its pretty implicit in the blank slate. (he defends behavior genetics, etc and evolutionary psychology but is careful to avoid the Bell curve minefield. He does cite Vincent Sarich as an authority on race, and sarich has defended the bell curve). naturally, they're shopping!)
but here is something from which you may be able something from---scroll down to pinker. or maybe i'm just projecting (that he primarily is defending his and fellow priviledgees).
www.edge.org/q2006/q06_3.html
--- On Wed, 7/15/09, Left-Wing Wacko <leftwingwacko at gmail.com> wrote:
> From: Left-Wing Wacko <leftwingwacko at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [lbo-talk] More on Kenneally
> To: lbo-talk at lbo-talk.org
> Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2009, 12:02 AM
> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 6:02 PM,
> Matthias Wasser
> <matthias.wasser at gmail.com>wrote:
>
> > Pinker is the ultimate concern troll. Every time he
> talks about politics
> > it's something to the effect of "Of course I'm a
> liberal and my sympathies
> > are with equality. But don't you think that cause
> would be better served by
> > acknowledging that women/blacks/the poor really are
> naturally inferior?"
> >
>
> Where or in what context does Pinker say such a thing, or
> at least where
> does he say something that gives you reason to infer that
> he means that?
>
> --
> http://left-wingwacko.blogspot.com/
> ___________________________________
> http://mailman.lbo-talk.org/mailman/listinfo/lbo-talk
>