Yes, Mr. Pinker has quite a reputation although I admit I have not yet read his work. My intention has been to do so, but, well, we are all a little lazy at times. All of the components of thought; desire, intention, identification and the like are indeed what make us sapient beings. We are rather more active than reactive, giving us a refined capacity for the uniquely(?) human activity we call planning.(The question mark should be self-explanatory in light of what we are learning about the capabilities of other terrestrial life.)
There has been much re-evaluation and opinionation of late on the subject of consciousness and thinkers and researchers have tried, at some length, to explain what it is; what it means. I believe we are getting closer, although it has been postulated that an organism, no matter how sophisticated, can never truly understand itself. A good friend and associate has speculated that self is, in reality, only a myth. Campbell might be proud. We think, therefore, we are. Mythology has its place in our high-tech world.
I think that thoughts are instruments of consciousness.
We have them readily at our disposal. And a good thing too. An alternative postulation might be that thoughts ARE consciousness. Let's see what your visit with Mr. Pinker brings forth.

My thoughts are true.
And truth is the power of the universe,
The immeasurable power of me.
=
MJA

I think it is cool that Steven Pinker and Rebecca Newberger Goldstein are married. Two very elite intellectuals who, I see, have brought great works on Psychology, Philosophy, Neuroscience, and American Literature into the Twenty-First Century. Such subject-matter as above mentioned, is favored in both authors works, and Philosophy Talk has past interviews that to illuminate such topics.

A desire is not a thought. Thoughts are assessments. The assessments of the nature of desire and means of dealing with it are thoughts - in think worthy animals in any case.
Otherwise we'd have every biological entity out there thinking up a storm.

改变思想的药物取得了怎样的进展，尤其是用于旧石器时代的人和动物……我们在娱乐上使用它们，但在“本土”萨满式的仪式上使用它们呢?这是否会对我们日常挣扎之外的思考产生重大影响?科技是否也是我们自我意识的罪魁祸首，比如懒惰为自省赢得了时间?

RE: Thought and Pinker + language = form
We are what we have been exposed to. From my stance, using English and computer, plus Chinese, I see things in language differently than many. Chinese, a language my Chinese friends love to have me try to speak in public as a great joke because I'm tone deaf, gives me a hint of how thought arises. Especially when I use computer. It is the form window. What is the form window for the language and you can help folks translate to your language. Chinese is a rigid form base language. Largest, next largest, and so forth. Any variance and you are telling your audience there is something in how you list the descriptors that is important to understand, the goal of thought beyond one's own mind. We drive pure Chinese speakers nuts, as we English speakers have 42 different ways to tell you the listener or reader what day it is. They have one. Unless something is more important than year, month, day, hour, minute. So English form is often noise to a Chinese speaker. Or pure confusion. Once I learned this, I became the go-to guy on the Business School staff to teach incoming Chinese students what a Harvard Business Case was all about. Because their first reaction was "Where is the question?" And they would be truly lost trying to tease it out of all that text.
Ok, you guys like fun leaps. Remember that wonderfully beat up piece of work called the "Bell Curve?" What the form window approach to language shows up in that work. Chinese speakers test higher in math functions. (The Bell Curve was cast out on its Black/White crap, but most folks here ran right by the "Asian" rankings.) If you have such a huge "form window" pushing reasoning/weight valuing (versus English, which is more a common sharing emphasis, you know...:)--see "computer" allows us to be tongue in cheek over straight written, so it is a language with improvements on the base form even to this ancient writer...)and the population evolves to represent the "window" parameters on tests administered to all EVEN WHEN a child whose parents speak Chinese learns English as a primary language.
So I'm back to my Systems Science basis on thought. We have to see what the boundaries are on our own languages to get some reflection on how thought arises or is organized inside our pre-programmed brain when it starts learning from its environment. Most of us slip through all that with out any problems and speak the mother tongue. But when we age, it is a hard road to learn new languages for unique thoughts. So the real question for all the grown ups here is what is thought to a baby brain? And how are they organizing it into a communicable form? Most of us have forgotten that part in our "adult" questions.

thought: a word referring to gathered consciousness activity.

The universe has no boundries, nor should our minds.
Freedom is this Way.
=

Warmest Greetings,
Although I thoroughly enjoyed your post immensely, there are issues I must disagree with. Thoughts are not ephemeral, thoughts really are things. But anyhow, you have an interesting viewpoint and I thank you for letting me share this with you.

Working on Pinker's How the Mind Works. I like his characterization of mind: Mind is what the brain does. Elegantly simple and straight to the point. It is a lengthy book---one I shall enjoy, I am sure.

I finally made some time for Steven Pinker. His How the Mind Works is a good read so far and affirms (for me) my ideas about consciousness/thought/sentience, etc. In his chapter on Thinking Machines, he discusses three "senses" of conscious being: self-knowledge; access to information, and appropriately, sentience. Humans appear to have all of these senses in greater or lesser degrees, and are therefore higher up on the tree of consciousness than other forms of animate life. And, it seems safe to say, we are more complete thinkers. We THINK so anyway.