Pinker argued in Enlightenment Now that trading off multiple competing goals is the essence of intelligence, so no genuine AI would cause the havoc imagined in doomer scenarios.
Not researched Checkable, but outside the sample that was researched.
Factual: Statements about the present or the past, checked against the record: did they hold up?
Cite this claim
Steven Pinker, “Pinker argued in Enlightenment Now that trading off multiple competing goals is the essence of intelligence, so no genuine AI would cause the havoc imagined in doomer scenarios.” (said 26 September 2026). Verdict: not researched. Reliability API, claim c_ef9e7849ccbb, method 0.1.0+28da144b, dataset release v1.1.2. https://epistacklabs.com/claims/c_ef9e7849ccbb
This claim is in dataset release v1.1.2, with the same verdict.
Reply to this claim
More factual claims by Steven Pinker
-
Mostly true
“I argued that any intelligent system is a mechanism which is good at solving some problems but not others, and which is inherently limited by knowledge about the world attainable only by observation…”
-
Mixed
“Part of the problem is that a lot of artificial intelligence has been deployed toward dubious goals like multiplying propaganda, disinformation, phishing scams, manipulating people into doing things…”
-
Mostly true
“A major fact about language, known for decades, is that people don’t blurt out what they mean”
-
Mostly true
“But in other kinds violence, such as homicides, the progress has definitely continued.”
-
Mostly true
“I float a number of hypotheses as to why cooperation and human flourishing in general have increased.”
Verdicts are made automatically; how verdicts are made.