Empathic academic writing in the age of AI: lessons from Steven Pinker

Harvard professor Steven Pinker has long been a beacon for anyone who values clear, elegant prose, whether in fiction, journalism, or academic writing. With the rapid evolution of Large Language Models (LLMs), some may wonder if human writing is becoming obsolete. Pinker, however, continues to champion the irreplaceable human element, especially the role of empathy, in writing.

Harvard Professor Steven Pinker has been the doyen of writing

The root of bad writing is lack of empathy

According to Pinker, the main cause of poor writing is the lack of empathy for the reader. He describes this as “the absence of theory of mind”: the failure to imagine what others feel when they are not familiar with your disciplinary jargon or thought world. 

Academic writers often become so immersed in their own terminology and field-specific abstractions that they forget to explain basic concepts. As a result, their writing becomes opaque to anyone outside their immediate circle of expertise.

Pinker’s solution? “Imagine what it feels like not to know about what I know.” While this may not always be perfectly achievable, he believes that this mindset is key to cultivating empathy in the writing process.

Why writing requires extra empathy

Unlike speaking, which benefits from shared context and immediate feedback, writing is a solitary act that lacks real-time interaction. In conversation, we adjust based on body language, tone, or verbal cues. In writing, there are no such signals. Writers must therefore anticipate how their readers might respond and preemptively guide them.

This is why feedback on early drafts is essential. Pinker emphasizes sharing your writing not just with colleagues in your field, but with readers outside your area of expertise. He notes that academia tends to be insular, despite constant praise for “interdisciplinary work.” True interdisciplinarity, he argues, requires the ability to communicate across disciplinary borders, and that begins with writing.

Writing as a democratic act

Pinker raises a provocative point about accessibility: when academics choose to write in overly complex or jargon-heavy styles, they reinforce exclusivity. In contrast, empathic academic writing, which is clear, generous, and reader-focused, opens the door to broader public engagement.

If we truly care about trends such as democratization, social mobility, and authenticity, then the way we write matters. Writing is not just a tool of communication; it’s a means of shaping culture and influencing history.

Can LLMs replace human writers?

Given his long standing interest in language, Pinker weighs in on AI-generated text. While he acknowledges that LLMs represent a foundational shift in communication with their pattern recognition and abstraction abilities, they lack the emotional intelligence that makes writing truly resonate.

Pinker argues that language is more than just words. It operates through context, symbolism, visual metaphor, and shared human experience. Until LLMs can replicate empathy, not just mimic it, human-authored writing will continue to offer something unique: authenticity, nuance, and a deeply human voice.

Want to hear more?

Writer David Perell asks all the right questions in his recent interview with Pinker. If you're navigating the future of writing in the age of AI or simply trying to write better, this conversation is worth your time.

Photo credit: Bhaawest, Wiki Commons