For those expecting everything from the sequences to be represented, you will be let down. For example, he says little more about quantum mechanics other than that “most physicists believe there is irreducible randomness in the subatomic realm of quantum mechanics”. Compare that to the sequence on quantum mechanics here which forcefully argued for the deterministic many worlds interpretation
OK, I’ve compared them.
If a laypeson tries to out-think an expert , and ends up disagreeing with the consensus , they are almost certainly wrong—whether it’s over climate change , vaccines or QM. So, out of the two, Pinker is giving correct rationality advice.
OK, I’ve compared them.
If a laypeson tries to out-think an expert , and ends up disagreeing with the consensus , they are almost certainly wrong—whether it’s over climate change , vaccines or QM. So, out of the two, Pinker is giving correct rationality advice.