I recently finished “The Coddling of the American Mind”, by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt. With the recent political atmosphere, the stories in the book were some nice context.
The key message of the book are three untruths which lie in the background of many disputes across American college campuses.
What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker. Always trust your feelings. Life is a battle between good people and evil people. The first statement deals with overprotection in American life. Starting from a young age, children are protected from seeming dangers to such an extent that they are not allowed to walk around their neighborhood alone. The problem is that for developing humans, many experiences are antifragile – while they may hurt in the short term, they pay benefits in the long term.
The wisdom the book gives is to prepare your child for the road, not the road for your child. Instead of removing obstacles in daily life, such as disallowing biking to school, allow your children to experience them, but give them a helmet and have a first aid kit handy.
The book then goes on to examine the attitude of “always keep safe” as it spreads to college campuses. The authors detail the concept of safety creep – at first, safety was a term reserved for physical harm, but in recent times it has been applied to social and emotional contexts as well. Put together, certain students have been boycotting speakers and groups on campus, stating that their words make them feel unsafe and uncomfortable. The problem here, the authors argue, is that differing points of view are essential to the growth of strong individuals.
These incidents, which are a common theme throughout the book, pertain to second point of “always trust your feelings” as well. The authors detail many college policies which boil down to “if you are feeling uncomfortable, something is wrong”. The issue here is that one’s feelings are not an objective measurement. In addition, if only content that reinforced original views was served to students, thus removing uncomfortable feelings, students would never be exposed to opposing views and be able to grow and learn.
The final point deals with increasing polarization between political parties, and the power of mob dynamics. In many campuses, protests have broken out, often in good faith. The issue only arises when making the slightest slip, or even simply not stating public support, puts you as an evil opposer to the cause in the eyes of the mob. Given an atmosphere where simply speaking is dangerous, discussion about the topics at hand is stifled. This happens most often when a group is centered around a common enemy, rather than united around their common humanity.
“The Coddling of the American Mind” pokes at a lot of topics that are worth exploring, and I think it’s worth a read even if you don’t agree with some of the arguments.
My thoughts about college protests is that there is a divide between those who view campus as a pure space for learning, and those who view it as a community they must shape. For example, one might argue that a controversial political speaker provides useful insight to a topic, and invite them to speak. The other side would argue that this speaker makes students uncomfortable, and they did not come to college to engage with politics. There is no clear answer here, it all depends on what aspect one prioritizes most.
The aspect I agree fairly well with lie in the dangers of mob dynamics. In many cases through history, groups have united with the goal of defeating a common enemy – from reactionaries in the Chinese cultural revolution, heretics in the inquisitions, and certain political supporters in college campuses today. The problem in these situations is that even questioning the topic, such as bringing up the discussion of whether to invite the controversial political speaker, can be seen as support for the other party, labelling you as an enemy of the cause. At this point, it becomes tough for communication to occur at all, as fingers start pointing instantly, and most people instead hide their tongues.
The opposite of common-enemy dynamics are common-humanity dynamics. Rather than searching for enemies to weed out in your community, appeal that we are all united as members of this community and should stand up for one other. Of course, this is an ideal, but it’s a perspective really stressed in my beloved The Book of Joy, and I think it’s something worth keeping in your mind anytime you reach a disagreement – there is no good and evil, and we really all are united as humans at the end of the day.
Art is a quick cover I drew for my friends’s Soundcloud release
Prev Post || Next Post