2 of 7 people found the following review helpful
Professor Pinker's potentially pointless pontifications prove precisely what perchance?,
This review is from: The Language Instinct: How the Mind Creates Language: The New Science of Language and Mind (Penguin Science) (Paperback)
To summate. Blah, blah, BORING, BORING, conjecture, blah. Thinly veiled attack on Chomsky. Blah, blah, unproven hypothesis. Another attack on Chomsky. Anthropological anecdote, reference to Japan. BLAH. Hypothesis, conjecture, subjectivity, BLAH. Dull, dull, boring, dull. Funky cover.
Thankfully, there will come a time in the not too distant future when this kind of self-congratulatory soft-science anecdotal fluff is no longer produced. Either because there will be no-one left to consume it or no-one left to write it. When the Academe finally shows the likes of Professor Pinker the door we may at last be able to shift the paradigm and move academia forward to occupy a place where, by adopting the same rigorous standards as the hard-sciences, the soft-sciences can take their rightful place at the top table. Either that or the veil is lifted once and for all and the likes of both Pinker and Chomsky are shown for what they are - THEORISTS. Academics whose collective hypotheses have, for the most part not been proved and thus remain still conjecture. Quite why these two individuals have been lauded for so long is beyond me. If your (at least) sixty year-old hypothese has not yet been proved you might want to take it down off the pedestal and invite some alternative thinkers to the BBQ...