What went wrong at Harvard | Steven Pinker | The Reason Interview With Nick Gillespie
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 14 май 2024
- Psychologist and bestselling author Steven Pinker is one of the leading defenders of academic freedom and liberal values of limited government, secularism, tolerance, and free enterprise.
0:00- How to save Harvard
12:42- The institution of neutrality
14:10- Universities should be nonviolent
20:31- How important is viewpoint diversity?
27:22- How bad is DEI?
32:02- How university policies are made
47:07- Why do progressives hate progress
52:00- The value of perspective
reason.com/podcast/2024/03/27...
________
A year ago, he helped found the Council on Academic Freedom at Harvard, "a faculty organization to advocate for the free and civil exchange of ideas inside and outside the classroom." In the wake of the reaction by the campus left to the October 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, he published "A Five-Point Plan To Save Harvard from Itself" in The Boston Globe. His ultra-influential home institution, he wrote, "is now the place where using the wrong pronoun is a hanging offense but calling for another Holocaust depends on context." Reason's Nick Gillespie and Pinker discuss if higher education is doomed, why so many people on the right and left are skeptical about moral and material progress, and how his 'stereoscopic' photography fits into his larger worldview.
How refreshing to listen to two grown ups talking rationally about academic issues.
And with a touch of good humour too!
They have gone from an institution of higher learning to an institution of louder yelling.
When you have no good answer, you yell... When you're no longer an Intellectual, but rather a soviet "Politruk", you yell. When The pseudo-scientific "Liberal sciences" lost all grip on logic, proof, self-doubt - and claimed to be "The science" - Harvard became just a political title, no more no less. NOTHING OF VALUE (and I mean GOOD value) will ever come out of these rotten-to-the-core institutions.
Till when?
Till you, Americans, finally wake up to reality, from your drug-infused dreams of personal-self-sufficiency. Nope, we're not just "Individuals" and our commitment to our society and values should SUPERSEDE our own self-caring-well-being commitments.
When you stop sending kids there, and stop employing Harvard Graduates. When you stop donating and change a channel every time a Harvard graduate is on TV or Radio. When you reject (by visibly avoiding to vote for) any Harvard graduate politician, Judge, Manager etc. --- Then you'll start see something getting fixed. Not a second before these efforts.
I’m pretty sure the curricula in and across their many schools and campuses is still fully intact and worthwhile.
If someone gave you admission and a full ride to any of their programs at your pace, would you personally turn it down because Harvard isn’t up to your academic standards?
If ‘louder-yelling’ is just making broad political over-generalizations, to stigmatize and essentially push towards public sentiment ‘cancelling’ something, just for media clout, I think we can see who is doing the ‘louder-yelling’ in your comment.
@@palominox64 It's meant as a joke. But seriously the media stigmatizes everything and the institutions of higher learning (and social engineering) should not be above reproach. Especially considering how years of government funded inflated tuitions have resulted in some of them having higher endowments than some countries. BTW Harvard is unique amongst major universities because it's highest paid employee is not the football coach..
I teach evolutionary psychology and every year it gets more difficult to teach it for political reasons. It used to be so fun to teach, too.
Gad Saad says exactly the same.
This is such a shame. It's a fascinating area of study, but honest scholarship has taken a back seat to ideology. Not sure if it will happen, but prioritizing scholarship over activism & ideology is the single move that will fix this mess. But too many small-minded people wish to see their ideology prevail, even at the cost of scholarship and real learning. It's just the pursuit of the wrong goals.
@@darrengagliardi1540The sad thing is that many of my colleagues tell me that things have gone too far but they are afraid to say anything publicly. According to one California Faculty Association member I know, at the union meetings you can interrupt someone and tell them they are being “too white.” If you think this is a joke, sadly it isn’t.
@@danchiappethe lunatics have taken over the asylum
I'm sorry you can handle the exchange of ideas.
Steven Pinker is such a pleasure to engage with, because he's so generous with facts that build a vivid picture in the mind of the listener. He understands what understanding is, and strives to provide it. And he succeeds, in my opinion.
It's true. Something he does really well is how he repeats himself. He finds a way to restate his point in a few different ways which makes himself clearly understood.
I remember a review of one of his talks saying that he 'marshals the facts', which I think sums up his talent very well!
Plus he's still so handsome ...
@@jaynespearin71 There's no accounting taste. I see two old guys with bad hair. (Describes me as well.)
Well put.
One serious problem is that the focus of much of higher education has drifted away from the goal of striving to discover what is "true." Instead, the goal seems to now be to strive to defend and support a particular ideology. This accounts for the explosion of many activist oriented areas of study. Activism is a far cry from scholarship. Activism seeks to silence opposing viewpoints, whereas scholarship relishes the opportunity to broaden and deepen legitimate understanding through challenging discourse. This problem will fester as long as the goal of activism supersedes the goal of true scholarship.
Every hire from now on, for a decade or more, should be someone to the RIGHT of the current orthodoxy.
@@friarnewborg9213 Conservatives have had undue influence in a bunch of fields and industries in academia, for generations. Business, economics, political science, medicine, engineering... conservatives have influenced these programs for generations. Industry and conservative think-tanks has influenced these programs for so long, that people seem to have forgotten, the in the US these fields are _way_ , way to the right of the rest of the world.
What conservatives are truly mad about are 2 things, one of them is a legitimate complaint, the other is not.
The legitimate complain: people in academia and elsewhere use 'social justice' and appeals to racial equity to justify enriching themselves and seizing power. They _say_ their research/theory is about social justice... but it's really just a means to an end. They're just using this language as a manipulation, a tool for them to gain prestige and power, to have _their_ theory be the big important theory. Conservatives rightfully criticize this, leftist are oblivious to this. They cannot understand, there are some people who abuse this system.
The other, illegitimate complaint conservatives have about academia, is that they're really upset that no one cares what they have to say with respect to culture. This is 100% self inflicted. Conservatives have not produced anything interesting culturally or artistically for the last 45 years. So, no one cares what they have to say. But they're super mad about this. They demand a seat at the table of culture, no matter how badly their ideas and contributions have failed in the marketplace of ideas. It's kind of just whining, IMO.
@@wolfumzdozed right off
Presumptuous Social Engineering has prevailed in academia since the 1980s.
It's what happens when you surrender the centres of reason to gynocentric activism. It all becomes about feelings. I genuinely feel sorry for the rational women trapped in this unholy vortex.
Things like this is why I regrettably stopped calling myself liberal or leftist, and I express my political association to be centrist. The same way how years ago I realized I had to stop calling myself a feminist, even though I've been explicitly interested and believing in gender equality for over 20 years. While arguably the true meaning of these concepts have not changed, as a pragmatic matter of daily life it became untenable to carry these labels, because they cause people to misjudge me and assume increasingly absurd things about me. The state of intellectuality today is, to a significant degree, a complete embarrassment...
Sowell called out all this nonsense 40 years ago.
Ditto.
the “progressives” pushed the left away from classical liberalism. The Left left us-you and me, too. We didn’t move to the right. They just went so far that in effect they left us to the right of them - more in the center.
Yes ….
Agreed but these 19th century (bronze age for the religious) ideas have been shown for what they are...junk...thing is the progressive left ain't progressive. They don't have even a basic grasp of biology or evolution. We can't be surprised at the other side. I don't need to take that further. BOTH do identity politics. Black white ..some sort of geographical " pin the tail on the donkey " ..lets get one thing , at least, straight. Skin pigment... sun...ultraviolet.. dump heat...Stefan-Boltzmann Law...evolved body chemistry... in all of that ...who gives a shit where you originated...its a fair bet your parents came from somewhere else...and your offspring will mate with someone...from somewhere else.. so ...Leftys And Rightys and the religious ...give it a rest !
The recent public face of Harvard has simply shown what we have known for years, it is a joke.
Har Har Harvard
Years? Maybe 10 years. It really doesn’t go back that far. Sure, there have always been radical intellectuals at academic institutions, but this is a relatively recent phenomenon IMHO. It’s a complete departure from intellectual honesty.
So what if it is a joke? Harvard started as a Divinity School. Religious folks left money to Harvard when they died. Harvard accepted the money with conditions. Now that fund has grown to $50 billion and politicians are trying to force "diversity" on Harvard. Every school doesn't need diversity. Or Asian students. This is called the legacy program and there is a department at Harvard that keeps track of students who played on varsity teams for Harvard, and saves spots for their children.
@@Hexadeci I don't agree with the ten years. It's been about 30 years since it was a lost cause. Same with all academic institutions.
Steven should be Harvard's president.
As a conservative, my concern lies in the unchecked indoctrination that has firmly entrenched itself in our left-leaning College of Arts & Letters, and is now making inroads into the College of Sciences. Professors wield academic failure as a weapon against students who dare to entertain opposing views. It’s time to shine a light on this issue and reclaim intellectual diversity within our institutions.
Respected British anthropology professor, Dr. Edward Dutton, has demonstrated that “LEFTISM” is due to genetic mutations, caused by poor breeding strategies.
🤡
To put it simply, in recent decades, those persons who exhibit leftist traits such as egalitarianism, feminism, gynocentrism, socialism, multiculturalism, transvestism, homosexuality, perverse morality, and laziness, have been reproducing at rates far exceeding the previous norm, leading to an explosion of insane, narcissistic SOCIOPATHS in (mostly) Western societies.
So what? Everyone is going to send their kids to college anyway because 99% of the population is happily autopiloting through life.
Independent thinkers got complacent and lost.
The revolution is already over.
The majority are happy with "bread and circus"
That sounds great but that's not going to happen. No ones going to be able to stop them. Get used to them and be careful speaking out against them because they will prosecute you
@@JackVz- nonsense. This can and will be corrected.
This is a result of the sheep begging & acquiescing to Government controlling education & educating their Children. The sheep gladly hand their Children over to the State
Thank you for a reasoned adult conversation. No tribal signaling, no slogans, no histrionic screaming. What a nice little vacation.
The diversity statements aren't just for professors, I saw a requirement for diversity statements in a job posting for a controller position at a local university
Ha ha! 'diversity'? Really?
DEI=Doing evil internationally
^ That requirement is absolutely racism.
@@cjay2 It's news to you that ANY mention of "diversity" nowadays tends to be laughable? (As in to be derided, absurd, ridiculous and offensive, not funny.) The word has been devalued beyond recognition, like "liberal". They are of course left-lunacy ideological loyalty statements and proofs of enthusiastic compliance. Don't be the first to stop clapping if you want to get or keep a job in such environs.
I stopped donating money to my Ivy League alma mater years ago. When they abandoned free speech in favor of wokism, I said I’m done.
Please find a worthy, smaller, non-elite institution serving children of working class families and shift your support to there. Your money is more likely to make a difference in a student’s life.
@@projoebiochem Yeah? Where?
What a waste of money, investing in a quality education…. Using the term wokism shows you learnt very little. Same if you complained about the alt right. The who debate wizzed over your head. Shame on your parents, they wasted all that cash
@@cjay2 Across the Midwest there are institutions that are doing good work, but that are struggling financially. I know the president and dean of graduate programs at Franklin College in Indiana. The University of Indianapolis serves a high proportion of first generation college students, and the DePaulia magazine has done a series of articles describing how their new president left his former institution in a difficult financial position. Augustana University in South Dakota has a good reputation for truly educating students. A relative attended Illinois Wesleyan University and had an excellent experience. There are many that are much more deserving of support than the Ivys are, and one-tenth the contribution would have ten times the direct impact on student opportunities.
what is wokism to you?
Pinker continues to be worthwhile and sensible.
The problem is even Dr Pinker thinks her plagiarism is a pinkie finger while we powerless students are held to higher standards than our College Pres. 🤦🏻♀
you mean dr claudine gay
@@user-mw6fh5oj2cno she didn’t. Use yer brain.
She's the one 😅.
@@user-mw6fh5oj2c This site so weird I can't even reply to you say yes or mention her name!
- frog Eww she even copied her acknowledgements. If you had a heart, you wouldn't be defending her!
What a pleasure to hear a calm, measured discussion of divisive and hostile issues in academia and America.
My son in 11th grade. Took sat before 2024 and got in 1500’s. He received booklet with invitation to apply. He is not interested. I can’t blame him.
Nothing that couldn't be remedied by acknowledging, "we're only in it to declare our superiority...
unlike white supremacists".
I’ve heard University of Chicago is a much more reasonable elite university
Your son sounds not just bright but sensible. I wish him all the best.
Time to teach him about buying low and selling high.
UATX
I wouldn’t let my kid go to Harvard even if it was free. It scores too low on FIRE free speech rating
Isn't a college student an adult?
Harvard was dead last, wasn’t it? Impressive in a way 😵💫
@zenocrate4040 Well, if a person wants to publish, in any field, the Ivies are the ticket. Thank goodness for the University of Chicago, as well as U Michigan and Berkeley, which also open the door. The latter two are public, so it is not a $350k proposition, including living expenses and modest travel allowance for four years.
What is MOST maddening is the fact that where you went to school has such an outsized effect on the rest of your life -- and it does, sadly.
But you get the fake papers that open a lot of doors.
Pinker has to walk through a mine field to vaguely answer questions without seeming to criticize the institution that signs his checks while also appearing to be not insane.
I am very pleased I never attended Harvard.
The ultimate "I would never join an organization that would accept me!" 😂
@@terraflow__bryanburdo4547you mean wouldn’t accept me? Sounds like you belong in the same category 😂
An observation on my part after working in the tech sector for nearly 30 years: of all the graduates in my experience who were the most over-rated, it was the Harvard grads. Specifically, the Harvard MBAs. I found them to be extremely narcissistic and often times they would make decisions that have short term benefits for themselves, but would be detrimental to the company in the long run.
Stanford graduates were a bit of a mixed bag as well.
The one school that always impressed me with their graduates was MIT. Always found those folks to be surprisingly down to earth and very enthusiastic about their work. Good work ethic as well.
@@Diomedes01 Thanks for sharing.
What university did you go to?
VERY rewarding. Gillespie outstanding. Keeping it serious with some good humor
The threat posed by DEI litmus tests ("diveristy statements") in academia to not only universities, but society at large, if allowed to persist, is difficult to overstate. It's far more threatening than anti-communist loyalty oaths ever were because the demand for those came primarily from outside the universities. The demand for DEI testing is coming from inside universities now that the believers have reached critical mass in each institution and want to prevent themselves from ever being toppled from power. They already finished the first wall of requiring allegiance of new faculty. Now they're working on the second wall, which aims to prevent anyone who dissents from their faith from even being seen as learned in _any_ academic field (i.e. from getting an advanced degree). Under those circumstances, it's entirely appropriate for legislatures to tear down the walls they've built, precisely to _save_ academic freedom from the heretics who claim it as they deliberately destroy it.
NPR is also run by DEI ideologues. Pinker's remark about "DEI by stealth" in Academia is a v good point.
DEI statements will only lead to detrimental ideological homogeny
And that's their purpose.
I've always wondered why a University needs to have a position on any issue, foreign or domestic. That's not its job, and I don't care what they think. I do care that the professors are doing good work in teaching students critical thinking and expertise in their chosen field of study. I don't need or want professor x's opinion on who is right in the Middle East, even if the class deals with he middle east. His or her job is to present the facts and encourage the students to find their own points of view, and of course help them articulate a good argument orally or in writing. That is the chief problem with a lot of the "niche" areas, like gender studies, etc.
I never taught in a college, but I did teach English in high school for many years. I had ample opportunity to "teach" my students the right way to think about controversial topics. I did my best to never do that. I would frame a question, try to include in that framing nuances they might not have appreciated on both sides, and let them find their way through conversation.
You are confusing the university and the professor. It is the university that should never have a position on any issue. But the professor is there to espouse an opinion. At the same time, once you're in higher learning, there's very little that's "facts". Because you learn that everything is based on interpretation and you're supposed to see where the interpretation comes in.
You can get away with avoiding the question of interpretation in high school but once you're in university, everything is on a spectrum between facts / opinions / interpretation.
If AI gets it's data from places like Harvard, we are doomed.
There will never be just one AI. There will be competition, you can already see it taking place.
Where _should_ it get its data? Breitbart? QAnon? The Flat Earth Society? The Ghost of Jerry Falwell? Hal Lindsey? You?
@@KeithOtisEdwards No, just Harvard, as you stupidly suggest.
it gets it from youtube
Good to see at the end there Steven getting the applause he truly and deeply deserves
But what were all those peple -- mostly women-- doing eating and chatting in the question period? Were they in a different room?
“Some of these fields, …..especially the “Studies” fields, stopped being political, (political meaning a situation where people can have different points of view…..), and they became totalitarian which means there is no possibility of having more than one point of view. Once a field becomes totalitarian, once it loses the debate that marks a political situation, thinking itself becomes degraded. Because why would you try and think different thoughts? Your whole job is to find a script and to follow it. And the logical conclusion of that is to actually start to recite it, to repeat it, plagiarize it. But it's not plagiarism because as a good party member, you're repeating the mantras of the master. You are citing the key phrases. You are showing how history all can be understood through this master narrative.”
-Bruce Gilley
I graduated from Harvard in 2022 but never got into Professor Pinker's class despite trying the lottery system. His straightforward approach was refreshing in an overwhelmingly partisan environment. Leftism was the water we sam in, and many students felt like his class was a breath of fresh air. The university often sent emotionally charged emails about political events, positioning itself morally whilst maintaining billions of dollars in investments into fossil fuels. These transparent attempts at moral posturing were so blatant that many students, including myself, set up email filters to automatically archive these obviously duplicitous messages from the dean and administration.
Harvard physically conquered and destroyed my home town to the point that not one single person born there remains.
Universities seem to result in this in the U.K. Locals ignored, ridden rough shod over and finally driven out.
@@hrtdinasaurette3020 Harvard was founded to educate the people of Cambridge, Massachusetts; that's their primary mission. Now, because of them there ARE no people from Cambridge, only folks passing through for a few years.
Sounds like a colonization issue
@@africkinamerican Absolutely. You can watch a convo between Joe Rogan, Jordan Peterson, Eric Weinstein and Lex Friedmen and it will NEVER COME UP that each of the lived here for YEARS. Imagine if the all lived in NYC and it never came up. This town is invisible BY DESIGN because if elite folks talked about Cambridge that would be all they ever heard about when they met up.
Yup. Same with UC Berkeley and UC Santa Cruz
to me it is incredible that "the west " has decided that the "enlightenment " was a bad idea
if you cannot have free speech, what have you got left?
Shouldn't the right to free speech be the right to argue against the right to free speech?
@@tuckerbugeater no, because if you win and free speech is gone there is no going back.
Why does it surprise us that the west has become disillusioned with the enlightenment? We discovered reason couldn't prevent The Terror, 2 world wars, or our "discovery" of a mysterious inner, authentic self that can be born in the wrong body.
That’s what happens when you adopt the self destructive idea that all cultures are equal.
I'm super glad he actually talks about the difference between the speech issue at Harvard and elsewhere and incidents of violence, exclusion, disruption etc. Way too many talk about this as "free speech" issue, when it certainly is not! Excellent discussion.
Claudine Gay was the dean of the Faculty of Arts and Science, and her goal was to DEI-ify every possible thing. How will Giving the power to decide on high level policies like DEI to these deans prevent their adoption? What am I missing?
The issue is never the issue... the issue is the revolution. These guys are just the useful idiots.
Same question I had, especially in the light that 90% identify as liberals.
Harvard committed a form of institutional immolation when it first adopted affirmative action and similar measures that admitted students based on something other than merit. The most important fact of the matter is that Universities such as Harvard do not teach anything superior to any other university. What gave Harvard the stellar reputation was the quality not of the faculty but the quality of the students. At any institution of higher learning, the students pretty much teach themselves and lectures provide only guidance. When they admitted only the highest quality students based on merit, no matter what else may or may not be true about the school itself, future employers could bank on the fact that if a student graduated from Harvard they were high quality candidates for employment. This isn't true anymore and thus, Harvard is now becoming an expensive joke.
1st time viewer. really enjoyed your manner and delivery. Excellent questions. love the way you provide your guest the time to answer and respond.
Collages can't fix what is a society problem. But the problem is they think they can because they consider themselves as the intellectuals and that they know more than all those who didn't go to college. The people who do the actual work always know more about life.
They literally created the problem.
gotta love nicks humor. dude has an organic happy demeanor.
Policies on civil discourse and behavior might go a long way towards improving the image and performance of universities. Students are there to learn, not to verbally attack people they disagree with.
DEI is a huge part of the problem and is symptomatic of unaccountable administration.
Great interview. So few adult conversations anymore. This is so refreshing.
excellent interview!
Regarding the question about admitting students who were good at sports, Harvard Business School did a study of its alumni, and it found the most successful alumni had mediocre grades.
I was on the admissions staff of one of the big three ivies, decades ago. I am very familiar with surveys like this.
You have to look at these statistics very carefully. There can be many complex reasons for this.
In the case above one reason could be that the sort of students who might to find it as easy perform best in a very traditional academic program (as Harvard business school is) may have not have had the very highest test scores or grades in college. That means that it was MUCH harder to get into HBS. But it also means that their applications most likely were very outstanding and persuasive in other ways.... Such as recommendations or employers or
professors, or outstanding, original or crative work done outside of traditional class work. Perhaps performance in the military, private research, or organization. These aptitudes and inclinations thus are picking up something that will later be very important in predicting success in their careers after HBS.
From what I remember, they attributed it to social / interpersonal skills being a critical success factor in business. If you can’t build and manage relationships, you’re not going far. Something alon* those lines.
but they forgot to test whether the wallets were pure alligator
And you both have such great hair!
Cut it out. Admiring hair is what got Canada into a state of dictatorship.
Really enjoyable!
We need to learn to talk both sides. This is more effective by far than changing structures and policies, which require people to enforce them.
We need to leave our bubbles and engage with people, even when they disagree with us.
There have been attempts to do so for years. It seems that the vast majority of it being from the Right attempting to engage with the Left, including Far Left Woke. It's one thing to say "we need to leave our bubbles", but what happens when the vocal ( and perhaps violent ) minority of the Woke threaten greater crime against prospective speakers ( and students such as Jewish ones recently )? What about what happened to Riley Gaines at STSU and no one was prosecuted by the Law? There are some deeply corrupt and unjust practices going on, often enabled by university presidents and city majors alike ( who tell police to stand down ). It isn't about Law, Order, and Justice, but Power and one "Side" winning.
It's gonna take brave people, from the Left to the Right, but seemingly MORE from the Left to call out their own extremists, bravely and consistently so. For starters, roundly condemn Antifa every time. Not once in a blue moon or never.
Tell that to the media and the gov’t. There has yet to be a two sided airing of the subject of climate. Thousands of climate scientists have been silenced, removed or denied employment, defunded, people are blocked on the internet for saying anything about climate change or any other authoritarian determined position. . And worst of all, neighbours and friends enforce this dictatorship. I am a Canadian Trump appreciator and I have lost most of my friends because of that. Very good luck with people allowing discussion where there is disagreement.
Yes, and the amazing discovery that there are many more than 2 sides!
The Better Angels of Our Nature and Enlightenment Now really changed my worldview in obviously a very positive way. Profound books.
@@josephblowseph6123 The Blank Slate started me down a rabbit hole i'm still exploring
@@josephblowseph6123
The “swell of realization is happening” because the door plugs are falling out of airplanes every week, barely figuratively speaking. The generational-cultural changes has happened. Or if you wish, the milk has turned. If you ever dealt with the latter, you can still consume it if it’s to your taste. But it will never become fresh, no mater what.
Discard.
Buy new milk.
The indoctrinated 20+\30+ are pushing this country into the nosedive ala Boeing-MAX-TWICE
The reputation damage is one of the main points. Reputation and trust takes time to be restored.
Hans Rosling showed that academia is more bigotted than uneducated
and also his work with Gapminder that can show multidimensional funktionality over time
Excellent interview and video. Thank you
Mr Pinker is a very healthy reference of sanity in a storm of insanity.
thank you
This man changed my life. I read his books twice. The book Enlightenment Now made me study psychology in midlife. I went from an entrepreneur to a Therapist by age 50.
Science is not something you BELIVE IN. That's the whole point of science!!!
Science has axioms that must be believed in in order to do science, they're just not commonly mentioned. (That would indeed be surprising to find any concept that had no presuppositions at all, I think that gets into Godel territory.) So for instance, science makes no sense if you don't believe in a rule-driven universe whose rules are discoverable, etc.
A great conversation!
Please see what ex president Gay tried to do to Harvard economist Roland Fryer. Her fascist efforts are likely how she ended up as president.
I admire Steven so much! He's so intelligent and fair. Sometimes my heart tells me he's too fair, but my head wins in the end. My reason tells me his logic is correct, even if the right wing I dislike so much does get a point here or there. He is a very admirable person.
I'm hearing a complex person. I'm also seeing a unique set of people commenting here. I hope to read some of the writers PInker mentioned. Thanks. Difficult topic, but handled fairly well.
There is only one place where an echochamber is a desireable place to be. In art. Because in art, truth is secondary to enjoyment, and the realm is literally by definition 100% subjective.
Anywhere that truth matters, an echochamber will always be less optimal than its inverse.
This morning while swimming in the pool, I was thinking about how to best leave this world. And then I found Steven Pinker in my RUclips selection of the day. As today is Easter Day, I see some kind of a miracle in this coincidence. I got to Pinker through Thomas Sowell (mentioned at 55'). The pure joy of listening to two people who "know how to think" (as one student put it).
Any idea what Pinker was talking about when he mentioned Sowell’s book “A Conflict of Visions” may be becoming obsolete? I would like to learn more about that.
The joke I make is, "Harvard? That used to be a prestigious college, right?"
left
SEE the 2020 teen comedy The Fu**It List”. Funny and wise as a top academic recruit rejects Ha’vard.
Not disagreeing or anything. But I don't find that even funny.
2:43 -- No reason for a university to have a foreign policy sums up this institution core problem because this attitude extends across the entire spectrum.
The best explanation of the how and why of the Harvard et al pantomime is given by Bruce Gilley in his conversation with Peter Boghossian.
I attended two British Universities back in the 1970s/80s; and my fees were met by 'Major Award' grants from the Counties in which I lived. Then, at the end of the 1980s, into the 90s, grant funding for students was withdrawn; in favour of loans. This turned 'students' into 'customers': and the rot set in. Not only were the customers 'entitled' to a degree, like any other product; but standards were lowered to ENSURE there were few, if any, failures. Perhaps this is why I am gaining the impression that Steven Pinker tends to pussy-foot around the problem: why not ensure that students sign a Deed of Covenant with their university of choice; such that - if they partake in the curbing of freedom-of-speech - they are ejected from their course; with no refunds? What is wrong with discipline in these institutions?
Stereo photography is awesome! I used my grandfather's Stereo Realist camera for decades until color slide film and processing got harder to find.
Please!
It has always been this way, the Liberal Arts vs. Business and the trades. The real thing to bemoan is the application of business values on the professions and the 'callings' (art, religion, science, human service).
The section labeled "why do progressives hate progress" has nothing to do with the subject. In it, Pinker talks about photography and AI
I noticed that too. Try 42.44-
It's not hard to understand why "progressives hate progress"
Progress eliminates their reason for being, they can't afford to solve issues without making themselves redundant.
In fostering a more enlightened society, a pivotal approach lies in cultivating critical thinking skills among students, emphasizing independent thought rather than dictating specific beliefs or timelines for ideation. By instilling a disposition that values receptiveness to diverse perspectives and advocates deliberative judgment over hastened conclusions, we stand to mitigate the ideological chasms prevalent in the contemporary American political milieu. The foundational stride towards comprehensive comprehension necessitates the comprehensive gathering and analysis of myriad viewpoints. This objective can be facilitated by initially implementing such practices among all faculty members, thereby affording students exposure to a spectrum of viewpoints.
What a sensible discussion... "holistic admissions"....CAN'T MAKE THIS UP"
Allen Bloom said so much 35 years ago
Maybe the Visiting Committees should include a few plumbers, electricians and carpenters. You know, REAL people who need to actually WORK to live. That might inject some realism in evaluating a department
Charles Summers - enough said!
Thanks for telling us about your interest in Thomas Sowell.
Let Harvard become the community college it truly desires to be. Harvard can not be "saved" because it truly desires to be ethnically diverse.
Yeah, filled with low-eye-cue nobodies who can't and never will be able to do anything.
What does viewpoint diversity look like? That’s easy, Nick. It’s looks like a room full of POCs agreeing with each other
poc? the acronym, please.
44:30 So strange that in talking about the availability bias he mentioned Daniel Kahneman, on the same day he died (today).
a personal stand depends on the scholarship sponsors.
Neutrality in classrooms should also apply. Professors in there personal life can do what they want.
18:00 : "Three percent of the Faculty define themselves as Conservative... ... ..... and those three percent, most of them are in their nineties, so you can see where that is going.... ...... ......."
Something could be said for going out of your way and working for your information or discovery
It is a felony under federal law to intentionally “solicit, command, induce, or otherwise endeavor to persuade” another person to engage in a crime of violence against a person or property. 18 U.S.C. § 373. Many states have similar laws.
And what do they label as a 'crime of violence'? Don't be dumb.
Want to know how DEI and other policies "just happened"? Faculty are supposed to do governance but they're lazy and farm it out to the administration. The administration bloats itself up with apparatchiks who know zip about education and care less but have to find some justification for existing. Before they know it, the faculty are being run by the bureaucrats, who snuck in policies beneficial to THEM and are making all kinds of make-work garbage like "assessment" to waste faculty time and cater to students, parents, and political types. Faculty let these parasites take over and now they can't get the purpose of the university--education--back.
"who snuck in policies beneficial to THEM" Such a simple & logical conclusion. Starting to feel Dr Pinker is playing dumb.
I'm quite sure this is part of it. At least some of these people are true believers however.
You are very much mistaken about the evolution of administrative constipation. Although you are good at guessing the constipation.
exactly
No the humanities , college of education and activist professors did this. Admin followed
That in any debate the debate forum should function as 'neutral arena,' not a contestant itself, seems obvious. What, in the end, can you say to someone to whom it isn't obvious?
A first person chat bot is not a gimmick, just as a programming language is not just a gimmick. Ask the chatbot to write a program that can do things the chatbot can not do, run it and think again.
The problem that made it a gimmick is that it can only solve problems that you think it may possibly be able to solve. Because you never try the others.
A strong code is important, but as Pinker admits, it must be evenly, consistently enforced. Does he have a recommendation for how best to ensure this enforcement? DEI true believers cannot be expected or trusted with this responsibility.
Nick, thank you for this and love your channel. Fantastic line: "'2.5D The stereoscopic photography of Steven Pinker" sounds like a concept album from the late 60s." 🤣And some other great one-liners as well. I will say, a few too many interjections that hijacked or at least broke Steven's train of thought. But a great interview overall, nonetheless. Cheers, man.
*If Harvard could tell itself the truth:* "Huh... It turns out there is a reason it's a good idea to keep those people out."
Tolerance for Leftist and Intolerance for anyone else!
However the state of academic landscape in the US may be. This kind of talks with its clarity and scrutiny do not exist in many other countries. (Such as mine, Germany)
Diversity Statements = Loyalty Oaths
Wow, when yelling takes over, the reasonable minds have to degrade themselves to yelling as well? Why not discipline/sanction the original tellers? What happened to the rules of conduct on campus?
We now have to ensure that college hasn’t made job applicants dumber
Too late.
Seriously. Too late by decades.
you're old@@PrezVeto
@@user-xu6bv7yh2j Whatchu talkin? I'm only 187.
@@user-xu6bv7yh2j No, he's correct.
Is perceived progress really just the measurement of change. But when we as a society are in a period of plateau then inevitably we become desensitised to objective progress or utility and so need to seek for more change. In short is objective happiness or morality out of reach?
Used the word entrenched a number of times. Entrenched is code for DEI.
Same. Going to Grainger. I-L-L...
While i find reading his books to be painful to read, he does have the old school pragmatic and fact driven approach.
Like most people, when i hear someone's opinion that differs from mine my "go to" response is to figure out ways to defend my position, but if Pinker's opinion is different from mine i immediately think to myself "Where's my error in logic or what is it that i don't know?"
... anyone who admires *Thomas Sowell* can't be all bad!
Yeah. Just mostly bad.
@Second247 Why do you say so? Not saying you're wrong... but I would like to know more.
Well he did start off as a communist. And many communists beliefs align with Libertarians
@@tuckerbugeater ??? Just how do Communists and Libertarians align in their beliefs ???
@@davidhunt313 Guy's economic takes are bad, so bad that he isn't taken seriously.
Whatever it was, Harvard academic state, today, is not worth a penny. Perhaps, it´s time to let go.
But Harvard accepts Federal taxpayer money for tuition and research. Unless Congress cuts these programs, there is no way to disconnect and set Harvard free.
The universities did go of the rails with DEI.
Anyone ever notice the resemblance between Steven Pinker and Rob Lowe?
And the late Mark Bowlan.
I wonder what Pinker s position on intellectual property is. He said networks of exchange help progress and before 200-250 people shared ideas. IP is like extractive resource. You get exclusive use of your IP
In the age of ChatGPT, plagiarism is a quaint anachronism.
They critise us for taking for granted how things have gotten better while chiding us for pointing out how things have gotten worse. Think of all the environmental degradation since the seventies 😮
I haven't yet listened to the entire conversation, but in the first 10 minutes Steven Pinker starts that the university should have a policy of neutrality so that students and faculty don't have to worry about an opposing opinion negatively impacting their professional prospects. But of course then they wouldn't know if their Dean or a faculty member did have an opinion that they were disagreeing with and would hold it against them. So the question; is it better for people in power to be prejudiced and to be public about it or for people not in power to be secretly impacted because they didn't know the positions of the people in power?