploit someone he must deal with routinely and expect good business from them. Moreover, these improvements, along with the nationalizing of jurisprudence, made plunder more risky and less profitable than trade.* The Enlightenment and ease of printing was a significant step towards non violence. Ideas from The Age of Reason and The Enlightenment flourished with the catalyzing effects of publishing. After Gutenberg’s invention of mechanical movable type, printing became easy and books multiplied. Ideas began to spread like never before, and the reader so influenced changed habits of thought and action. On the scene came new or improved forms of literature: the Montaigne type essay, scientific treatise, political pamphlet, the novel. Of these, notable was the sentimental novel, which became endemic in the age of Reason, where the captivated reader might tremble in fear, shudder in disgust, and snigger out loud with the lead character’s experience. Make believe or not, people sympathize with the individuals as the pages turn and the plot unfolds. So, the novel as a literary genre fostered habits of taking others position–perspective taking. Many came to the realization that folks outside family, friends and community are just like them. The published word, along with widespread trade, made a variety of views available, and made cosmopolitism prevalent and fashionable. (People noted the cultural values of people east of Christendom). Soon enough, Europe witnessed the end of the slave trade, and carried out humanitarian reforms such as the abolition of judicial torture. Humanitarianism like this required a shifting in moral relational foundations.The effect of cosmopolitism and the influence of the philosophe was a moral trend away from Divine authority and sanctity, while success of the individual and self-sufficiency grew in emphasis. Together with democratic views, the “Republic of Letters” (as the starring Enlighten establishment were also known) promoted science and the application of reason to all questions. Religious experience and authority was found suspect and it was criticized. Few were atheists, many were Deists, but nearly all harbored an existential worldview which emphasized living and that dismissed concern for the soul and the hereafter. This emphasis led to a greater regard for the suffering sentient being, and humanitarian reform soon marched onward–ever taking the high ground–reaching the Rights Revolution and beyond.*The cultural morality and taboo structure that guide ethical belief and behavior has retracted from traditional spheres to produce a reduction of violence.Pinker discusses, at some length, Shweder’s Ethics, Haidt’s Moral Foundations, and Fiske’s Relational Models. People within a culture have universal traits including moral. Yet, a people’s moral repertoire follows a structure that guides the “super-ego” and molds the mentality of taboo. It tells one what immoral acts are disgusting and sets what infractions are punishable. A tribal society from Old Testament times can be examined to illustrate a culture where the moral relational model encourages violent ways–typical of most cultures until recently. These were a herding people that felt guided by the dictates of a sacred God. The authority of God and the patriarchal head was held in sanctity as well as the In-group loyalty to family and clan. These were collective societies, hierarchical in structure, where members were hair-wired sensitive to questions of honor. Highest regard was given first to the family head, then, the Patriarch’s brothers–then his sons. Considered property and possessing little as far as rights, were the female members of the community. In Fiske’s relational models, this tribal morality structure is labeled Communal sharing. Their circle of empathy was a narrow one, and if one is not of their kin, violation of moral codes is especially tough and unforgiving. Wars were chronic and severe and those involved were prone to committing heavy carnage on the outside group. Presently, the Islamic fundamentalist found in “the war on terror” epitomizes this Communal Sharing/Authority Ranking model. Contrastly, there is the modern European society, in Fiske’s relational model it is labeled Equality Matching/ Market Pricing/ Rational Legal, where people believe in fairness and reciprocity, and they value the cultivation of kindness and compassion. Not surprisingly, they find aggression repulsive. Such societies are feminized (A world without testosterone would be a world that studied war no more.) Moreover, this moral relational model, as practiced by Europeans, place little stock in divine guidance or religious practice. The world, according to Pinker, is turning into the latter relational model. America, however, is a blend of several models, though it too is gradually retracting from the traditional spheres.- Religious morality and political ideology often are deleterious to a peaceful world.Morality and political ideology are packaged in their own scared belief system. Religion, Pinker suggests, is only partially conducive to creating a peaceful world. Often, it is the reason violence cycles onward. With the sway of religious authority behind them, the believer will see heaven as a paradise infinitely good, and one can justify any means to that precious end. If it gets the wayward soul to heaven to torture him or massacre his friends, it is worth the effort to do it. If in a war with a heretical or infidel country, one cannot compromise with the enemy because it would risk the chance of getting to the promise land. (So, war goes without end.) To commit martyrdom or suicide to get oneself and family to blessed eternity is worth the act. If you look at history, it is apparent that religious zealotry was the cause of many a conflict: religious war, crusaders, heretic abuse, inquisitions, burning at the stake and massacres.Still, ideology has been more than equal to religion in killing and harming people. The Enlightenment, after the French Reign of Terror, sparked a reaction against it with the Counter-Enlightenment. Rationality was played down while emotion was played up. Political pursuit oriented toward seeking the perfection of man and the building of an utopia, and it was a goal worth everything. Like the religious zealots, they too desired to reach a heaven that was infinitely good–but, this one on earth. All persons in opposition were considered evil. Like the desperate worshiper, it was permissible to carry out any means to reach the goal. Eliminate those that bar the way but encourage the doubter to believe. Bloody Napoleonic Wars, Nazi and Stalinist death camps, Mao Zedong’s Cultural Revolution–all followed counter Enlightenment ideals–all sought utopia.-Any loss of government administration or consistent application of law and order will quickly return a society to a world of violence.One need only to see the anarchy of banana republics, or African countries that, just decades ago, broke from European colonization to see chronic civil wars, coup d’états, and chaos. Too, when sub cultures, such as criminal gangs, cannot turn to the state for enforcement of law, their isolated territory returns to the days of non-state societies: becoming rife with predation, preemptive attacks, retaliation and the seeking of dominance over an adversary. We are wired for violence and it takes little to reveal the devil in our nature.I discussed just a small number of salient points composing the content of his book; but, far from being unsupportable speculation, the thesis stands the test of his evidence. Indubitably, the book is grounded on data that would interest the serious historiographer, social psychologist, and political scientist. Although I thought there were too many graphs and too few pictures, it was a wonderful read.
erick ferreira –
Muito bom
Riccardo –
Un libro veramente interessante, per mettere in prospettiva il mondo di oggi. Per quanto ci sembra di vivere sempre in crisi e in declino, prima (anche recentemente) si stava molto, molto, molto peggio
Slendi González –
Color, textura … todo el libro es de muy buena calidad… llego muy bien empaquetado y sin detalles… ademas su precio esta súper bien
buenlimon –
Das wird sie aber nicht. Die Beweisführung ist unglaublich lang und umständlich. Es wird einfach nichts, was irgendwie von Relevanz ist, ausgelassen. Statistiken, kulturelle Forschungsergebnisse, neuere psychologische und soziologische Experimente in einer schier unglaublichen Fülle werden hier vorgelegt und geben uns wirklich zu denken. Was man letztendlich mit diesen ganzen Resultaten anfangen kann, ist schwierig zu sagen. Aber man muss zu Kenntnis nehmen, dass sich die menschliche Psychologie sich in den letzten Jahrhunderten erheblich geändert hat, und zwar in Richtung auf weniger Aggressivität und Gewalt. Der Mensch hat sich überhaupt geändert. Und wie sich der Mensch geändert hat, wird einem nicht nach den ersten 10 Seiten klar, sondern da muss man das ganze Buch durch. Es nützt auch nicht die ersten 3/4 davon zu lesen, denn einige der gewichtigsten Ergebnisse kommen zuletzt im Buch und können nur in dem ihr zugedachten Zusammenhang verstanden werden, wenn man tatsächlich alles vorhergehende genau gelesen und verstanden hat. Das Buch bildet eine harmonische Ganzheit ohne Widersprüche und verändert den Leser, sodass er nicht mehr die Menschen so sieht wie vorher. Dieses Erlebnis kann ich aus ganzem Herzen jedem empfehlen.
John R. Bates –
A very thought provoking and extremely well researched book. I’d love to know if the author’s opinions have altered at all with the dramatic changes in world affairs since this book was published.