Introduction

The speaker introduces himself and the topic of moral psychology, highlighting how it can help explain conflicts around the world and on university campuses.

• The year 2016 has been marked by extraordinary violence in Syria and Iraq, political events in Europe, and unexpected events in the United States.

• Moral psychology can help explain conflicts driven by people who think they are pursuing the good fight.

• The speaker will apply moral psychology to universities from two different perspectives: John Stuart Mill's approach to finding truth through debate and Karl Marx's approach to changing the world.

Two Perspectives on Universities

The speaker presents two different perspectives on universities based on quotations from John Stuart Mill and Karl Marx.

John Stuart Mill's Perspective

• According to Mill, a university should strive for diverse views, encourage a culture of debate and challenge, and reach out for viewpoint diversity.

• Only in this way can we find truth together.

Karl Marx's Perspective

• According to Marx, philosophers have only interpreted the world in various ways; the point is to change it.

• A university based on a Marxist approach would look extremely different from one based on Mill's principles.

Changes in Universities Over Time

The speaker discusses changes he has observed in universities since he arrived at Yale University as a philosophy major in 1981.

• Yale had a long tradition going back to medieval universities like Oxford and Cambridge.

• It had an active culture of debate and argumentation that was fun.

• Beginning in the 1990s, universities began changing what was written over their doorway.

Changes in Universities and the Need for Schism

In this section, the speaker discusses changes that occurred in universities during the 1990s and how they have led to a need for a schism. The speaker argues that universities cannot pursue both truth and social justice as their central mission.

Talos: The End Purpose or Goal of an Object or Thing

• Talos is an important word in ancient Greek philosophy, referring to the end purpose or goal of an object or thing.

• Different professions have different Talos. For example, the Talos of medicine is health, while the Talos of business is ultimately to create value.

• Social justice activism has racial equality as its Talos, but it also includes gender equality, LGBT rights, environmental issues, and other related issues.

The Need for Schism in Universities

• The speaker argues that no university can pursue both truth and social justice as their central mission.

• A university needs to declare which way it is going - either truth or social justice - so that students can choose which kind of university to attend.

• The speaker believes that a radical separation between universities pursuing truth and those pursuing social justice is needed.

Interactions Between Different Fields

• Different fields interact with each other and strive for excellence in their own expertise. For example, businesses rely on doctors to keep their costs low on research of all sorts especially in the sciences and on justice and lawyers and judges.

• Social justice activists help other fields be excellent by using their own excellence. For instance, when they point out disparities in healthcare based on race.

Overall, this section discusses how changes in universities during the 1990s have led to a need for a schism between universities pursuing truth and those pursuing social justice. The speaker argues that universities cannot pursue both as their central mission, and different fields have different Talos. Different fields interact with each other and strive for excellence in their own expertise.

Talos and Motivated Reasoning

In this section, the speaker discusses how different fields pursue their own Talos to achieve their goals. However, when one field injects its Talos into another, it can lead to corruption and a violation of scholars' Talos. The speaker also explains that human reasoning is heavily motivated and not good at objective reasoning.

Pursuing Talos

• Each field pursues its own Talos to achieve its goals.

• Pursuing one's own Talos helps others achieve theirs through constructive interaction.

• Other fields return the favor by helping justice activists be effective.

Injecting Talos

• One field injecting its Talos into another can lead to corruption and a violation of scholars' Talos.

• Doctors increasingly view patients as profit centers instead of pursuing their own Talos, leading to corruption.

• A trade group bribed Harvard scientists to write a review that led to the government adopting policies saying fat was bad for you, which was never true.

Motivated Reasoning

• Human reasoning is motivated and not good at objective reasoning.

• When evaluating a proposition, we start with a feeling of wanting to believe or doubt it and then search for evidence that supports our belief.

• We have motivated reasoning even in academic settings where we want to believe something because it aligns with our values or beliefs.

The Implications of Motivated Scholarship

In this section, the speaker discusses how people tend to see what they want to see and how this affects scholarship. He also talks about the importance of institutionalized disconfirmation in protecting against motivated scholarship.

How Our Minds Work

• People tend to see what they want to see, even if there is ambiguity.

• This has implications for scholarship because people often have an idea they want to believe and will find evidence for it.

• Motivated scholarship often propagates pleasing falsehoods.

Institutionalized Disconfirmation

• Institutionalized disconfirmation is the major protection against motivated scholarship.

• If you participate in an institution that institutionalizes critique and disconfirmation, bad ideas and research get caught and filtered out.

• This is the way science is supposed to work.

Changes in American Professorial

• As late as the mid 1990s, the left/right ratio in American academia was only two to one left to right.

• However, after about 15 years (mid 90s - 2010), there was a radical change in the American professorial as baby boomers and gen-x replaced previous generations.

• Almost everybody on campus became left-leaning.

Politics of Psychology Professors

• In 1960, psychology professors were mostly Democrats (4:1 voting Kennedy over Nixon).

• As late as 1996, it was still four to one Democrat over Republican.

• However, by every measure afterwards (left-right or who you voted for), it shoots up.

The Consequences of Political Orthodoxy in Universities

In this section, the speaker discusses how universities have become less politically and professorially homogeneous over time. He notes that students are now more likely to hold orthodox views that are pleasing to the left, but they are also much less able to defend their beliefs when challenged. This has led to a culture where students walk on eggshells in class discussions and become intellectually fragile.

Changes in University Culture

• Universities have become less politically and professorially homogeneous over time.

• Students now hold orthodox views that are pleasing to the left, but they are much less able to defend their beliefs when challenged.

• Students walk on eggshells in class discussions and become intellectually fragile.

• Students are much more afraid to speak up and disagree than they were 10 or 20 years ago.

Consequences for Faculty

• There is a misallocation of effort as many people flood into trendy topics.

• Professors all over the country are changing their teaching because they're afraid of the students.

Activating Psychology of Sacredness

• Political orthodoxy becomes dangerous because it activates psychology of sacredness.

• Humans are the only species on earth that can cooperate in large groups without being siblings.

The Sacredness of Victimhood

In this section, the speaker discusses how social rituals generate social electricity and how groups can function as one. He explains that what is sacred at a university has changed since the 1990s, with the victim becoming the most sacred thing in the social sciences and humanities. The speaker identifies six groups of victims that have been traditionally considered sacred since the 90s, but notes that Muslims have recently been added to this category.

Social Rituals Generate Social Electricity

• Emile Durkheim's metaphor of social rituals generating social electricity is discussed.

• The group can function as one when they trust each other and work together.

What is Sacred at a University?

• Veritas (truth) is identified as what's sacred at a university.

• Since the 1990s, however, there has been a change where victims have become more sacred than truth.

Six Sacred Groups

• There are six groups of victims that are considered sacred: race issues, gender issues, LGBT issues, Latinos, Native Americans and disability status.

• These groups tend to be involved in big political blow-ups and controversies.

Seventh Group Added

• Muslims have recently been added to this category.

• Criticism of Islam or Muslims is now equivalent to blasphemy.

Victimhood Culture

• Polarization has given rise to victimhood culture on campus.

• This new moral culture on campus is transforming university life.

Honor Culture, Dignity Culture, and Victimhood Culture

This section discusses the evolution of American culture from an honor culture to a dignity culture and finally to a victimhood culture.

Honor Culture

• In an honor culture, people shun reliance on law or any other authority even when available.

• A gentleman cannot tolerate any stain upon his honor and must challenge anyone who insults him in public.

• Dueling was common in America until the end of the 18th century.

Dignity Culture

• In a dignity culture, public reputation is less important than personal dignity.

• It is commendable to have thick skin and brush off insults.

• The emphasis is on individual strength rather than oppression.

Victimhood Culture

• In a victimhood culture, concern with status and sensitivity to slight are prevalent.

• People are intolerant of unintentional insults and bring them to the attention of authorities instead of dealing with them personally.

• The aggrieved emphasize their oppression and social marginalization as a way to gain status.

Moral Dependency in Victimhood Culture

This section discusses how victimhood culture leads to moral dependency on authorities.

• People in victimhood cultures don't deal with themselves but bring their grievances to authorities for punishment.

• The emphasis is not on individual strength but on being part of a victim class or standing up for other victims.

• Once victimhood culture gets into teaching, students are taught to see people as members of good or bad groups leading to eternal conflict and grievance.

The Negative Effects of Safe Spaces and Trigger Warnings

In this section, the speaker discusses how safe spaces and trigger warnings can lead to moral dependency and weaken individuals. He also introduces the concept of antifragility and explains how it relates to personal growth.

Safe Spaces and Trigger Warnings

• The idea of words, ideas, and speakers invalidating someone's existence is threatening.

• Providing trigger warnings for events that may contain triggers such as sexual violence or assault can create moral dependency.

• Moral dependency weakens individuals rather than making them stronger.

Antifragility

• People are antifragile; what doesn't kill them makes them stronger.

• Antifragility refers to systems that increase in capability, resiliency, and robustness as a result of mistakes, false attacks, or failures.

• Personal growth requires facing adversity, failing, getting back up multiple times.

Examples of Antifragility

• Bones become tougher when they are used more frequently.

• The immune system needs exposure to different kinds of bacteria to develop properly.

• Helicopter parenting has led to children not having unsupervised time which is essential for personal growth.

Safety Culture is Debilitating

In this section, the speaker talks about how safety culture can be debilitating and crippling. He explains that those who embrace it as their core identity become weaker and angrier, making them less likely to thrive after leaving the bubble of safety.

Embracing Victimhood

• Those who embrace victimhood as their identity become weaker and angrier.

• Straight white men are the only beneficiaries of safety culture because they have four years of preparation for a job, whereas anyone who grasps victimhood has four years of dis-preparation.

Blasphemy Laws

• At social justice universities, there are many blasphemy laws such as racism and sexism being endemic, victims playing no role in arriving at their current state, no difference of ability or interest, and affirmative action being good.

• Thomas Jefferson's words at UV states that there will be no blasphemy laws at UV; you can say anything you want and people will simply argue it down if you're wrong.

Stem Department Gender Inequality

• Women are underrepresented on the Faculty of stem department science technology engineering.

• Lawrence Summers gave a talk on why we can't get the numbers up in our stem departments. One of his three causes was discrimination.

Conclusion

The speaker argues that safety culture is debilitating and crippling. He also points out that social justice universities have many blasphemy laws which hinder free speech. Finally, he discusses gender inequality in STEM departments.

Research on Gender Differences in Quantitative Skills

The speaker discusses research that shows gender differences in quantitative skills and the potential reasons for this difference.

Reasons for Gender Differences

• One reason for the gender difference is that the population of people applying for jobs as professors of chemistry at Harvard comes from the top, which may skew results.

• Another reason is discrimination against women.

• A third reason could be other factors beyond sexism.

Outrage Over Researcher's Findings

• The researcher who suggested other factors beyond sexism was forced to resign due to outrage over his findings.

• He committed three forms of blasphemy with his argument, including blaming the victim and violating sacred values.

Poverty in America and Child Poverty

The speaker discusses poverty in America, particularly child poverty, and how a bipartisan group of scholars came together to address it.

Addressing Poverty

• A bipartisan group of scholars came together to try to reach consensus about inequality and child poverty.

• Both sides agreed that economic and familial factors contribute to poverty.

• After a year, they came up with what the speaker believes is the best analysis of American poverty in 30 years, including recommendations such as marriage being important for understanding poverty and inequality, as well as recommending birth control.

Challenges Faced by Social Scientists

• Social science research is difficult due to the inability to run true experiments and the need to navigate sensitive topics.

Gender Disparities in Silicon Valley

The speaker presents a graph showing the gender breakdown of jobs in Silicon Valley and asks if there is evidence of institutional or systemic sexism. He then shows another graph on the gender gap in PhDs and discusses how prenatal testosterone affects occupational choices.

Gender Breakdown of Jobs in Silicon Valley

• Women make up about 50% of the workforce in non-tech jobs, but less than 20% in tech jobs.

• The speaker asks if anyone sees evidence of institutional or systemic sexism based on this graph.

• He notes that at other schools, many hands go up when he asks this question.

Gender Gap in PhDs

• The speaker shows a graph on the gender gap in PhDs across different fields.

• He asks if anyone sees institutional or systemic sexism here, and only a few hands go up.

• The speaker notes that women earn the majority of undergraduate degrees, master's degrees, and PhDs in the US.

• He explains how prenatal testosterone affects brain development and occupational choices.

High School Students' Preferences for Careers

• The speaker presents data from the US News Raytheon STEM Index on high school students' preferences for careers.

• Women's interest in science has been rising, but there is still a significant gap between boys' and girls' interest in tech fields.

• Boys are much more interested than girls in going into tech and engineering fields.

Overall, the speaker argues that while efforts to encourage women to pursue STEM fields are important, the gender disparities in these fields may not necessarily be due to institutional or systemic sexism. He suggests that prenatal testosterone and differences in occupational preferences may play a role.

Correlation vs Causation

In this section, the speaker talks about how correlation does not imply causation and how social scientists should look for third variables before making conclusions.

Correlation Examples

• The speaker gives an example of how autism rates and organic food sales have both increased since the 90s. However, it is incorrect to assume that organic food causes autism or vice versa.

• Another example given is that people who make more money tend to have more sex. However, the third variable in this case is extraversion and openness to experience.

Causation vs Discrimination

• The speaker explains that while we know correlation does not imply causation, we often impute causation when there is a disparity between outcomes. For example, assuming a woman was not hired because of her gender.

• At social justice universities, students are taught that if a group is underrepresented, it proves systemic discrimination against that group. However, this assumption is wrong as there could be other factors at play.

• The most powerful test for discrimination is experimental manipulation. An experiment conducted by Williams and Ceci at Cornell showed bias against women in STEM fields despite efforts to equalize things.

Disparate Outcomes

• Disparate outcomes do not necessarily imply disparate treatment. It's important to look for third variables before concluding systemic discrimination.

Overall, the speaker emphasizes the importance of looking beyond correlations and considering all possible factors before making conclusions about causation or discrimination.

Understanding Justice and Social Justice

In this section, the speaker discusses equity theory and how it helps us understand justice. The concept of equality as a kind of fairness is also introduced. The speaker then talks about social justice and its focus on disparate treatment of individuals and achieving equal outcomes for all groups.

Equity Theory

• Equity theory helps us understand justice in social relationships.

• We keep track of the ratio between our inputs (how much work we do) and outputs (what we get out of it).

• Equality is important when inputs are equal, but what if one person does more work than another?

Social Justice

• Social justice activists focus on disparate treatment of individuals.

• Disparate outcomes are also a concern for social justice.

• Achieving equal outcomes for all groups is a goal of social justice.

• However, focusing solely on equal outcomes can lead to injustice.

Example: Punishment Rates in Schools

• Boys are disciplined more often than girls in public schools.

• The Bush administration thought this was unfair and told schools to eliminate gender disparities in punishment rates.

• Schools responded by cracking down on girls to narrow the gap, which would be unjust.

• In 2014, the Obama administration noticed that punishment rates were disparate by race and told schools to eliminate these disparities as well.

The Schism: Diversity, Inclusion and Social Justice

In this section, the speaker discusses the issue of social justice and its impact on diversity and inclusion in universities. He argues that equal treatment is just, but equal outcomes without concern for inputs or differences is unjust.

The Incompatibility of Social Justice and Truth

• Rates of punishment are different among individuals with different behaviors. Equalizing rates of punishment to achieve equal outcomes would be unjust.

• Social justice demands equal treatment, which is just. However, when it demands equal outcomes without regard for inputs or differences, it becomes unjust.

• The speaker calls for a schism between schools that prioritize social justice and those that prioritize truth.

Examples of Schools Prioritizing Social Justice or Truth

• Brown University has a left-leaning ratio of 60:1 in humanities and social sciences. It has committed $100 million to diversity and inclusion initiatives.

• University of Chicago prioritizes truth over social justice by not allowing safe spaces in classrooms.

• Wheaton College prioritizes serving Jesus Christ over other values.

Affirming Talos at Duke University

• The speaker urges students to visit Heterodox Academy's website to restore viewpoint diversity on campus.

• Students can introduce a resolution calling for Duke to become a heterodox university.

Two Different Ways of Thinking About Intellectual Life

In this section, the speaker talks about two different ways of thinking about intellectual life that have led to two very different ways of thinking about universities.

Intellectual Life and Universities

• The speaker discusses two different ways of thinking about intellectual life that go back 150-200 years.

• These two ways of thinking have led to two very different ways of thinking about universities.

John Stuart Mill's View on the Point of University

In this section, the speaker talks about John Stuart Mill's view on the point of university and how it relates to committing to truth and achieving justice.

The Point of University According to John Stuart Mill

• The speaker is thrilled that most people in the audience have identified with John Stuart Mill's view on the point of university.

• According to Mill, the point of university is to understand the world because only by committing to truth can one achieve justice.