All of the violence that doesn't occur doesn't get reported on the news.
Interpretation
This quote highlights the idea that unreported peaceful interactions are overlooked in media narratives focused on violence.
Steven Pinker's quote suggests that the majority of human interactions are peaceful and non-violent, yet these events are rarely highlighted in news coverage. Instead, the media often focuses on sensational violence, skewing public perception and leading to a misunderstanding of the inherent nature of human behavior. By acknowledging the violence that does not occur, we can cultivate a more nuanced understanding of society and emphasize the importance of peace.
In practice
In a speech addressing community safety, this quote could be used to emphasize the importance of recognizing non-violent solutions.
The foundation of individual rights is the assumption that people have wants and needs and are authorities on what those wants and needs are. If people's stated desires were just some kind of erasable inscription or reprogrammable brainwashing, any atrocity could be justified.
The linguistic clumsiness of tourists and students might be the price we pay for the linguistic genius we displayed as babies, just as the decrepitude of age in the price we pay for the vigor of youth.
If we are not to abandon values such as peace and equality, or our commitments to science and truth, then we must pry these values away from claims about our psychological makeup that are vulnerable to being proven false.
We adults protect ourselves with laws, police, workplace regulations and social norms and there is no conceivable reason why children should be left more vulnerable, other that laziness or callousness in considering what life is like from their point of view.
The idea that children are passive repositories to be shaped by their parents has been massively overstated. A child's peer group is a far greater determinant of its development and achievements than parental aspiration.
Reason is non-negotiable. Try to argue against it, or to exclude it from some realm of knowledge, and you've already lost the argument, because you're using reason to make your case. ... We don't "believe" in reason.
'He who seeks may easily get lost himself. It is a crime to go apart and be alone.' Thus speaks the herd.
Faith, to be faith, must center around something that is not known. Faith, to be faith, must go beyond that for which there is confirming evidence. Faith, to be faith, must go into the unknown. Faith, to be faith, must walk to the edge of the light, and then a few steps into the darkness. If everything has to be known, if everything has to be explained, if everything has to be certified, then there is no need for faith. Indeed, there is no room for it.
The Vedas give information on various subjects. They have come together and form one book. And in later times, when other subjects were separated from religion - when astronomy and astrology were taken out of religion - these subjects, being connected with the Vedas and being ancient, were considered very holy.
Do not follow after the past; do not go forward to meet the future. Instead, just rest the mind naturally in the present awareness.
Contradiction itself, far from always being a criterion of error, is sometimes a sign of truth.
Perhaps the most significant moral characteristic of a nation is its hypocrisy.
Subscribe for the occasional hand-picked quote. No noise.