Dream Laser

Dream Laser

Steven Pinker once said of me, “McGinn is an ingenious philosopher who thinks like a laser and writes like a dream”. Nicely put, Steve, memorable, poetic. But what exactly does it mean? Is it true? We should certainly take it seriously because (a) Pinker is one the world’s top cognitive psychologists, (b) he is an exceptional thinker himself, and (c) he is a fine writer and an expert on language. What did he mean by saying I think like a laser? The word is an acronym for “light amplification by stimulated emission of radiation”, but its literal meaning is beside the point; he means the word metaphorically. It can mean highly focused, as in “He was laser focused on the problem”. But I think Pinker means to evoke the bright and cutting aspects of laser beams, their high precision burning, perhaps their slightly frightening destructive power (remember that terrifying scene in an old James Bond movie?). So, he is referring to (what he takes to be) my uncommon penetration, clarity, and precision. Okay, we understand that. What about writing like a dream? He obviously doesn’t mean that I write in a meaningless, chaotic manner, like a disjointed nonsensical dream. He means the quality the dictionary describes as “a wonderful or perfect person or thing”—something transcending the usual imperfect world of waking life. Dream writing is writing that takes you to a better place, a type of paradise. Now what was Pinker trying to convey by these metaphors? Would he say that many people have these qualities? I don’t think so: he meant to say that they are rare, perhaps especially among philosophers. Other philosophers are apt to think like a shovel and write like a hangover. Would he describe any other philosopher in these terms? I rather doubt it; he meant to be singling me out. That is the indicated conversational implicature: only McGinn can be so described—though others may come close. Some may think like a laser but not write like a dream; others may write dreamy prose but not have the laser intelligence. That seems to be his intent anyway.

What do I think of this description? What strikes me is that I would not describe any philosopher this way, living or dead. I would say that many philosophers have been brilliant thinkers and excellent writers, but I wouldn’t say anyone thinks like a laser and writes like a dream. Some scientists have laser-like intellects and some writers have dreamlike prose, but not philosophers. It is the idea of cutting that stands out: cutting through an issue, getting to its heart, surgically dissecting it. In the case of dream writing, the only writer I would describe as writing like a dream is Nabokov (possibly Flaubert), though there have of course been numerous fine writers of fiction. This to me is the most intriguing part of Pinker’s description: that I don’t just write well, or even very well, but like a dream. And I do see his point: I always feel in a trance as I write, as if I am having a pleasant dream. I think he was onto something: the combination of the cutting and the dreamlike. Then there is the use of “ingenious”: I don’t think I was being singled out for this quality; lots of philosophers are ingenious. But they are not intellectually laser-like and verbally dreamlike. I could have been laser-like and dreamlike without being ingenious, and I could have been the converse; but, according to Pinker, I am all three. The one that I like the best is the dream comparison: ingenuity and lasers are all well and good, but dreams are something special.[1]

[1] I am well aware of the egotism involved in writing about this subject, but someone has to do it. I have not discussed this remark of Pinker’s with him, though we are now friends; we didn’t know each other at the time he said it. One day I will ask him to expand (or maybe not).