Podcast Summary:

Conversations with Tyler: Steven Pinker on Coordination, Common Knowledge, and the Retreat of Liberal Enlightenment
September 24, 2025
Host: Tyler Cowen
Guest: Steven Pinker

Overview

In this episode, Tyler Cowen interviews cognitive psychologist and author Steven Pinker about the themes from Pinker's new book, When Everyone Knows that Everyone Knows: Common Knowledge and the Mysteries of Money, Power, and Everyday Life. The discussion spans the nature of common knowledge, its role in shaping society, the fragility and power of coordination, the retreat of Enlightenment values, the intricacies of social conventions, and the contemporary impacts of technology and culture.

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Importance of Common Knowledge

Definition & Role:
Pinker explains that common knowledge is more than individual awareness—it's a recursive, mutual understanding that "everyone knows that everyone knows…" [03:20]. This underpins structures like money, political authority, and social norms.
- Quote:
  “All of our economy depends on coordination … why do we accept a piece of paper in exchange for something of value? … Everyone knows that everyone knows that money has value. That’s what gives it value.” – Steven Pinker [01:12]
Fragility of Coordination:
Tyler questions whether real-world coordination requires true common knowledge, noting most cooperation is less fragile and recursive than formal models suggest [02:39].
- Pinker agrees daily life relies on limited recursion but stresses that implicit common knowledge—like eye contact—generates mutual understanding instantly [03:20].
Non-Human Coordination:
Pinker uses coral spawning by moonlight as an example of solving coordination without common knowledge or consciousness, relying on a shared public signal [06:38].

Salience, Schelling Points, and Social Conventions

Public Signals as Common Knowledge:
Pinker articulates how public, conspicuous cues (like mass protests or the full moon) can instantly create common knowledge—even if no one consciously tracks infinite levels of “knows that I know” [03:20].
Schelling Points:
- These are focal points people choose for coordination, not because of intrinsic value but due to shared salience (e.g., meeting at Grand Central Station) [16:43].
- Quote:
  “A Schelling point is something that is salient enough to enough people that they alight on it as a solution to a coordination problem in the absence of common knowledge, per se.” – Steven Pinker [16:47]

Coordination and Conflict: Special Cases

Coordination vs. Differential Knowledge:
Tyler notes that sometimes action requires not just common knowledge but a critical agent with private (differential) knowledge or initiative—e.g., elites moving to depose a dictator [09:24].
- Pinker agrees, using “The Emperor’s New Clothes” as an example: it often takes one agent to voice the truth, generating common knowledge [09:58].
Anonymous Speech and Common Knowledge:
Cowen asks if anonymous posters online are socially beneficial. Pinker expresses skepticism, noting anonymity enables both “little boy” truth-telling and trolling/misinformation [10:58]. The balance is unclear.
Noble Lies & Social Hypocrisy:
They discuss whether shared pretenses (not outright lies) can be socially stabilizing—like not publicly acknowledging certain sensitive truths (e.g., Israel’s nuclear weapons, Taiwan’s diplomatic status), allowing everyone to “look the other way” without fracturing vital norms [12:30].
- Quote:
  “…it’s a case where you… there are some things that are true that you avoid saying…” – Steven Pinker [12:30]

The Limits of Common Knowledge

Should Some Things Remain Unspoken?
Tyler wonders if too much common knowledge (e.g., about elite corruption) could erode social trust, hinting at the value of shared “noble lies” [12:04]. Pinker distinguishes between outright lies and benign pretense needed for social functioning [12:30].
Determinism & Free Will:
If everyone accepted pure determinism, Pinker speculates this could undermine the social fabric of holding people responsible. The maintenance of order relies on a certain level of shared pretense [15:55].

Rationality, Belief, and Peer Disagreement

Aumann’s Agreement Theorem:
Tyler probes Pinker about Robert Aumann’s argument that true epistemic peers with shared priors cannot rationally “agree to disagree.” Pinker affirms the logic under strict conditions but notes real-world priors and preferences often diverge [21:16].
Subjectivity in Taste:
The conversation turns playful, debating whether preferences (for chocolate, ballet, Hitchcock films) can ever be rationally reconciled or if they lie outside the scope of peer agreement [23:31–26:45].

The Fate of the Liberal Enlightenment

Is the Enlightenment Gone?
Tyler suggests classical liberalism has irreparably retreated. Pinker remains guardedly optimistic, citing universality, science, and historical trends that favor its values, even if these are not intuitive or guaranteed [28:02].
- Quote:
  “Liberal enlightenment is not particularly intuitive. It doesn’t really fit our human nature… What’s much more natural is tribalism, deference to authority, conformity.” – Steven Pinker [33:49]
Conflict and Universalism:
Cowen anticipates more low-level global conflict and waning universalism, citing examples of cyberattacks and non-militarized hostilities [32:06]. Pinker replies that, as bad as things are, they could be much worse were it not for the restraint arising (even imperfectly) from Enlightenment norms [32:48].

Social Change and Backsliding

Regression to Tribalism & Authority:
Pinker argues Enlightenment values must be actively defended, as human nature tends toward hierarchy, tribalism, and superstition [33:49].
Charisma vs. Liberal Ideas:
The pair reflect on the lack of “stirring” liberal thinkers under 55, noting that charisma often works against rational, process-oriented liberalism [35:19].

Side Topics: Academia, AI, and Art

Academic Standards & Meritocracy:
Pinker laments grade inflation and undermining of standards at elite universities like Harvard, blaming non-meritocratic admissions and incentives to inflate grades [37:02].
- Quote:
  “Harvard does not admit students on meritocratic grounds.” – Steven Pinker [38:14]
Linguistics and AI:
Pinker is “discouraged” by the minimal impact linguistics has had on large language models (LLMs), though he lists areas where linguistics is built in implicitly. He speculates that LLMs solve problems differently from humans, leading to “hallucinations” unlike human error [39:39–43:13].
Subjectivity in Literary Quality:
Discussing whether AIs could match Pablo Neruda in poetry, Pinker proposes that knowledge of a work’s origin inseparably shapes our judgment of its quality [43:20].

Personal Preferences: Fun Lightning Round

Bob Dylan Albums:
Pinker names “Highway 61” as Dylan’s best, Tyler votes for “Bringing It All Back Home” [27:21].
Favorite Beatles Song from “Rubber Soul”:
Tyler likes “You Won’t See Me”; Pinker prefers “I’ve Just Seen a Face” [44:47].

Future Projects

What’s Next for Pinker:
He hints at reassessing the metrics of global progress a decade after his earlier book, Enlightenment Now [45:03].

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

On Money and Common Knowledge:
“Everyone knows that everyone knows that money has value. That’s what gives it value.” – Pinker [01:12]
On Eye Contact & Common Knowledge:
“Eye contact is an instant common knowledge generator… by the mere fact of making eye contact.” – Pinker [03:20]
On Anonymous Speech Online:
“A lot of the shaming mobs, a lot of the trolling, a lot of the degradation of discourse in social media comes because of that anonymity.” – Pinker [11:16]
On Noble Lies and Pretense:
“It’s not an outright lie, but… there are some things that are true that you avoid saying… allows them to say the rule of law still holds in general even as we choose to look the other way.” – Pinker [12:30]
On Aumann’s Theorem:
“The theorem says those assessments have to be the same, that is, rational agents with same priors… cannot agree to disagree. Those assumptions are seldom satisfied, but if they are… yeah.” – Pinker [21:16]
On the Retreat of Enlightenment Values:
“Liberal enlightenment… does not really fit our human nature… what’s much more natural is tribalism, deference to authority, conformity.” – Pinker [33:49]
On the Limited Impact of Linguistics on AI:
“Linguistic theory, in the sense of what you see in a journal like Linguistic Inquiry, doesn’t have direct counterparts [in LLMs]… My hunch is yes [linguistics could help], but the models are so complex that I can’t say for sure.” – Pinker [39:39]

Timestamps for Key Segments

[00:52] Main theme: Why common knowledge matters
[01:12–02:39] Coordination, value of money, authority
[03:20] Recursive models, psychological limits, human vs. coral coordination
[07:08] Fragility of common knowledge in practice
[09:24–10:50] Differential vs. common knowledge, elites and coups
[10:58–12:30] Anonymous speech, noble lies, social pretenses
[15:55–16:43] Determinism and Free Will
[16:43–20:24] Schelling points and social conventions
[21:16–26:45] Aumann's agreement theorem, peer disagreement, subjective tastes
[28:02–32:06] The fate of liberal Enlightenment and universalism
[32:06–33:37] Future of conflict, cyberwarfare, and violence
[33:49–35:19] Why Enlightenment values are unintuitive
[35:19–36:25] The charisma problem in liberal thought
[37:02–39:33] Grade inflation and declining meritocracy in universities
[39:39–43:13] Linguistics, AI, and black box intelligence
[44:47–45:21] Pinker’s favorite Beatles song, upcoming projects

Tone and Language

The episode balances lucid, theory-heavy exposition with moments of wit, banter, and personal asides, maintaining Pinker’s characteristically analytical style and Cowen’s probing, eclectic questioning.

Conclusion

Steven Pinker’s appearance provides a sweeping yet grounded account of how common knowledge, coordination, and social conventions underpin key aspects of our world, while also honestly evaluating the limits and challenges facing liberal Enlightenment ideals in the modern age. Tyler Cowen’s sharp, often contrarian questions provoke nuanced discussion about social trust, collective action, progress, and the future of rationality in a complex world.

Podcast Summary:

Conversations with Tyler: Steven Pinker on Coordination, Common Knowledge, and the Retreat of Liberal Enlightenment
September 24, 2025
Host: Tyler Cowen
Guest: Steven Pinker

Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Importance of Common Knowledge

Definition & Role:
Pinker explains that common knowledge is more than individual awareness—it's a recursive, mutual understanding that "everyone knows that everyone knows…" [03:20]. This underpins structures like money, political authority, and social norms.
- Quote:
  “All of our economy depends on coordination … why do we accept a piece of paper in exchange for something of value? … Everyone knows that everyone knows that money has value. That’s what gives it value.” – Steven Pinker [01:12]
Fragility of Coordination:
Tyler questions whether real-world coordination requires true common knowledge, noting most cooperation is less fragile and recursive than formal models suggest [02:39].
- Pinker agrees daily life relies on limited recursion but stresses that implicit common knowledge—like eye contact—generates mutual understanding instantly [03:20].
Non-Human Coordination:
Pinker uses coral spawning by moonlight as an example of solving coordination without common knowledge or consciousness, relying on a shared public signal [06:38].

Salience, Schelling Points, and Social Conventions

Public Signals as Common Knowledge:
Pinker articulates how public, conspicuous cues (like mass protests or the full moon) can instantly create common knowledge—even if no one consciously tracks infinite levels of “knows that I know” [03:20].
Schelling Points:
- These are focal points people choose for coordination, not because of intrinsic value but due to shared salience (e.g., meeting at Grand Central Station) [16:43].
- Quote:
  “A Schelling point is something that is salient enough to enough people that they alight on it as a solution to a coordination problem in the absence of common knowledge, per se.” – Steven Pinker [16:47]

Coordination and Conflict: Special Cases

Coordination vs. Differential Knowledge:
Tyler notes that sometimes action requires not just common knowledge but a critical agent with private (differential) knowledge or initiative—e.g., elites moving to depose a dictator [09:24].
- Pinker agrees, using “The Emperor’s New Clothes” as an example: it often takes one agent to voice the truth, generating common knowledge [09:58].
Anonymous Speech and Common Knowledge:
Cowen asks if anonymous posters online are socially beneficial. Pinker expresses skepticism, noting anonymity enables both “little boy” truth-telling and trolling/misinformation [10:58]. The balance is unclear.
Noble Lies & Social Hypocrisy:
They discuss whether shared pretenses (not outright lies) can be socially stabilizing—like not publicly acknowledging certain sensitive truths (e.g., Israel’s nuclear weapons, Taiwan’s diplomatic status), allowing everyone to “look the other way” without fracturing vital norms [12:30].
- Quote:
  “…it’s a case where you… there are some things that are true that you avoid saying…” – Steven Pinker [12:30]

The Limits of Common Knowledge

Should Some Things Remain Unspoken?
Tyler wonders if too much common knowledge (e.g., about elite corruption) could erode social trust, hinting at the value of shared “noble lies” [12:04]. Pinker distinguishes between outright lies and benign pretense needed for social functioning [12:30].
Determinism & Free Will:
If everyone accepted pure determinism, Pinker speculates this could undermine the social fabric of holding people responsible. The maintenance of order relies on a certain level of shared pretense [15:55].

Rationality, Belief, and Peer Disagreement

Aumann’s Agreement Theorem:
Tyler probes Pinker about Robert Aumann’s argument that true epistemic peers with shared priors cannot rationally “agree to disagree.” Pinker affirms the logic under strict conditions but notes real-world priors and preferences often diverge [21:16].
Subjectivity in Taste:
The conversation turns playful, debating whether preferences (for chocolate, ballet, Hitchcock films) can ever be rationally reconciled or if they lie outside the scope of peer agreement [23:31–26:45].

The Fate of the Liberal Enlightenment

Is the Enlightenment Gone?
Tyler suggests classical liberalism has irreparably retreated. Pinker remains guardedly optimistic, citing universality, science, and historical trends that favor its values, even if these are not intuitive or guaranteed [28:02].
- Quote:
  “Liberal enlightenment is not particularly intuitive. It doesn’t really fit our human nature… What’s much more natural is tribalism, deference to authority, conformity.” – Steven Pinker [33:49]
Conflict and Universalism:
Cowen anticipates more low-level global conflict and waning universalism, citing examples of cyberattacks and non-militarized hostilities [32:06]. Pinker replies that, as bad as things are, they could be much worse were it not for the restraint arising (even imperfectly) from Enlightenment norms [32:48].

Social Change and Backsliding

Regression to Tribalism & Authority:
Pinker argues Enlightenment values must be actively defended, as human nature tends toward hierarchy, tribalism, and superstition [33:49].
Charisma vs. Liberal Ideas:
The pair reflect on the lack of “stirring” liberal thinkers under 55, noting that charisma often works against rational, process-oriented liberalism [35:19].

Side Topics: Academia, AI, and Art

Academic Standards & Meritocracy:
Pinker laments grade inflation and undermining of standards at elite universities like Harvard, blaming non-meritocratic admissions and incentives to inflate grades [37:02].
- Quote:
  “Harvard does not admit students on meritocratic grounds.” – Steven Pinker [38:14]
Linguistics and AI:
Pinker is “discouraged” by the minimal impact linguistics has had on large language models (LLMs), though he lists areas where linguistics is built in implicitly. He speculates that LLMs solve problems differently from humans, leading to “hallucinations” unlike human error [39:39–43:13].
Subjectivity in Literary Quality:
Discussing whether AIs could match Pablo Neruda in poetry, Pinker proposes that knowledge of a work’s origin inseparably shapes our judgment of its quality [43:20].

Personal Preferences: Fun Lightning Round

Bob Dylan Albums:
Pinker names “Highway 61” as Dylan’s best, Tyler votes for “Bringing It All Back Home” [27:21].
Favorite Beatles Song from “Rubber Soul”:
Tyler likes “You Won’t See Me”; Pinker prefers “I’ve Just Seen a Face” [44:47].

Future Projects

What’s Next for Pinker:
He hints at reassessing the metrics of global progress a decade after his earlier book, Enlightenment Now [45:03].

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

On Money and Common Knowledge:
“Everyone knows that everyone knows that money has value. That’s what gives it value.” – Pinker [01:12]
On Eye Contact & Common Knowledge:
“Eye contact is an instant common knowledge generator… by the mere fact of making eye contact.” – Pinker [03:20]
On Anonymous Speech Online:
“A lot of the shaming mobs, a lot of the trolling, a lot of the degradation of discourse in social media comes because of that anonymity.” – Pinker [11:16]
On Noble Lies and Pretense:
“It’s not an outright lie, but… there are some things that are true that you avoid saying… allows them to say the rule of law still holds in general even as we choose to look the other way.” – Pinker [12:30]
On Aumann’s Theorem:
“The theorem says those assessments have to be the same, that is, rational agents with same priors… cannot agree to disagree. Those assumptions are seldom satisfied, but if they are… yeah.” – Pinker [21:16]
On the Retreat of Enlightenment Values:
“Liberal enlightenment… does not really fit our human nature… what’s much more natural is tribalism, deference to authority, conformity.” – Pinker [33:49]
On the Limited Impact of Linguistics on AI:
“Linguistic theory, in the sense of what you see in a journal like Linguistic Inquiry, doesn’t have direct counterparts [in LLMs]… My hunch is yes [linguistics could help], but the models are so complex that I can’t say for sure.” – Pinker [39:39]

Timestamps for Key Segments

[00:52] Main theme: Why common knowledge matters
[01:12–02:39] Coordination, value of money, authority
[03:20] Recursive models, psychological limits, human vs. coral coordination
[07:08] Fragility of common knowledge in practice
[09:24–10:50] Differential vs. common knowledge, elites and coups
[10:58–12:30] Anonymous speech, noble lies, social pretenses
[15:55–16:43] Determinism and Free Will
[16:43–20:24] Schelling points and social conventions
[21:16–26:45] Aumann's agreement theorem, peer disagreement, subjective tastes
[28:02–32:06] The fate of liberal Enlightenment and universalism
[32:06–33:37] Future of conflict, cyberwarfare, and violence
[33:49–35:19] Why Enlightenment values are unintuitive
[35:19–36:25] The charisma problem in liberal thought
[37:02–39:33] Grade inflation and declining meritocracy in universities
[39:39–43:13] Linguistics, AI, and black box intelligence
[44:47–45:21] Pinker’s favorite Beatles song, upcoming projects

wavePod

Steven Pinker on Coordination, Common Knowledge, and the Retreat of Liberal Enlightenment

Powered by Wave AI

Summary

Podcast Summary:

Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Importance of Common Knowledge

Salience, Schelling Points, and Social Conventions

Coordination and Conflict: Special Cases

The Limits of Common Knowledge

Rationality, Belief, and Peer Disagreement

The Fate of the Liberal Enlightenment

Social Change and Backsliding

Side Topics: Academia, AI, and Art

Personal Preferences: Fun Lightning Round

Future Projects

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

Timestamps for Key Segments

Tone and Language

Conclusion

Summary

Podcast Summary:

Overview

Key Discussion Points & Insights

The Importance of Common Knowledge

Salience, Schelling Points, and Social Conventions

Coordination and Conflict: Special Cases

The Limits of Common Knowledge

Rationality, Belief, and Peer Disagreement

The Fate of the Liberal Enlightenment

Social Change and Backsliding

Side Topics: Academia, AI, and Art

Personal Preferences: Fun Lightning Round

Future Projects

Notable Quotes & Moments (with Timestamps)

Timestamps for Key Segments

Tone and Language

Conclusion