The Battle Over Free Speech: Are Trigger Warnings, Safe Spaces & No-Platforming Harming Young Minds?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 27 мар 2019
- Many would argue that these are the fundamental goals of a good education. So why has Cambridge University taken to warning its students that the sexual violence in Titus Andronicus might be traumatic for them? Why are other universities in America and increasingly in Britain introducing measures to protect students from speech and texts they might find harmful? Safe spaces, trigger warnings and no-platforming are now campus buzzwords - and they’re all designed to limit free speech and the exchange of ideas. As celebrated social psychologist Jonathan Haidt argues in his book 'The Coddling of the American Mind', university students are increasingly retreating from ideas they fear may damage their mental health, and presenting themselves as fragile and in need of protection from any viewpoint that might make them feel unsafe.The culture of safety, as Haidt calls it, may be well intentioned, but it is hampering the development of young people and leaving them unprepared for adult life, with devastating consequences for them, for the companies that will soon hire them, and for society at large.
That, Haidt’s critics argue, is an infuriating misinterpretation of initiatives designed to help students. Far from wanting to shut down free speech and debate, what really concerns the advocates of these new measures is the equal right to speech in a public forum where the voices of the historically marginalised are given the same weight as those of more privileged groups. Warnings to students that what they’re about to read or hear might be disturbing are not an attempt to censor classic literature, but a call for consideration and sensitivity. Safe spaces aren’t cotton-wool wrapped echo chambers, but places where minority groups and people who have suffered trauma can share their experiences without fear of hostility.
In November 2018, Haidt came to the Intelligence Squared stage to discuss and debate these ideas. Joining him were the former chief rabbi Jonathan Sacks, who believes that educating young people through debate and argument helps foster robustness, author and activist Eleanor Penny, and sociologist Kehinde Andrews, one of the UK’s leading thinkers on race and the history of racism.
"....for 500 years it has gotten us nowhere" says the Black University Professor living in the former Colonial Nation
The rabbi made, for me, one of the strongest points. Those who are sure they are right are the keenest to hear opposing ideas, because they are confident that the facts are for them. It is, by contrast, those who are least sure they are right who are keenest to shut down debate.
@Y T Haidt doesn't have analysis, he has nice little catch phrases that pretend reality is something different that it is, to make people feel good.
Thank you. I was screaming at my screen when he started spewing that absurdity. The lack of awareness is stupefying.
@@philipbrown2086 I very much agree, and you see this play out pretty apparently in debates like this. When you have, in my opinion, one side that totally outclasses the other, there is a huge difference in the demeanor of the two groups. These two were a very good example, simply looking at things as simple as their cadence of speech, posture, and hand gestures. There is an element of unease, that i hope im not just projecting on them, but seems relatively obvious.
This same type of thing plays out when you watch a young student or protestor attempt to debate Jordan Peterson. They yell and scream and flail their arms to, in my opinion, distract from the weakness, even they see, in their own positions. Its like a form of cognitive dissonance that produces extreme anxiety, which then manifests as mental defense and physical aggressiveness.
lol I was so confused by that... Nothing has changed in 500 years..???? So if that idiot was sent back to the 16th century things would be the same for him? The world has changed more in just the last 100 years then it had in the entire previous 10 000 years, the quality of life is so many magnitudes better in 1st world countries then it was 100 years ago, for fucking every person living in it. This guys mad that racism still exists, his ancestors from the early 1900s were dealing with a lot fucking worse then his sad story of not being able to wear jeans :'( Not to mention a million ways to die that wouldn't even keep you home from work in todays world. Go back the 17th century then bud, and enjoy 40% of your children dying from infection, disease and everything else long before ever reaching adulthood.
My brain just turns off when someone starts with,
"As a (insert race, gender, sexuality group identity), I feel..."
None of that matters to your argument. Either you have good ideas or bad ideas, your group identity is inconsequential to the merit of your ideas.
Johan Doah I really disagree with that statements. People in the minorites experience things in society then people who aren’t this is just fact. And I believe as a human we should be able to hear from different perspectives whether we are in the racial minority or sexual because they have experiences that might be different then yours so listen, asses and then form your opinion
@@amalnasser4118 You can have all the experiences unique to you that you want...and I am happy to hear your personal experiences, but when someone wants to use that to push policy on me and strip me of my rights, please forgive me for not just rolling over and giving them up.
Your personal experience does not make your ideas good or bad, they are good or bad on their own merits period.
John doah of-course my personal experiences is not categorize into right or wrong there just experiences from my point of view in a minority I understand your point I do no should impose anything in any way to infringe on your rights. And no please don’t apologize you have every right with disagreeing on my points I’m not asking to agree with everything all I need if for something to listen. Thank you for your comment.
@@amalnasser4118 It's not a "fact" at all. While being black might be different than being white, we are both Americans in the same society with the same basic rights. What we choose to do with any opportunities that we are presented, or that we create, is up to us as individuals. If you think the world owes you something, then you'll be in for a rough ride as an adult when people rightly tell you to "Grow up."
Also, this preposterous idea that as a human being I can't possibly comprehend what it's like to be another human being is patently false. Empathy, sympathy, and our sense of fairness are built upon our ability to see things from a different perspective. It's foundational to any interactions you have with other people, and if you are lacking it, you're a psychopath.
Intersectionality is about nothing but power, and trying to gain it over others. It is not based on any science, and we should all reject it completely.
A different person with a different background and different ideas? Yea... it totally doesn't matter
Haidt is so eminently reasonable, comprehensive, and thorough in his analysis of these issues, that the opposition inevitably winds up looking like they are relying on pure appeal to emotion and generalizations/stereotypes that the world would do better without.
He's been shut down in his methods of teaching and feels the loss. And he is smart enough that anger can only harm his case, so he actively bites it down, and practices patience. I was more impressed with Sacks' answer than anyone.
Quite right.
The set-up was unfair. They paired two rational and highly intelligent adults with two emotional and ideologically possessed children.
all the rational, educated adults on the other side are smart enough to know emotional arguments are inherently unstable &do not hold up to scrutiny...
What else would you find on that side of the argument other than emotionally unbalanced intellectually insufficient children?
@@WayneBraack Rational higly intelligent adults that suppor this left-leaning opinions. C'mon, im right and a lot libertarian, and it's amply obvious they can find someone who has dedicated their lives studying the left leaning arguments (argumentation is a science)
True.
@@arthurwittmann6242 you'd think so but I haven't heard from or seen any of them doing debates like this. Who are they? I'm curious to hear from them too for balance.
Christopher Hitchens put it best “If someone tells me that I've hurt their feelings, I say, 'I'm still waiting to hear what your point is.'
@@isabelsanmartin3060
How wrong could he be about the Iraq War, that was his downfall...
@Blake839
He's dead? No shit Sherlock, thanks for the breaking news...
@@Oners82 Great attitude! I had no idea he was dead, or when this was filmed.
Yeah well Hitchens was a mean-spirited man full of privilege and entitlement. If he understood the painful realities of the past, he would take care to not hurt the feelings of the already marginalized and oppressed, and he would listen more and talk less
@@fusion772
Telling a public speaker to speak less - words of wisdom lol!
Funny calling it a debate, one side had no argument
Harry Peach I love a balanced debate and I did love this. But they had an incoherent argument.
@@liamwinter4512 Yeah tbh it was actually a pretty interesting debate although a little cliche
Felt like more of a civil discussion rather then a debate. Which is probably good
HAHAHA. Those arguing for safe spaces never do. Funny how that "Gen Z" rep mentions nothing of the rise of rabid identitarianism on the left and the unidirectional trend of de/no-platforming.
We need to stop ascribing inherent legitimacy to "minority" voices; the loser on stage speaking about the "violence of white faces" is why. Also, how alarming this kind of thinking; what does that mean for his worldview? Suspicious of all whites, faces "violence" in situations in historically white countries - got a suggestion for him, go to a country that matches his desired racial demographics.
How many sides are there?
As a woman who went through university, I can honestly say I never felt an ounce of sexism or oppression. That young woman is actually quite authoririan. She doesn't see the fascism in her own remarks!
Nazis suppressed freedom of speech. Their flag was colored red to attract the communists.
Leftists are always authoritarian, without fail. Orwell himself said, the next rise of fascism will come from the left. It makes me crazy when leftists try to invoke 1984 when talking about the right wing, when that novel was written as a cautionary insight on the LEFT gone rogue.
@@zeldagoblin Exactly!
58:16 "If you really have confidence that you are right then you never seek to silence your opponents." Rabbi Jonathan Sacks
It crazy to watch a debate we’re one speaker maintains that there has been exactly zero progress with racism in university yet teaches black studies at universities
Very good point...and oh yeah “the far right is on the rise” yeah right...
@@justkiddin1980 is this sarcasm?
They are standing against a system that is hundreds of years old. I 'm white, I get it, wtf is the problem with this. I see the racism EVERYWHERE IN EVERYTHING. I do not even want to hear any of you white folks telling me it isn't there when as a white folk , I HEAR it daily, I'm exposed to fragile white people crying about shame and guilt and never once actually checking themselves. I'm white, so folks assume I'm on their side and and don't mind their blatant bigotry. I do mind. It's gross, and holds humanity back from evolution, and y'all need to do some research and introspective critique.
I get that it is hard and defensiveness is a first reaction to being called out. It happened to me and it took a long time for me to learn, As, when it happened that I was called out (believing, mind you, that I was not a bigot) was when there were not willing people there to explain about privilege, what it is what it means to be living in it. There are folks willing to explain it-all over the internet and probably in your communities.
There isn't progress because the underlying structures have never been properly addressed.
How many black people you see in puzzles that are not exoticism in praxis?
What Do you know of Africa's history of science, mathematics and architecture before colonization?
that 's all
@@d.rabbitwhite Do tell -- what are just a FEW examples of these anecdotal interactions you experience on a "daily" basis? And where (geographically, organizationally, etc.)? Your remarks resonated & struck a chord w/ me -- as with countless millions others, of course -- as we live in an especially precarious time where ppl are given free pass on unspeakably evil "hate speech," like calling Obama "a bad prez," and only 90% or so of media & academia believe Trump is as bad or worse as Hitler.
@@Cronhour Since when is stating fact sarcasm? The far left is trying to make a comeback i hope we can stomp that shit out...because the next real wave of facism and racism is coming from the left...
The young woman’s on the left incoherent rambling almost convinced me of her argument that some people have not earned the right to a platform.
LOL. Well played
She is possibly the best example I've seen of someone speaking a lot of words while saying absolutely NOTHING. I can listen to graduate level physiology or economics lectures while sorting out my laundry and doing the dishes, but listening to her speak was an absolute bore. As substantive as listening to someone with a bad stutter who just drank a pint of vodka.
She sounds like a stroppy teenager arguing with her parents
I couldn't understand her either. Hwew. Strained so hard to listen to her slightly incoherent speech.
Laris Vrahimis yet, I was glad to hear her perspective, as much as it made my brain hurt. I want to hear more from “snowflakes” and more leftist perspectives, as I don’t understand the logic. I want to understand
Can I just say that this moderator is absolutely brilliant. She is perfectly balanced, fair, articulate, and informed. At times its almost as if she summarizes the speakers' position as well as if not better than the speakers themselves. Its a masterclass in moderation.
And she's way hot.
Her first words are to make a joke about Brexit to her audience, giving away her - and their - bias IMMEDIATELY
@@mogznwaz Because this was recorded in the height of brexit discussions, thus making a nice contextually accurate joke about it being a brexit free safe space. Pretty sure even most smooth brainers would understand that.
@@NeilDeBarna It was lazy pandering then and it is now.. Period.
@@mogznwaz You remind me of Kehinde Andrews, jumping on every tiny thing, pointing and shouting "see, they're biased!" When in reality, it was nothing or the sort.
"Censorship is forbidding a man from eating steak because a child could not chew it." -Mark Twain
I like that. It says alot, with few words. I'm stealing it 😛
The Far Left does infantilize adults with pablum ideas and roof much coddling.
The ‘Devouring Mother’ who feels every person is either a helpless infant… or a tyrannical threat to infants… there are no middle ground of the strong, healthy people able to fend for themselves, make their own choices.
@@j_freed Its very easy for individuals to make broad assumptions based on a snapshot off apparent information I imagine it is very much different looking in through our own eyes and observing ..rather than a heartfelt experience through the individuals eyes ...after all we all have very different coping mechanisms.
The enormous spectacle of MEDIA has reduced the individual to a dot.
This wasn't really a debate. The guys on the left just repeat "But victimhood", 100 times in different ways.
Gordon Freemason was it only 100 times? Felt like 400
Gordon Freemason they are all from the left it's lefties vs far lefties
You can only negotiate with a peer. If someone claims victim status they’re placing themselves in a category that makes negotiation and debate impossible. Decent society requires the person who’s not the victim to submit to the victim. If the victim status is permanent (based on identity) then there’s absolutely no way to ever be peer to peer. Its a permanent, unresolvable bug. If we cannot negotiate we cannot communicate. We can’t have justice. Nobody is a victim based on their “identity” alone. This idea of minority identity equals oppression does not hold water when we look at outcomes across the western world. It’s a lie that all people of influence promote- all teachers, all politicians, celebrities. It’s cauterized into the Western world. I’m not surprised we are where we are. Those ideas can never lead to long term success. There is never going to be an end to this victim narrative because it’s a lever that can be pulled continuously and without end. There’s zero evidence to support this victim narrative and despite all evidence to the contrary the victim/oppression narrative much like a religious movement continues to occupy spaces of influence. At some point you just say NO.
I think gordon was expecting these debates with multiple black people who can barely speak English spewing as much gibberish in as short of time possible. only occasionally to be punctuated with a racial slur.
Just saved me 90 minutes. Cheers. Upvoted.
45:10 - I don't think I've ever heard someone say 'profoundly patronising' in a tone that was so profoundly patronising.
torch2k haha...I felt the same but didn’t put words to it. Bless you. 😂
She even went through all the gestures and shit.
I just saw that part (after Haidt gives a positive and realistic breakdown on the social progress that universities have come to largely provide over the past few decades in particular) and had to pause and take a break from the video because of the admittedly *hopeless* feeling that set in when she threw down the “profoundly patronizing” comment and gesture. Scrolled down and saw your comment haha.
I found even her hand movements to be "profoundly patronising." (but her ideology tops the list)
@Gerry BerryDavid Starkey took out Laurie Penny with a massive overhand right of "I'm not taking any of your shit bitch." Its like candy. ruclips.net/video/oj9dA6E3fJw/видео.html
Having your feeling hurt by 'offensive speech' will never be as bad as being fined or jailed for speech.
"Minority students are alienated in universities".
Solution: Let's alienate them further.
What could go wrong?
I would love it, as a gay man, if these speakers on the left of the stage would stop using the LGBT as a trope for their arguments. You are not our protectors. The LGBT does not need your protection. We deserve to be treated as individuals first. You only speak for yourself Eleanor Penny.
Indeed.
Joe you don't need their protection ... Mate, u need protection from these idiots. She's already mentioned Muslim students and LGBT students in the same argument. The left loves Islam and Islam throws u guys off roof tops. The left has used the gay community, particularly gay men and when Islam has taken over and is rounding up and murdering u guys in the most barbaric ways imaginable, the left will be sitting by sprouting out "Not all Muslims".
They use you as a shield for their shitty ideas.
Well said, sir.
JB - This your new account Milo?
Not one cohesive argument against free speech. Just endless whining from one person and meaningless word salad from the other.
Word salad. You poet. Kudos.
Fucking word salad? Wow. You are operating on a hiring brain level dude. I’m using that one. Hahaha
Word salad is the modus operandi of the postmodern left.
amen
@Scott Mamby citation needed
For a girl who's so fearful of fascism, the way she speaks about de-platforming people she disagrees with, looks like shes heading down that road...
It's rather confusing that someone with extreme socialist political views would be fearful of fascism...
You have peculiar view of fascism. Fascism is defined by a militaristic and imperialist expansion with a strong nationalist base. If you think fascism is a left-wing creation, then I would wholeheartedly recommend a re-reading and analysis of post WWI Germany. I'd happily provide recommendations.
@@comradeusa8351 Maoism
I laughed out loud when she claimed "I'm actually suspicious of government". Sure you are, just like every communist stooge.
Why do you always bring up the National Socialists of Germany? Is the self hate that bad?
Haidt was excellent, I thoroughly enjoyed his clear, coherent, analysis. I was expecting a debate and the others seemed to be regurgitating ideologies which made little sense.
The two sitting on the left: angry, emotional and incoherent.
The two sitting on the right: Charming, poised and lucid.
They are oppressed and will always choose to be.
Don't diss thier choice of career.
@@robtalbot3852 That Poor Young Girl is Obviously being Severely Oppressed by "S's" , "T's", "ST's" & "TH's" .
wisdom comes with age
@@thetayterminator1436 and the ugly stick too!! I'm so tired of people all crying about how life isn't fair...boo hoo...poor me...poor me ...pour me another. I can't listen to any more of this...and I need a trigger warning from these people because of the anxiety I'm feeling about people who want to stifle free speech and therefore I am censoring them...hows THAT for more of their walking contradiction. Leftism is a mental illness. People just look for reasons to be offended.
@@newsletter4826 true shit son
"I don't want you to be safe ideologically or emotionally. I want you to be strong. I'm not going to take the weights out of the gym..."
"This is the gym..."
Not Sparta, although those guys definitely had a great gym! 😄
That quote was heaviest take away of this debate? ? ?
Haidt nailed it. The two on the left kept proving his point lol
@@nildaluzrodriguez what's your take?
When I was a child we had a saying: "Sticks and stones may break my bones, but names will never hurt me".
Eleanor Penny sounds like she’s on the verge of tears every time she speaks.
She is totally wet anyway.
she wants everyone in the room to adopt their behavior to her personal pain/hangups. it's authoritarianism presenting itself as a victim. should be shamed... it's how evil manifests.
To me it seemed more like nervousness. I doubt she has ever spoken for such a large audience in a debate.
She's not much of an advertisement for UCL...
the young activist makes no sense. period. Take a writing class in idea development.
Lol yeah she talks about "The trappings of free speech" and I thought... you mean... being able to speak freely? Then she literally speaks of not allowing people whose views (in her opinion) are dangerous to have a platform. The painful irony and hypocrisy of this mindset is sadly lost on them.
Oh my god I’d love to take that class.
She is Laurie Penny's sister, so I'm not surprised.
I feel Eleanor Penny should be no platformed on the basis of crimes against reason, and for language abuse.
J Davies The opposite is true - crazy people and bad ideas must be exposed in public so that they can be debated and defeated; it is worse for all of us if they suppturate below the radar.
@@ciaraosullivan3755 Errr, I think irony just died.
She is insufferable. I wouldn't silence her, but my God I wish she would silence herself.
@@amandagriffin1751 Lol. I loved this
@@moonlitspider2827 Thanks. She really is garbage.
This was wonderful. Johnathan Haidt is a treasure. His books have had a huge impact on me.
Greatest thinker of our generation in my opinion
his attitude is superb too
Fake
I am so pleased to see the students challenging the younger speakers. I found a lot of what I heard from the left side to be borderline nasty with a sugar coating, regardless of the experiences they may have had to bring them to their conclusions. They're not ready to give straight answers to these questions without insulting the questioners.
"Sitting around talking and trying to solve problems has gotten us literally nowhere in 500 years." Uh....what?
Well, in America it took a Civil War, with 360,000+ Union deaths, to move the ball from "slavery" to "freeman" for Black Americans. But that's literally NOWHERE.
Their lack of logic is astounding.
So glad I'm not the only one that noticed that. What the actual fuck is this guy on?
@@stanbartsch1984 Well, if you want to be technical the Civil War wasn't ONLY for slavery. it was primarily for principle of States' Rights and taxation. But you could also say that they weren't "freemen". They weren't slaves but weren't free and you could say talking and solving problems did work because you had "I Have a Dream" "Malcom x speech", and "Brown v. Board of Education".
"deeply oppressive culture"s do not allow the oppressed to sit on a literal stage and lecture the oppressors of how evil they are.
I thought the same thing
@NAREK ARUTYUNYAN You're not quite right about that. The cleverest oppressive systems *DO* allow certain forums for token "dissent" which are no threat to those in power.
(1)Apartheid South Africa's white-only parliament had regular denunciations of National Party governments by the mostly English-speaking opposition.
When the apartheid police killed black people in custody (often), the system allowed inquests which exposed the most horrific details _ but always exonerated the police.
(2)Pre-independence Ireland was a system of crushing oppression for the vast majority, by British rule. But after Catholic Emancipation and particularly from the time of Parnell, the British Parliament had no problem with allowing Irish representatives to protest about their people's grievances _ which British governments, for the most part, then ignored.
(3)Palestinians live under a system of deep discrimination, which among other things, involves large numbers of civilians being killed by aerial bombing.
Yet one of Israel's highest judges is a Palestinian, and some Palestinians are allowed to vote in Israeli elections, making up roughly 20 to 25% of the voters.
Few Palestinians would regard these concessions as meaning that they are not living under oppression.
@@nicholassaint5149 All well, but not the case here!
I just wish this would have been said to the speakers in the left
The irony of this young girl sharing a public forum panel with Jonathan Haidt attempting to argue against the platforming of “right wing” voices in fear of legitimizing those views is astounding
She said she had a PTSD diagnosis. She should research PSG -post traumatic growth. At some point, you need to deal with it and grow from any trauma, not stay stuck on it, seeing it and feeling it all the time.
But why? People wear PTSD as a badge of honor. It's like the "Get out of jail free" card in Monopoly.
To paraphrase the deplatforming gal, "I'm all for free speech as long as the speech I don't agree with can't be heard."
It's mostly about respect. Your boss can disrespect you but you can't disrespect him. We've actually had to write laws to limit the ability of owners and managers to disrespect their employees. You know, like when someone is maimed on the job and the boss used to just send the poor guy home to be nursed by his family. Both sides did agree that hates speech is unacceptable. So to paraphrase both sides, "I'm all for free speech as long as the speech I don't agree with can't be heard." 60% of Asians attend college; 42% of whites; 37% of African-Americans attend college; 36% of Hispanics attend college in the US. 58% of Asians; 40% of whites; 26% of African-Americans and shockingly only 18% of Hispanics attain a bachelor's degree. The success rate of blacks and Hispanics has a big drop off.
@@disnotesfoyou And this is because? Have you studied the causes for this drop or are you just assuming?
@Anonymoose 123 And why would that be? Why do you need mutual respect for free speech? Free speech gets 'strange idea's' out in the open. Without FS such idea's stay underground. Slowly burning under your feet, untill the floor gives way.
There's a difference between FS and open discussion. FS means FS! NO MATTER what you say. Prohibiting FS, language, certain words, will only mean some idea's go out of sight. They don't vanish! They still remain! You just don't see them anymore.
Keep your friends close, keep your enemies closer!!!
Yeah, there is a difference between hate speech and speech that you hate
Very bad paraphrase. It happens a lot with paraphrase.
I wish I could thumb down individual speakers instead of the whole video.
Yeah, with they would implement that. Its more like a polling format.
"The university is the market and the market is racism. " what the hell am I listening to?
I’m debating wether my last brain cell can survive the second half of this dumpster fire
These woke heroes want a genocide
I love how at the very end Haidt is basically like, guys this whole thing is kind of a waste of time and your college years would be better spent elsewhere. 1:24:30
The young woman , rabbiting on , lost me in quick time, after she finished I had not a clue what she was on about.
That Poor Young Girl is Obviously being Severely Oppressed by "S's" , "T's", "ST's" & "TH's" . I guess she never really will have free speech as much as those letters are taxing her words lol
She was a word salad. I think it was her way of having to not actually answer anything. As Einstein once said, "if you can't explain it simply, then you don't understand it well enough".
the classic 'blind with bs' approach
mostly to deflect the focus from the real problem - lack of tolerance from the Left
@@eternalreign2313 The thing is, she is parroting 3rd wave feminist dogma perfectly.
Peter Bohossian had her number a few years ago, but she is unable to deviate from scripture.
Once again I am stuck being embarrassed by my gender listening to another woman dribble on in nonsense. Women are a majority of the population. If women don’t assert their own power, then their limitations are self imposed. Any woman living under a society based on western ideology, is the freest that woman have been in all history. As a women who majored in the sciences, completed my legal doctorate, raises my children, and tries to find a little joy in the craziness and struggle of life, which is the same for all people in context, I can’t imagine pretending I am some shrinking violet in face of masculinity.
Also, her opening statement shows her bias against reason. I wish I had the proper time to unpack it’s logical fallacies, but I have a life.
Bravo Kirstin!
Its because your a successful modern woman and these two have took there fundamental features ie race and gender and blamed racism and sexism on why they are not succeeding, your skin pigmentation, gender and sexual orientation do not hold you back in a modern western society and the easy thing to do is blame our ancestors who did some horrible things to minorities and women and even to themselves and condemn the modern world I’m so glad I didn’t go uni, It’s the only valid point a modern pupil of academia has is the price and the degrees that don’t get you a job but this made up oppression of groups are a non starter it just becomes the oppression olympics
This was beautiful
Thank you! Especially your last sentence made me smile
Trump 2020
I've been a soft-core liberal by the nature of my age (30) and geographic location (liberal state) not until I met my husband whose an economic conservative and socially liberal and we would have these huge quarrels in the beginning about various societal issues. Most of the times it'd end with me feeling emotionally overwhelmed and stating "enough, I don't want to hear you anymore" but internally knowing he has had the upper points and I was simply arguing on "borrowed problems" identified by the left like women inequality, racism (I'm Asian from 1st generation immigrants),etc. After having this awareness I started my exploration into the "other side" to see if I could be convinced or not and a good way to test how secured and solid my grounds are as a leftist endorser.
Long story short, the so-called "conservatives" won me over in pretty much all political debates by their well researched facts, in depth analysis and ability to pose hard intellectual questions on problems which they themselves might not have answer to but the left often conveniently toss it under the umbrella of 'racism, gender, capitalism, etc.' and these are the evil of society. They are so superficial on their solution, rudimentary in their thinking, and loud on their virtues signaling. I'm still waiting for the day where both sides have equal weight in their claims and which I'm actually torn between the two but for now the scale continues to tip right.
I’m a gay female. I 100% believe in all sides having a platform. If we shut people down, that’s big trouble. I would go see Steve Bannon if he spoke at my University. I would also partake in the Q & A session and challenge him on anything I felt he was off base on. That’s true progress… listening to one another and having hard conversations. I see these people who claim to be speaking and acting on my behalf, and they are showing up to academic lectures and banging on cowbells and chanting over speakers so no one can hear them. It’s disgusting. Massively immature. Let people speak and then hold them accountable. And most importantly, find some common ground. Intersectional division never ends. I can find countless ways to describe how the people I encounter on a daily basis are NOT like me, but the healing begins when we look for ways we ARE ALIKE and things we can agree on.
Eleanor Penny can't articulate an argument to save her life.
I can't even understand what the hell point that moron is trying to make, other than 'right wing bad!' It's right wings don't want free speech, we're all in favor of it, but just for some reason we'll scream, harass, threaten, intimidate, perpetrate violence, have massive protests against you IF you use it!
Well you have to remember Haidt has a lot more experience and wisdom, like she is still very young. He has much more perspective. When you're young you don't really know what's going on. Like he has kids, he is responsible for educating students. Penny doesn't have any of that. I tried to find a bio on her but couldn't much but my guess is she just hasn't had the real world experience of being responsible for other human beings like that. She hasn't had the experience yet of realising she is fundamentally wrong on something she felt really strongly about yet. Or of seeing her ideas and perceptions change over time. Stuff like that. So her condemnation comes easy to her.
Going off her opening statement: she is basically proving Haidt correct in his description of gen z, and it is painful to watch. Like she basically is doubling down, on the kinds of things Haidt says gen z does or thinks.
Insofar as she says anything, she is saying the reason why gen z acts this way instead of developing more robust individual ability to deal with issues, is because the issues are structural. And being a stronger individual can't answer structural issues.
Whereas like the obvious answer would be there have been structural issues since the beginning of time, and basically the answer to that in all wisdom literature is: become a stronger individual. And part of Haidt and his co author's argument was based on cognitive behavioural therapy.
To be fair, you can't articulate a non-argument
The Ball, but you can articulate a terrible argument.
Exactly. She is the epitome of pseudo intellectual tryhard.
The two coddled minds opposite Haidt repeatedly demonstrate his point.
Haidt is always a pleasure to listen to. Can't say the same for the young "safe space" woman (not sure of her name.) I enjoyed hearing from the Rabbi(?) and the moderator was just great. She was passionate, thoughtful and brought a great energy to the discourse.
God she is so lost and everyone there is so polite to her, she needs a hug and then an eduction to help her grow up.
No, what she needs is something very different, but what it is, I cannot say.
You can see immediately which side is arguing from emotion and not logic.
That's very apparent in this debate, I agree. The lady sitting to the right hand of the facilitator particularly makes emotional arguments.
No platforming is the 21st century version of book burning.
Interesting analogy...! (I thought of book-burning the other day as an analog of 8th century iconoclasm, since the Church used icons not only for venerating -- not worshipping! -- the saints/martyrs, but also for educating the faithful, before the printing press, widespread literacy, commonly available books, etc.) Hmmm....
Yes
No it's 21st century fascism. A few decide what the majority hear. They use violence if necessary and will ruin your life if you dare step out of line and dare challenge their ideology.
Universities are producing far left nut jobs who refuse to listen to anything the don't like, but instead of walking away they protest, they no platform, they use violence.
Sadly MSM hardly speaks of this over here, though i must admit i think it's starting to come to a head and to the publics attention finally.
Luckily those of us who don't go to uni don't have our head in the clouds, we don't have safe spaces to run too when some fella gives you a load of crap whilst your working as a waitress or retail worker. We have to actually go out into the real world after college or school and actually work, pay tax, whilst students spend their time getting hammered and rocking up hung over to their lectures, they pay no tax, their loans pay their bills and is all pretty much done for them.
They have no idea how much of a b###h life is, they don't understand nor want to understand peoples worries about immigration numbers, who have valid real points and concerns, yet they can't be heard because it will hurt peoples feelings...what about peoples physical health when the NHS eventually collapses because the population growth is too rapid and the NHS cannot cope with the strain (this will happen, it's not if it's when), but these concerns that are rooted in common sense if nothing else aren't being heard.
These liberal uni robots shut anyone down who tries to have a debate about it, anyone who challenges them are bigoted, racist, homophobes and best of all a fascist.
...funny the centre and right wing also liberals with common sense and a functioning brain thats able to think, don't want to shut the far left down, we want to debate, they don't want to hear so they suppress dissenters of their ideology.
@@libertasdemocratiam887 Anti Semitism is missing off your list of accusations. That's the most common term used when criticism presents them.
@@libertasdemocratiam887 That's true ... you have social media to fuck up your brains even worse. There is no more center-right. It's gone to alt-right freaks glued to their Facebook and Google accounts that call shitposting "entrepreneurship". Get into the real world.
It just dawned on me when Ms. Eleanor said " deeply oppressive society " that there seems to be a conflating of the ideas of oppression and simple hardships of life. Everyone agrees that life is hard, but her statement implies that all hardship in life is the result of oppression. 🤔 I don't believe that are one in the same. Both things can be true without one Necessarily causing the other
Some people just feel that life, especially other people, need and must be changed .
I like how they aren’t being timed or restricted. It makes debates more healthy, and overall, it’s more pleasant for viewers
The young woman on stage is a PERFECT example of the emotional immaturity & instability that Haidt has described. A Perfect Exhibit A. She's a jumble of emotion, I feel, I feel, my feeling are hurt....hardly a way to handle oneself at an intellectual institution - the opposite of rational thought.
I feel I must agree with you
@@mistermelorious I feel I must take a shit. I will let you know how I feel afterwards.
@@whirled_peas How was it? We're here when you need to talk.
@@Bejaardenbus I fainted half way through and now I have PTSD. I have an appointment with my state-funded defecation trauma specialist, and the shite has been ordered to attend empathy classes so it may never oppress another arsehole again. #EverydayShitism
@@whirled_peas I'm very happy to hear that you're getting help.
Incredible.
Ask an academian with a lifetime of experience of reasearch and teaching - makes sense.
Ask an barely adult activist ("journalist") and they'll jabber on for minutes uttering nothing but asinine drivel not even addressing what they were asked.
If not so sad it'd be grounds for screaming laughter...
In a Poetry Foundation class in which we analyzed many mostly contemporary poems, we were given trigger warnings in advance every week. I was floored. All I could think was, are our younger generations that sensitive that they have to be warned before they read a poem?
That’s embarrassing.
To be honest, though, that's the whole point of poetry! It is MEANT to shake you, to move you, to make you feel, & also to make you question & think. So those who lash back at being moved are very much missing the point. So too are any who consider it too inconsequential to be moving. Poetry is like love: if you're afraid of love, or incapable of it, then it is wasted on you; if you are both capable of & open to love, beauty ensues.
It’s funny - no one objects to turning people away from university because they aren’t clever enough, so why do they let in people who are so fragile that they are nothing but a nuisance to everyone around them. The extreme left should fund separate universities for those of more delicate constitutions and then employers could make their choices from the students that emerge from these and more traditional universities.
The one thing j hate about "intellectual debates' is saying things like: "all the research shows" and then never once citing a single study.
There's an unspoken agreement in these types of debates that participants will not lie. I wouldn't accuse anyone in this debate of lying. I think the real problem is Haidt position is "don't do this because it will hurt you" and the Penny's characterizing his position as "don't do this because you'll hurt me". Haidt's teammate is arguing "i sucked it up, so can you" (which i don't think is fair) and Penny's teammate is at least attempting to argue that Haidt's wrong on the facts. But Penny talks more, and most of her points are about something no one else is really talking about.
The issue with that is many people think they're telling the truth. You can't just make a claim and not have supporting evidence. That's not how honest debates work. Many people listen to these debates and take things that support their narrative as true, not knowing the presenters claims arent substantiated or the argument is filled with fallacies. I listen to these things unbiased with a critical ear to learn, but I cannot, with a clear conscious, accept an argument as valid when there's no supporting information.
@@joshk7051 someone can just as easily invent a source during an oral debate, though, so it sounds like the format just isn't for you
@@TheoMurpse no, this discussion isn't my style at all. I like facts, not opinions.
@@joshk7051 but the ones who want truth will research the studies and other won't like the last five years because they can't handle the truth.
Haidt is a legend
He goes too soft on people trying to curtail free speech. He has a lot of good ideas, but he gives them too much ground.
@Abdul Hannan Abdul Matheen In some cases I agree...but there are points where he could really get at the core issues, but lays down to try and placate feelings...which just emboldens them to use those feelings arguments more.
@Abdul Hannan Abdul Matheen Hitchens was a bit of a one trick pony if we're honest. I must admit to worshipping him when I was in the adolescent phase of my atheism about 10 years ago (around the time that "The God Delusion" was fashionable), but as I developed my views he became less and less interesting to me. It's a great shame we don't have his devastating polemic wit to tackle the issues we see on our screen now. I am quite impressed with his brother, Peter, in the years since Christopher died, even if he can be a little black pilled for my taste.
Abdul Hannan Abdul Matheen may he Rest In Peace
i'm probably midway between both arguments with respect to colleges, but what gives with the snickering and sighs from people opposing Haidt. I've seen this in several videos with Haidt, and others arguing against safe spaces in colleges. I just dont get this part, and part of me thinks it speaks volumes of those people. Here's some advice to those advocating for full blown safe spaces, do not snicker or sigh while the opposing side is making their case. It makes you look immature
Worst "non-discussion" I've ever suffered through. Guy on far left, instantly plays up the victim role and goes downhill from there.The two on the left are all about "self". Me, me, me. Nothing at all to contribute. I'm a victim of prejudice.
So what's wrong with being a victim if you are a victim? How about not blaming victims but instead the perpetrator?
@@yueotsutsuki4553 Nothing wrong with it. Unless there is no real 'perpetrator', but only an overly sensitive 'victim'. You shouldn't be afraid to talk to a woman, because you might say something offensive, if the 'offense' is something normal. Like saying 'have a look' to a blind person. You a: aren't always (immediately) able see that someone is blind, and b: most blind people want you to talk 'normal'. It's usually other people that find it awkward.
I'm not talking about things that are commonly seen as offensive. I'm talking about people with very long toes, that are almost hoping you'll say or do something they can make a fuss about. So, I'm not talking about real bullying, sexist behaviour and that kind of unlawful behaviour or behaviour generally found unacceptable (like slapping a woman's butt), but things like being called the wrong gender by accident (what happened to me regularly, when I had long hair. Despite my beard :) ). It sometimes seems being the oddball is the standard today and everyone is very, very very, entitled. But nobody talks about the duty that goes with rights and nobody talks about the responsibility that comes with priviledge.
For me it's all a sign of decadence. Through history there's war. Not that I want war, but kids today have such luxury lives. They are spoiled rotten and can't handle any criticism. A war makes people aware of what's important and what's not. People who don't accept reality die and after the war everybody who's survived is very busy getting thing up and running again. It makes people humble. Now compare to the spoiled kids who think it's a crime if someone says something 'offensive' to them. Not DO something offensive, but just and only SAY something 'offensive'. If those offensive things are also seen as not offensive to 99% of people, than there is something going very wrong in society. It can and may never be that the few rule the many. Not in a democracy! And might you think there's no spoiling in kids today. Muscle mass of todays young generations is 30-40% less than kust 30 yrs ago. Twelve year olds have diabetes type 2, are obese, need physiotherapy for their necks and backs caused by smart phone use. Kids make hundreds to even thousands of selfies a day. How narcissistic can you get?
And what's the gain? Cause people who do really offend are not going to think differently because a word is forbidden. So we got the N-word, the G-word, etc., etc. Does it mean there is no discrimination anymore? I can call my mate an *sshole without offending him. Why? Cause he knows my intentions! There is trust that I mean to tease him, not offend him. It's the way I say it that makes the difference. Today everyone has long toes and if you drop even a feather on those sensitive toes ....... Because they are programmed (brought up) to distrust and seek offense in everyone and everything and they're 'entitled'!
We have a comedian here that made a sketch (in the 1970's) about a guy telling a joke. After starting with: There were 2 Chinese walking in the park. He gets an telephone call. The caller is offended because it's about 2 Chinese and that it's discriminating. 2nd Call is about walking in the park, disturbing the birds or some BS. Everytime the guy adjusts his story to match the caller's demands. So, you can imagine the story falls completely apart and at the end, the last caller says: wouldn't the joke be much better if it was about 2 Chinese walking the park, etc., etc.. At which pont the storyteller tries to pull put his hair and is pulled offstage by men in white doctor's clothes. Get my drift? If you let this thrive, you'll end up with an Orwellian society, where everyone is afraid to say anything to anyone. Life isn't always fun and cetainly never fair. The sooner you learn, the better you'll be able to cope.
They are filled with a lot of hate, and i dont think they can build anything lasting good out of that
@@arturama8581
Nice comment. About the most famous comedian in Belgium made a similar joke. People complaining about his joke, so then he had to adjust it, and in the end cuz of the adjustments it became an even more offensive joke. It's not possible to translate the joke into english alas.
@@arturama8581 brilliantly phrased! As a 21 y/o crazed by the current “woke” culture gaining momentum around me.. I agree with every word of yours 💯
It’s been maddening, listening to their hate and their rhetorics. And at just 21, I’m gravely concerned about the future generation. It’s a downward spiral from genZ
@48:54 the Rabbi really brings in a fresh new perspective: "I get it - that you [ Gen Z ] live in a harder world in some ways, that you are rightfully angry. The question, though, is how do you use that anger to actually get people to listen to you?"
A clear demonstration of the critical importance of maturity.
Best-Quote award goes to Jonathan Haidt: *"A mind prepared for battle is not a mind prepared for learning."*
If that black guy is a professor then we are all done with universities, nothing serious can come out of such a feeble man.
I know, can you believe it? He is a professor!!!!!! And he has access to young minds. That should scare the pants off sane people.
@@gordonthefreeman Ah, a classic Hitchens quote.
He was on GMB a while ago claiming the English Flag was a symbol of racism, when pushed he had to give the crusades as an example, despite the English Flag having not been used at that period.
@@gordonthefreeman i disagree. Give him all the platform he wants. Sunlight is the best disinfectant.
@@icecell platform to speak yes, platform to teach, fuck no
When I was at school, when a premise was to be undertaken for debate and sides were being allocated , I was always chosen to speak on behalf of the position that was in opposition to my personal opinion or view point. It's strange being both saddened and glad to have won those debates.
When we are very young we are told what to do from a plethora of different areas across the entire range of experiential things that we encounter.
Without listening to all voices from these varied backgrounds, we don't get an opportunity to inform the outdated or ignorant .
If I feel triggered by the words a person speaks, its likely that its because I come from place where I have some emotional attachment of the subject matter. I try to give that person the benefit of the doubt before I instantly react, accepting that it could be either side of an argument that comes out of a state of ignorance, mis information, sudo-science /psychology/ sociology.
We should undertake the art of being able to represent ourselves in a manner that does not misrepresent an idea as a fact. We must be willing to replace outdated data when gaining greater insights, gained in through exploration education and experience
The history of medicine viewed from a place where we have a greater understanding across the whole populous than our forefathers, demonstrates how advancements were completely dismissed by the established body in favour of what they had studied therefore 'knew' as fact. With a struggle to gain acceptance of any advancement that could replace the accepted. Research and gaining knowledge into a subject through for example inventions that allow for exploration of areas previously unavailable. Discoveries only become advancements when not being automatically dismissed by things that previously unknown to be factually so theories and ideas were held on to tightly by the established medical bodies as a factually held belief, because' they knew better'
Vaccination for smallpox came out from the observation that cow maids displayed immunity but was accompanied with fears bovine in nature and spread in print through different publication because the understanding of a new insight wasn't accessible to all that and had to replace an established way of thought. I know is a difficult attitude to replace as it usually sits with I'm right. Neither willing to back down.
You can change an idea but its much more difficult to change a belief. Education can only benefit from being allowed to do its job by explaining, informing and not holding on to the debunked values. Silencing a voice stops you having the opportunity to see further into something given advances made in understanding and its only by sharing that we all benefit. there needs to be a willingness to talk across that which can divide. Fostering a culture of being a part of the dialog not apart from it. And in that being said I hope to demonstrate how two different words, sounding the same only by exploring does the sentence say otherwise
The advancements in communication, equipment and its global reach where the internet can translate, inform and cross oceans in seconds should perhaps be embraced as an opportunity. As long as it is understood that communication is that key word, that it needs the support of sharing information based on facts not fear. This unprecedented surge into a world where the we have the potential access to insights available, into the worlds previously unexplored. Not understanding that the unknown only becomes known through exploration and its nature is on that is often accompanied, often with fear. Which shouldn't be dismissed but perhaps allowed to be a nervous expression of self preservation that in our less enlightened age was potentially vital to survival until known to be otherwise.
😅
I debated in school. There was a set topic for the season. I had to be prepared to argue either side (affirmative or negative) of the topic. Not only argue it, but back it up with evidence.
It teaches people how to think.
every time I see eleanor penny on anything im absolutely mystified as to how she got an invitation
She got more than 1?
one side: blatant racists demanding authorities give them special protection for arbitrary conditions.
other side: bringing facts, research, history and logic to argue for freedom and the unique conditions that enabled us to prosper and free ourselves from authority.
hmmmmm this wasn't a "battle" this was a slaughter.
Free speech is a human right, not a special condition for only certain people. It's a universal principle.
I was there. The two idiots completely lost the audience. Towards the end no one applauded their racist, bigoted nonsense. They were dreadful and I felt so ashamed that they were all we had to offer to debate the two great and compassionate minds of Haidt and Sachs.
Adults arguing with children.
@Dwaine Castle ironically fox news is the only lame-stream entity that has it's toe in the water of truth, their pundits are obviously monitoring alternative-media for their talking points. your talking point was true in the early '90's now... not so much. the mainstream are dying and that is like the sword being dulled, the elites will not have that.
Haidt is good but he isn't ruthless, where is Hitchens when you need him. Indignation is required.
As a professor he can't permit himself that liberty
Gad Saad would be a good fit. He would put the two bigoted lefties in their place. I’m absolutely disgusted by their ignorant ideology. The so called professor is a disgrace.
Omg yes. How awesome would it be to have Hitchens throw a few slaps on those fragile pots
The difference between Haidt and Hitchens is that people walked away from debates with Christopher emboldened in their beliefs and truly believing that their side won, whereas there is no chance to two on stage left walked away from this debate thinking that they won. Gentle persistence is an effective tactic for actually changing minds. A meek affect can be extremely persuasive. Hitchens was exciting, but only if you already agreed with him.
@@jefftravilla Good point.
A popular way to hone a debaters skills is to force them to take an opposite position to their actual beliefs and challenge them to win the debate. It requires people to learn about the opposite sides points. At the very least we should allow open debates about all topics to TEST their strengths. Stopping debate is a killer for true democracy/republics.
There is a lot of gentleness and patience being practiced here. I might have pressed directly to the issues.
We can mostly agree that only Haidt and Sacks were the rational people in this debate.
Of course. I knew that before I clicked play. The black man did nothing but complain about white men. Racism. Racism. Racism. So tired.
If the guy on the far left ( no pun intended) switched the words "black" and "white" within everything he said, he would be arrested...
In the UK lol yeah. Not the U.S
Here we have free speech.
Shadow Ling free speech ?
Think I remember that from my childhood....
I can't believe that he is allowed to spew this divisive & racist stuff.
I saw him on the BBC once.
He feels very triggered by these flags 🇬🇧 🏴 although he chooses to live in the UK, he wants them banned.
He is a privileged black man in the UK, because by their laws he should be arrested for hatespeech.
@@shadowling77777 IN the Us he would be killed.
and when they run out of things to say that make sense they bring up slavery ... like i thought that went away 150 years ago.. wah my great great great great great great dad owned yours. wah.. so that now excuses them of being racist themselves.. let me state 2 things.. one.. i have never been a racist.. two. never owned anybody. get off the slavery thing. jesus. go back 1800 yrs. im sure my rallies could of been roman slaves.. .. have they stopped to think the reason why people treat them (both off them sitting on the left) differently is because they are pretty fu cking annoying..
Kehinde Andrews was worried that there were very few members of staff in universities that are black. That worried me as it was not something that I noticed in UCL. Looking up the stats there are only 3% of the UK's population that are black according to statistica: 'Black British citizens, with African and/or African-Caribbean ancestry, are the largest ethnic minority population, at three percent of the total population. Indian Britons are one of the largest overseas communities of the Indian diaspora and make up 2.3 percent of the total UK population. Pakistani British citizens, who make up almost two percent of the UK population, have one of the highest levels of home ownership in Britain.' I did not catch the number that he quoted but if things are in proportion then the number of staff members that are black should be around 2.3% all other things being equal. This gives me some comfort and also it seems that people on KA's side of the debate, when they quote numbers, prefer low-resolution stats without understanding a breakdown of the contributors. Without that there is clear danger that the wrong explanation is concluded and the wrong solution is implemented. Haidt on the other hand explained, in part, the male female pay gap in the USA. If we are to address social issues as a result of our biases, then we need to understand the mechanisms that drive them.
Someone close to me works for one of the largest employers in our state and they no longer allow middle managers to interact in person with people under 30 because HR gets so many complaints that it kept shutting down departments for investigations, so now they 'promote' young people liasons and will just fire them if there is a complaint and any communication from an actual manager is written. Of course they would never call them disposable mgrs but that's essentially what they are.
I love how the end was basically the audience vs. the SJWs.
You could hear it during the clapping. The people on the left got a lot less of it when they made their point. It doesn't help that they laughed at the one questioner at one point.
Dude when that black guy stood up and said in about three words that he wasn't on the dude's side I almost gave him a standing ovation. It's such a thing in the black community that if you don't accept the oppression narrative then you're basically a traitor to the race. There was something so brave about him just voicing opposition to what the guy on stage would deem to be "his own kind"
Yes. I knew they had lost when all they had left was mocking laughter.
That smugness of that Eleanor is offputting. And I'm left-leaning. There's something really wrong with her. I can't quite put my finger on it, but she doesn't seem sane.
Not enough of the world listened to, I think. I'm about her age, her ideas seemed pretty off-putting to me too
she seemed obsessed with Milo Yiannopoulos. what I would pay to see her locked in an elevator, debating him. :-)))))
@@froggyfootball7572 But what would happen if Milo invited her to his room for some coffee?
Im very left leaning and I fucking hate her. She puts forth a frantic, manic energy that is off putting.
I don’t know where that lecturer lives but if he’s from Britain as he sounds like he is, where exactly does he think graduates will work where they won’t meet diversity? Surely the UK is one of the most diverse societies in the world? I’m not much older than him I’d say but he sounds brain washed. His use of the word violence is utterly ridiculous. The people of Syria are experiencing violence. The victims of the bombings in Christchurch or Sri Lanka are victims of violence. An associate professor in a third level institution in the western world invited to speak in such company on such a stage is privileged and most certainly is not experiencing violence by merely a notion in his head of inequality. Good God we need to toughen up people!! It’s like a badge of honour to adopt weakness! Try forced immigration, death of entire families, false imprisonment for size if you want to talk about troubles... I honestly think we don’t have enough to worry about in the west any more and now we are just making things up to moan about.
When I was at school, our teachers taught us not to wave hands around like a windmill, it was considered very rude and unprofessional. Yet lots of people do it nowadays apart from the well educated, there’s minimal hand movement from the sensible people speaking truths.
Those last few ask the audience questions really stuck it to the left side of the panel. They're way of thinking is dangerously flawed!
These comments cheer me up. Knowing others care about the free exchange of ideas over feelings and grievances gives me faith in humanity.
They show me how fucking stupid Conservatives are, forever whining about everyone else's wrongdoing other than their own. Trump is the perfect example of what is SO WRONG with the USA right now.
And the ONLY chance our Country has is if Biden wins in November. Otherwise, the virus will NEVER end under Trump and unemployment is gonna never get better. Trump has no clue how to put Americans back to work. Obama had done that work for him, the first half of his Coup attempt with Putin.
He's gonna be arrested, the moment he loses in November, so I"m looking forward to see him taken in to custody and thrown in prison with his horny black cellmate BUBBA!
BUBBA will show Trump how RAPE IS REALLY DONE! He's had plenty of experience.
@@ColonPal how on earth did you get what you said from what the first comment said.
@@leelahasan3988 Thanks for asking Leela, I was giving a warning to all Americans that Trump's attacks on Freedom of speech is a terrible thing and LUCKILY people believed my comment and elected Biden, so I"m SO GRATEFUL THAT I MADE THAT COMMENT 7 months ago or Joe could have not won.
The reason I wrote it is because Biden is president today. Thanks for giving me the opportunity to educate you. You can thank me later.
@@ColonPal
Congratulations!
You've won the "most arrogant comment of the week" award!
You've also been entered for a chance to win the "Most arrogant comment of the year" award!
Well done and keep up the overconfidence!
i didn’t mean to dislike your comment my b
These 2 kids are the proof of what Haidt is saying.
absolutely
Amen.
Yes and the more they spoke, the more they proved his point
I don't think the young woman's two mom's would agree with that.
@@joemendiuk5683 Hahaha!
students go to university to learn, they are acting like the students should be the ones teaching/determining everything etc when they don' have any real life experience yet or haven't even discovered who they are yet. university is the place to grow and learn and discover those things. the fact that she is saying she needs a safe space to then be able to struggle, is like working out before going to the gym so that you can handle working out at the gym...the other issue is that life is always going to be harder for some people than other people and we have to accept our own personal starting points and work to overcome our own issues instead of whining that we can succeed because we didnt get a head start in life. the greater a person has to overcome, the greater success story when you do, so just hit the ground running and stop crying about everything, with struggle comes confidence and strength and power of character.
Eleanor Penny and Kehinde ‘I’m black’ Andrews are truly representative of everything I loathe about today’s society.
45:10 "it's profoundly patronizing..." says the most condescending person in the room...
Yeah, I needed to see if anyone else had to pause there. "It's profoundly patronizing..." when someone asks me to provide some evidence or even a rational justification for my opinion. My indignation IS my evidence and you must concede or I simply label you a bigot.
omg, i was thinking the same think. what a joke.
She doesn’t even address his point. Not even once. She instead went on a rant about history. She is talking about tactics when she is right before your eyes changing the topic.
@Jeffrey Lebowski Ironically the UK mainstream is actually rather oppressive if you have wrongthink opinions. A lot of the stories I've heard recently coming out of the UK are outright dystopian. Express any level of disapproval / criticism towards minorities on social media and risk literally having cops knocking on your door telling you to be 'mindful' of what you say online. ( ruclips.net/video/QK3Ix0DhSs8/видео.html )
These are the kinds of cultures people like that woman create, and the irony is totally lost on them. Sad really.
as she rolls her eyes for the 47th time. :-)))
Johnathan Haidt made them look bad. They're arguing against the guy who wrote the book and wrote it well.
I think the two younger panelists are quintessential examples of adults who have not dealt with their personal issues and are constantly looking for excuses and scapegoats. She, more aggressively finger-pointing, as you can detect in her body language (overly coddled and falsely confident) whereas Mr. Andrew’s body language is depicted as insecure and it can be interpreted as “removed” or “bored” from the conversation as he slouches and looks down a great deal of the time. These two individuals obviously have many valid points but their own insecurities and idiosyncrasies surface to a point where their ideologies are either misconstrued or underdeveloped.
This debate is an artefact for future historians of thought. Within the context of other intelligence squared debates from previous years, this debate stands out as clear example of the recent change in Western intellectual culture. The contrast between the world views of these two sides is astonishing. The affirmative are calm rational and gentle, whilst the negative are aggressive, irrational and, despite their claims, clearly more sympathetic to neo-Marxist authoritarianism then classical liberalism.
"To say that university students reason purely from emotion is just untrue." Proceeds to make hyperbolic emotional statements.
This was painful to watch. And I managed without a trigger warning. Jonathan and Jonathan speak truth.
Queen of the Uetliberg oh my gosh it’s torture listening to the young girl who thinks she has it all figured out. Need more Jonathan’s and less of miss safe spaces
Are you sure? Sounds like you could've needed one if it was so painful.
These two kids and their believes are the existential threat to us all.
“We get to decide now what kind of speech is ok.” That is a VERY slippery slope.
George Orwell didn't see this coming.....he thought he was writing a work of Fiction in "1984".
Keep it away from Eleanor, she will think it's a textbook.
Nah, he saw it coming. Just because technology changes, Authoritarians remain the same. This is simply the cycle of humanity.
It was never fiction
Gentlemans club? Wtf....60 percent of students are female....facts> feelings
That wasn't the point...the point was lets do a hypothetical here(not based on reality) and see if there is anyway possible we can enter the shoes of someone else...I think the moderator did awesome in helping me see the far left point of view or at least thy nodded their heads in agreement with the scenarios she presented....but I still wasnt' able to feel their pain
Why attend a university if it is against everything you stand for? Why not choose one that fits you better?
One thing I've noticed in life is that with truly intelligent people you can understand what they are saying. I was enjoying Hadit and what he said made sense, now Eleanor is speaking and I'm like - say what??!! two young maybe for this level of conversation.
I don't understand what is wrong with teaching European history in a European university or what is wrong with having pictures of old European men on the walls of a European University? Kehinde Andrews says that with disgust as if it's a bad thing. We need to wake up to this and call it what it is, racist. He's speaking in disgust about the University as if there is anything wrong there.
I think he has an issue with the British curriculum in which empire and slavery was never taught. History went from the classics, to the middle ages and Tudors, to the enlightenment, and then to WW1 and WW2. That's pretty effed up as we have an idealised/imagined sense of national history. And unfortunately explains a lot about the current crop of political leaders and ethno-nationalist rhetoric that is creeping into the mainstream
That's fine for the European History department but what about the rest of the knowledge in the world?
I’m not sure what type of history he would expect to learn about in a European university .. 🤔
@@palvishah89 except slavery and the empire is taught in schools and so is the Holocaust
Kehinde hates the white man. He said they disgust him....a racist
Ideas don't cease to exist by being silenced.
When the pen is removed the sword becomes inevitable.
Deus vult brother
That's horrifyingly beautiful.
Brilliant
you've been hit by, you've been struck by the thought criminal
The pen is mightier than the sword. Yes they were not silenced just given the assumption that what they speak is the truth as nobody would listen to or confront them with facts. Thus their pen is allowed to work unimpeded, and unchallenged.
i work in the offshore drilling industry and ive found that the faster i can get the new guys to shut up and listen and cooperate even if they dont agree with what they are doing the faster they will learn and be successful and get promoted quickly and make lots of money. ive got to break through their mental defenses with a straight forward rudeness to prove they dont know anything and then i can get them to trust me without alot of second thought. the ones that can accept this the fastest are seen as smart because they appear to the bosses to catch on quickly and are looked at favorably and will be making 100k$ a year within around 5 years . these guys move up real fast. the ones that usually dont move up dont want to listen and will not accept what im trying to tell them. they know what is right or wrong and they can bend the world to their will and it takes around 3 years to move up the first time and might take 5 years to move up the 2nd time. so professors should be brutal to get the kids to shut up and listen and show respect. because when they get into the workforce the boss is going to be the new professor and they will understand what the brutalness was for. college is meant to prepare kids for life. and them sitting around crying and dictating how their world will be is not getting them ready for life in a tough world. and this is a conspiracy to make the western world bend the knee
As a gay guy myself, I VEHEMENTLY DISAPPROVE of Eleanor's line of reasoning. It is preposterous why we, gay people, are being used as the default recipient of this supposed benevolence that they claim to offer. I find it very, very condescending to be addressed and talked about in such a way as if I am in need of coddling in order to survive. Let people say their mind and oppose them as you would. Why are we nurturing these sensitivities by curtailing our own freedom or speech and of thought? Let people be offensive and offended. The reason that many young people lose their wits when being told anything remotely offensive is precisely because of this hysteria over offense! I am Gen Z myself (born in 1998) and I see no reason to curtail other people's control over their words and thoughts simply because I find them offensive or hurtful. I would simply reply with a more sinister terminology to describe their existence, as I should.
Edit: Apologies but I must add this bit of an edit here. Listening to Kehinde Andrews make everything about race and how racist white men are elicits irritation on my part not because I am a white man (I am southeast Asian ) but because of how he brings race to every senstence that comes out of his mouth. There's a lot of guilt-tripping on his part and he does not address the issues in a more nuanced way outside his racist theories. He accuses other ethnicities of racism when he is the one bringing up race and skin color all the time! Looks to me that if there's someone racist here, it has to be him.
Someone needs to explain what the “violence” means to that professor
When a 1 and a half hour video starts with *"open your mind to censorship"* ... you know its gonna be stupid as hell.
Doesnt she see the irony of that statement?
Yet, what is with all the likes? I can only assume the answer to that is a resounding no, right?
I was just about to quit it when she said that stupid sh!te. I am only 5 minutes in, so I hope it gets better.
@Jochanan Berohart deleted that idiotic pro-censorship statement. Just as well, I was about to tell 'em just how ignorant he/she was.
I am straining to be open to censorship---it hurts. I'm going with the benefit of the doubt that there is some sort of logic to that line of thinking. I'm not too good with history but censorship never seemed like a path out of oppression.
The moderator is definitely bias to the left. You can imagine the outrage if she was thoughtfully jotting down the comments from the older Caucasian man, then pointed at the black student to hurry her thoughts along. Trust me, it's not only conservatives paying attention to sh¡t like that.
Watching any of her forays into interviewing intellectual opponents, on YT is a thoroughly uncomfortable experience & confirms her immovability beyond her orthodox leftism.
While in university I was in a Criminal Justice student which is only good for LEO’s. The university was a liberal arts school. My victimology course was taught by a 4th of July Vietnam veteran who fit perfectly in the university curriculum. He knowing I was a deputy sheriff had to be very argumentative with me matters when it came to arrest of over policing minorities. Unbeknownst to him I am a first generation American, Mexican-American but I look white. I grew up poor and very much a B,C student in high school who paid my way through university.
My point is our arguments would dominate much more of class with students always siding with the Professor. Even another police officer would argue against me at times. But despite our disagreements I learned a great deal. Some of which was in part due to my enormous respect for his sacrifice of being severely injured in the Vietnam War. But he had excellent points. And since this was a fourth year course our exams were purely essay.
He made me study very hard and despite our different view points I got a 4.0 in that course and I was shocked and I mean shocked.
Years later I learned we had a mutual friend who told me my professor enjoyed our arguments. And years after that I had an intern assigned to me who told me my professor had hoped after my retirement I would teach at my former university.
My hopes that todays young men and women can have the same discourse and not be in fear and that their opinion based in fact will be respected by your professor. But that goes both ways where a teacher will accept their point of view and not hold it against them.
Interesting. I never realized that universities were interrogating the idea of “trigger warnings” etc. While I disagree with allowing deliberate hateful speeches, information, and paraphernalia, I think it’s still important for us, especially university students, to learn views that oppose our own. Only then is your field of perspective broadened enough to shift understanding.
One side talks with facts and evidence and the other side talks with feelings.
Oh my god I am terrified to send my kids to university after listening to those two plums on the left.
Teach them to recognize dreck, read the classics with them, the great philosophers; teach them to DISCUSS.
@@susansargent396 please. Your children will do what all good children do and ignore you until they have gained enough life experience to decide what aspects of your philosophy is worth keeping and then ask you about it. Spend more time being a person your child can respect and will want to emulate some day.
@@daolong51279 What kind of parenting did you get that you that's how you think children are supposed to behave?
Your preconception that ALL parents are NOT parenting, WRONG! The advise I gave was based on experience. You may want to confront you preconceptions, since clearly they have begun confronting you! What responsibilities have you voluntarily picked up? Or are you more of the #DirtyDNC ilk? @@daolong51279
This chick in the crowd literally said ‘I’d think the kids these days have faced racism and sexism in ways previous generations haven’t.’ The mental bounds she dug for that one was DEEP lol. What tf is she talking about???
The young man at the end who spoke and thought the mike was loud - BRAVO!!!! The lady before him and the lady after him SPOT ON!!!! This is gives me hope.