Two weeks ago, as a part of a social event for our current undergraduate and graduate students in the department of Chemical & Physical Sciences (CPS) at the University of Toronto Mississauga, I, for my part, had offered to run an activity popularised in recent times by American academic, Peter Boghossian: Spectrum Street Epistemology. In this surprisingly addictive game, participants respond to a series of claims—of which they have no prior knowledge—as they are presented on a screen, and, following a brief countdown by the host, react by walking to lines inscribed on the floor that calibrate a spectrum of agreement, through neutrality, to disagreement—otherwise termed a Likert scale.
Every time I see one of these stories it reinforces my conviction that abandoning academia was the right thing to do. I miss research dearly. I miss having a regular income. I miss the pretense of status.
But the academic institutions seem determined to descend to the stygian depths of intellectual irrelevance, and I do not remotely miss the pain that comes from biting my tongue, the headaches induced by humoring the fashionable delusions of my colleagues, or the sheer boredom of interminable conversations about privilege, discrimination, indigenization, and so on with the timid mediocrities that infest the modern academy.
I am reminded of this quote from Theodore Dalrymple:
"...I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better... To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
With regard to the Muslim grad student. I once had a grad student in astronomy proudly proclaim, after being awarded his MS, that he believed that the universe was created in 7 days and that we, his teachers, were a bunch of fools whom he'd successfully deceived.
The funny/sad/scary thing is that there are apparently hard-core trans believers who might wholeheartedly AGREE with “Men cannot become women” — because they think anyone transitioning MtF was already a woman, just one that was misgendered (incorrectly “assigned male”) at birth.
At my advanced age this (whatever it is), is simply beyond my comprehension. That adults would accept, let alone foster, such incredible stupidity is astonishing.
When I was an undergraduate, university was a substantial step up from high school. The material went by faster, and it was far more demanding and challenging. Many fell by the wayside, but those of us who survived adapted and grew. The goal was quality over quantity. We seem to have reversed that goal in many instances now, and just want quantity in everything, at all costs.
I am sorry the author/OP was subjected to a "dressing-down" by the chair. But at this stage of my career, I have been taken to the woodshed by administrators so often that I almost expect it. I have developed a tremendous animosity towards the standard administrative structure one confronts in academia, as well as other institutions where STEM R&D takes place, such as corporations, government and nonprofits.
I realize these characters who are attempting to "run" these R&D organizations are subject to all kinds of crazy pressures. But with time, I am less and less impressed by the quality of most of these people. I am not sure the way we organize ourselves in these situations is particularly beneficial, let alone optimal.
I remember the fatwa against Rushdie for the Satanic Verses. Formerly sensible students instantly reverted to a barbarian mindset, and people made excuses for that.
To me, the question of pineapples on pizza is scorched-Earth nonsense. Having to read this suggestion has left me traumatized, and on Easter, no less.
Which makes me wonder---I wonder what would happen if old people like me turned the tables on the students (or even administrators!) by claiming they've traumatized us with their attempts at cancellation? I'm not much of an actor, but I'll bet I could put on a convincing show of being hurt, triggered, etc., by the departure from the western scientific method. I'd go all the way to the president of the university in protest, but use the exact same language they do, that I feel invalidated and "othered". (Because, of course, those of us with heterodox views ARE, in fact, being invalidated and othered.) I think that might be kind of fun.
It's probably a good thing that I'm retired except for continuing my research (at my own expense, so I'm beholden to no one except maybe the department chair who continues to let me use my lab).
Fifty years ago, we used a very similar activity in teaching a Race Relations course in the US military. In general, once people started talking about their perceptions and beliefs about sensitive racial issues and listening to others' views, they tended to migrate from the extremes toward more moderate positions. The exercise worked pretty well, but times have changed. When my I/O Psych class and I posted a survey study addressing issues of academic freedom and hostile environment protection in 2018 all hell broke loose. Recently, the student underground paper, the Torch, published my essay sharing some of the results: https://bereatorch.com/2023/02/19/deconstructing-the-baffling-bull-behind-title-ix-at-our-college/
If you do this exercise again, in addition to the chair's suggestion about Pineapples on Pizza (which could be outing the chair), may I suggest that you ask, "Is Spectrum Street Epistemology a more suitable exercise at this event than coloring with paper and crayons?" I think I would walk to 'agree' or perhaps stay put at 'neutral.' Yet, I don't really see anything wrong with coloring at a social event for students or anyone - if you want to participate, do, and if you don't, don't. They could have a knitting table or one for trout fly tying...not everything has to be ideological combat all the time. Likewise, if people don't want to participate in your activity, then they too can choose to move along and let y'all that want to participate do so.
Missing from this essay, in my reading, is whether the meeting with the chair had any specific result. I guess maybe time will tell...the wheels of justice sometimes turn very slowly and it's only been two weeks.
30 years in the Air Force; retired in July 2001; HH-53 Rescue Helicopter pilot, Chief Functional Check Flight Pilot, maintenance officer, behavioral scientist. Ops assignments: 7 yrs at Hickam; then 2 years at RAF Woodbridge later; completed a doctorate at Oxford in 86 in experimental cognitive psychology then spent the next 15 years teaching leadership at the AF Academy...
LEIGH [Epistemology Question/Thesis]: “Western science is hampered by a political bias.”
LEIGH: One female student stood on the ‘Strongly agree’ line, and I asked her why she had chosen that stance. “Speaking as a Muslim woman of colour, I know that to be true,” she announced over the microphone, followed by words to the effect that all science was a hopelessly White patriarchial (sic) Eurocentric endeavour, wholly committed to oppressing other ways of knowing.
Leigh also pointed out, quote:
LEIGH: It is the host’s role to remain neutral and not express an opinion, or react in any way that might express their own BIASes.
What a minefield of possibilities for a Socratic. E.g.
Q. What is the political bias of Muslim women of colour?
Q. What is the political bias of white patriarchal Europeans?
Q. As a Muslim woman of colour; who thinks that all science is a hopelessly white patriarchal Eurocentric endeavor; how do you explain Srinivasa Ramanujan FRS in mathematics and/or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar FRS in physics?
In sum and in short, you "modern" academics constantly waste the teachable moment while pretending to be "unbiased", when the sage, Bias of Priene (one of the 7 wise men of ancient Greece), had most moderns pegged from over 25 centuries ago by saying "Most men are bad!"
Bias didn't say little blue amoebas are among those "most men who are bad", because he hadn't run into a little blue amoeba on a substack way back then. The little blue amoeba, however, is once again uttering non-sense and proving himself a "bad man", quote:
LBA: (Octave 4 hrs ago): Queers marching for Palestine should be rounded up and subjected to the treatment the Palestinians would give them. Or at least, make them aware of reality. And scare the queer right out of these savages.
This Octave "clown" wants MAID for those who debate him and now he wants to "round up queers" and "scare them". He is actually our future --- but it will be someone who is far more intelligent and much less unintelligently verbose.
Meanwhile back at the U of T, the author's "head mistress" is breaking ground with, quote:
Groundbreaking research in EDI
Friday, February 2, 2024 - 14:54
A collaborative survey led by postdoctorate fellow Scott Jess and Professor Lindsay SCHOENBOHM addresses the lack of representative stats in Canadian geoscience. Their report, "Demographic Trends in Canadian Academic Geoscience," published in 2023, reveals disparities in representation, particularly at postdoctoral and faculty levels, and emphasizes creating inclusive academic environments where individuals can contribute their unique perspectives. Check out the full article!
Oh dear. The author's "unique NON-perspective" was deemed non-contributable by an EDI (equity diversity and inclusion) "researcher". FAUGH!!!
I'm glad you named names. Professor Lindsay Schoenbohm is a disgrace to science, and should be laughed out of the profession. She sound positively Soviet. Is her research any good? It could be; much Soviet science was. But a lot of academics got ahead there by boot-licking politics and keeping faculty faithful to the party line. https://www.utm.utoronto.ca/cps/people/lindsay-schoenbohm-phd
Two biological females were in strong agreement: gender is a social construct, etc. A number of biological males disagreed.
Every time I see one of these stories it reinforces my conviction that abandoning academia was the right thing to do. I miss research dearly. I miss having a regular income. I miss the pretense of status.
But the academic institutions seem determined to descend to the stygian depths of intellectual irrelevance, and I do not remotely miss the pain that comes from biting my tongue, the headaches induced by humoring the fashionable delusions of my colleagues, or the sheer boredom of interminable conversations about privilege, discrimination, indigenization, and so on with the timid mediocrities that infest the modern academy.
I am reminded of this quote from Theodore Dalrymple:
"...I came to the conclusion that the purpose of communist propaganda was not to persuade or convince, nor to inform, but to humiliate; and therefore, the less it corresponded to reality the better... To assent to obvious lies is to co-operate with evil, and in some small way to become evil oneself. One’s standing to resist anything is thus eroded, and even destroyed. A society of emasculated liars is easy to control."
With regard to the Muslim grad student. I once had a grad student in astronomy proudly proclaim, after being awarded his MS, that he believed that the universe was created in 7 days and that we, his teachers, were a bunch of fools whom he'd successfully deceived.
The funny/sad/scary thing is that there are apparently hard-core trans believers who might wholeheartedly AGREE with “Men cannot become women” — because they think anyone transitioning MtF was already a woman, just one that was misgendered (incorrectly “assigned male”) at birth.
At my advanced age this (whatever it is), is simply beyond my comprehension. That adults would accept, let alone foster, such incredible stupidity is astonishing.
When I was an undergraduate, university was a substantial step up from high school. The material went by faster, and it was far more demanding and challenging. Many fell by the wayside, but those of us who survived adapted and grew. The goal was quality over quantity. We seem to have reversed that goal in many instances now, and just want quantity in everything, at all costs.
I am sorry the author/OP was subjected to a "dressing-down" by the chair. But at this stage of my career, I have been taken to the woodshed by administrators so often that I almost expect it. I have developed a tremendous animosity towards the standard administrative structure one confronts in academia, as well as other institutions where STEM R&D takes place, such as corporations, government and nonprofits.
I realize these characters who are attempting to "run" these R&D organizations are subject to all kinds of crazy pressures. But with time, I am less and less impressed by the quality of most of these people. I am not sure the way we organize ourselves in these situations is particularly beneficial, let alone optimal.
I remember the fatwa against Rushdie for the Satanic Verses. Formerly sensible students instantly reverted to a barbarian mindset, and people made excuses for that.
To me, the question of pineapples on pizza is scorched-Earth nonsense. Having to read this suggestion has left me traumatized, and on Easter, no less.
Which makes me wonder---I wonder what would happen if old people like me turned the tables on the students (or even administrators!) by claiming they've traumatized us with their attempts at cancellation? I'm not much of an actor, but I'll bet I could put on a convincing show of being hurt, triggered, etc., by the departure from the western scientific method. I'd go all the way to the president of the university in protest, but use the exact same language they do, that I feel invalidated and "othered". (Because, of course, those of us with heterodox views ARE, in fact, being invalidated and othered.) I think that might be kind of fun.
It's probably a good thing that I'm retired except for continuing my research (at my own expense, so I'm beholden to no one except maybe the department chair who continues to let me use my lab).
Fifty years ago, we used a very similar activity in teaching a Race Relations course in the US military. In general, once people started talking about their perceptions and beliefs about sensitive racial issues and listening to others' views, they tended to migrate from the extremes toward more moderate positions. The exercise worked pretty well, but times have changed. When my I/O Psych class and I posted a survey study addressing issues of academic freedom and hostile environment protection in 2018 all hell broke loose. Recently, the student underground paper, the Torch, published my essay sharing some of the results: https://bereatorch.com/2023/02/19/deconstructing-the-baffling-bull-behind-title-ix-at-our-college/
If you do this exercise again, in addition to the chair's suggestion about Pineapples on Pizza (which could be outing the chair), may I suggest that you ask, "Is Spectrum Street Epistemology a more suitable exercise at this event than coloring with paper and crayons?" I think I would walk to 'agree' or perhaps stay put at 'neutral.' Yet, I don't really see anything wrong with coloring at a social event for students or anyone - if you want to participate, do, and if you don't, don't. They could have a knitting table or one for trout fly tying...not everything has to be ideological combat all the time. Likewise, if people don't want to participate in your activity, then they too can choose to move along and let y'all that want to participate do so.
Missing from this essay, in my reading, is whether the meeting with the chair had any specific result. I guess maybe time will tell...the wheels of justice sometimes turn very slowly and it's only been two weeks.
30 years in the Air Force; retired in July 2001; HH-53 Rescue Helicopter pilot, Chief Functional Check Flight Pilot, maintenance officer, behavioral scientist. Ops assignments: 7 yrs at Hickam; then 2 years at RAF Woodbridge later; completed a doctorate at Oxford in 86 in experimental cognitive psychology then spent the next 15 years teaching leadership at the AF Academy...
LEIGH [Epistemology Question/Thesis]: “Western science is hampered by a political bias.”
LEIGH: One female student stood on the ‘Strongly agree’ line, and I asked her why she had chosen that stance. “Speaking as a Muslim woman of colour, I know that to be true,” she announced over the microphone, followed by words to the effect that all science was a hopelessly White patriarchial (sic) Eurocentric endeavour, wholly committed to oppressing other ways of knowing.
Leigh also pointed out, quote:
LEIGH: It is the host’s role to remain neutral and not express an opinion, or react in any way that might express their own BIASes.
What a minefield of possibilities for a Socratic. E.g.
Q. What is the political bias of Muslim women of colour?
Q. What is the political bias of white patriarchal Europeans?
Q. As a Muslim woman of colour; who thinks that all science is a hopelessly white patriarchal Eurocentric endeavor; how do you explain Srinivasa Ramanujan FRS in mathematics and/or Subrahmanyan Chandrasekhar FRS in physics?
In sum and in short, you "modern" academics constantly waste the teachable moment while pretending to be "unbiased", when the sage, Bias of Priene (one of the 7 wise men of ancient Greece), had most moderns pegged from over 25 centuries ago by saying "Most men are bad!"
Bias didn't say little blue amoebas are among those "most men who are bad", because he hadn't run into a little blue amoeba on a substack way back then. The little blue amoeba, however, is once again uttering non-sense and proving himself a "bad man", quote:
LBA: (Octave 4 hrs ago): Queers marching for Palestine should be rounded up and subjected to the treatment the Palestinians would give them. Or at least, make them aware of reality. And scare the queer right out of these savages.
This Octave "clown" wants MAID for those who debate him and now he wants to "round up queers" and "scare them". He is actually our future --- but it will be someone who is far more intelligent and much less unintelligently verbose.
Meanwhile back at the U of T, the author's "head mistress" is breaking ground with, quote:
Groundbreaking research in EDI
Friday, February 2, 2024 - 14:54
A collaborative survey led by postdoctorate fellow Scott Jess and Professor Lindsay SCHOENBOHM addresses the lack of representative stats in Canadian geoscience. Their report, "Demographic Trends in Canadian Academic Geoscience," published in 2023, reveals disparities in representation, particularly at postdoctoral and faculty levels, and emphasizes creating inclusive academic environments where individuals can contribute their unique perspectives. Check out the full article!
Oh dear. The author's "unique NON-perspective" was deemed non-contributable by an EDI (equity diversity and inclusion) "researcher". FAUGH!!!
Kevin
I'm glad you named names. Professor Lindsay Schoenbohm is a disgrace to science, and should be laughed out of the profession. She sound positively Soviet. Is her research any good? It could be; much Soviet science was. But a lot of academics got ahead there by boot-licking politics and keeping faculty faithful to the party line. https://www.utm.utoronto.ca/cps/people/lindsay-schoenbohm-phd
What was the response of the audience to the topic "Men can become women"?
I might have proposed, "Men and women are different" or "Men and women are identical in every way".