Can the authors of “‘Enlightened’ Denials” really believe that Steven Pinker, espousing the benefits of the enlightenment, is suggesting that we resurrect eugenics or that we should discount the bloody history that got us to today? Or is this piece, in dancing around the reality of biological differences (however minute), and/or interpreting Pinker’s work as some kind of racist/sexist dogwhistle, actually ironic satire defending his case for reason?
