Think of it more as short-selling Steven Pinker's work in the marketplace of ideas.

edit: I like this analogy the more I think about it. If I tell my friends I strongly disagree with Steven Pinker today and his "valuation" continues to fall, I can gain social credit. There is a risk involved in this, however, because sometime in the future science may gather strong confirmatory evidence that Steven Pinker was right all along, and I'll have to trade in an even greater amount of social capital (e.g. because I'm forced to admit I was wrong or go all defensive kook).

Sorry, following the increasingly bizarre news with cryptocurrency and GME is something I've been doing too much of lately.

I don't see any calls for cancellation in the parent comment. It seems that you presume his association with Epstein implicitly merits cancellation. I don't see the problem in pointing out this association.

It’s irrelevant to the topic at hand.

I suspect it's relevant because I doubt Pinker would have so personal a stake in cancel culture if he weren't being widely shouted down for his association with Epstein.

Cancelling is only a problem because it got out of hand and started targeting people for things that weren't completely inacceptable.

Providing legal aid to a known pedophile is a step beyond, though. That would get you "canceled" pretty much anywhere, anytime. Having flown on the Lolita Express isn't any better. Lying about your relationship with that person is the cherry on top.

Plus, as the commenter said, the Harvard social science crowd is very shady, and it's most prominent members were often involved in various atrocities.

I am fairly skeptical of all the Harvard social science crowd. Most of them just say things are great, the youth are ruining things, and cover for state crimes.