academic freedom Culture Education Intellectual freedom Intelligent Design

Bret Weinstein: Free speech is only part of the problem on campus

Spread the love

Abandonment of civilized norms is another part. From an article suggesting that abandoning the arts faculties of most universities may be a wise use of resources:

A huge amount of attention and public anxiety has been expended on the plight of free speech on campus. Every season the situation seems to get a little worse. Guest speakers are routinely shouted at, de-platformed, or disinvited. Students and teachers alike are bullied into -silence or craven apology by self-appointed virtue-crats in college administrations and among designated victim groups among the students.

But the issue isn’t really, or not only, free speech. Bret Weinstein, a former biology professor, was hounded out of Evergreen State College when he objected to a “Day of Absence” rally that insisted that all whites stay off campus for a day.

Since then, he has been frequently invited to talk about free speech on college campuses. But he notes that the real crisis in education isn’t about free speech. Rather, it is about “a breakdown in the basic logic of civilization.”

Academia is the crucible, the engine room of this rot. But the breakdown of which Weinstein speaks isn’t confined to college campuses. The revolutionary -intolerance that has made college campuses so inhospitable to free expression and the impulses of civilization has also deeply affected the woke mandarins of social media and Big Tech. It has made serious inroads into the HR departments of the Fortune 500 and elsewhere in the world of business. And it has insinuated itself into the values and practices of most governmental agencies, many of which have yet to meet a politically correct left-wing cause they do not embrace. Roger Kimball, “PC insanity may mean the end of American universities” at New York Post

It’s more or less the opposite of the atmosphere that drives real advances in arts or sciences. Have a look at this vid and ask yourself, would you want to work with anyone in this vid, except Bret Weinstein, at anything? Anywhere? And if you don’t want to, is that a crime?

Follow UD News at Twitter!

See also: Darwinian PZ MyersBlows Off Attack On Bret Weinstein

Even Darwinian evolutionary biologist Jerry Coyne sort of “gets it”:

See also: Jerry Coyne: Just sign Chicago “Statement On Principles Of Free Expression”

and

Jerry Coyne discovers the lack of intellectual freedom on campus

Also: Which side will atheists choose in the war on science? They need to re-evaluate their alliance with progressivism, which is doing science no favours.

7 Replies to “Bret Weinstein: Free speech is only part of the problem on campus

  1. 1
    Eugene says:

    Whites are being “disappeared”, nearly the same as native Americans have been “disappeared” a long time ago. Whites are a problem to the powers that be (TPTB), as they keep expecting the same high standards of living they enjoyed during the last few decades, yet there is now 2+ billion people available to perform the same work for a lot less. Whites have priced themselves out, and so TPTB are building an army of useful idiots to help deal with this problem.

  2. 2
    kairosfocus says:

    News, in the logic-1st principles stream, breakdown of morally governed rationality is clearly a major issue and one fraught with damaging civilisation-level consequences. KF

    PS: This year 40% of global economic growth of 3.3% as projected, is coming from china [27+%] and India [just under 13%] with US no 3 at 12+%. The European zone is individually much lower but likely add up to a similar range. However it is clear that slowed growth is a challenge, one looking for a rising Kondratiev wave tide to break the slowdown. Digital and Technology and possibly nuke sectors might do it, e.g. through new fission approaches [molten salts and thorium LIFTR anyone? pebble bed?] or fusion breakthroughs [Bussard polywell electrostatic fields? AI-controlled Tokamaks that finally tame the plasma?] that open up desalination and on the fusion side would turn water into our main energy source. Thence, Moon, Mars, Asteroid belt and gas giant moons, solar system colonisation. Transformational, not trend change.

  3. 3
    John Calvert says:

    This article is about a “real crisis” in our culture – what is the “crisis?”
    “the real crisis in education isn’t about free speech. Rather, it is about “a breakdown in the basic logic of civilization.”
    So what is the breakdown in the basic logic of civilization?
    “the breakdown of which Weinstein speaks isn’t confined to college campuses”
    It also affects: “HR departments of the Fortune 500 and elsewhere in the world of business,”
    and
    “it has insinuated itself into the values and practices of most governmental agencies”
    and
    “institutions that claim to be educating students but really are simply indoctrinating them. Par-ents and alumni, rightly disgusted by what these institutions have done to their children, should refuse to subsidize their perversion.”
    So what belief system are they indoctrinating students to accept that is causing this global “breakdown?”
    The author only mentions the “indoctrination” of students at the college level. However, it now starts in Kindergarten in K-12 public education, that incrementally, progressively, comprehen-sively and deceptively indoctrinates children, beginning at age 5, with this belief system that is the cause of the breakdown.
    So what is the “belief system” that is so destructive of the belief system that once was “dedicated to the pursuit of truth and the transmission of the highest values of our civilization. Today, most are dedicated to the destruction of those values.”
    OK, lets go back to the first issue “what is the breakdown in the basic logic?”
    In my view the breakdown is described by Paul in Romans 1:20 as the substitution of materialism for the logical inference we all derive from the observation of nature that leads us to an intelli-gence – an intelligence that has created both the world and life for a purpose. Given the evi-dence it is logical to make the inference made by Paul in Romans 1:20:
    Ro 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness, Ro 1:19 since what may be known about God is plain to them, because God has made it plain to them.
    Ro 1:20 For since the creation of the world God’s invisible qualities—his eternal power and divine nature—have been clearly seen, being understood from what has been made, so that men are without excuse. Ro 1:21 For although they knew God, they neither glorified him as God nor gave thanks to him, but their thinking became futile and their foolish hearts were darkened. Ro 1:22 Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools Ro 1:23 and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man and birds and animals and reptiles.”

    I submit that the mechanism for the modern breakdown is methodological naturalism being ap-plied to origins, behavioral and social sciences. Enforced MN moves the culture from theistic religion to non-theistic religion – Atheism, agnosticism, Religious (“secular”) Humanism, etc. The problem with non-theistic religion is that it robs humanity of purpose and meaning in life.

    MN is now buried in Next Generation Science Standards designed to cohere with all subjects taught in K-12 public schools. The NGSS seek to establish a “scientific worldview.” However, due to MN it is actually a non-theistic religious world view. Because it is a religious it pervades all aspects of our culture, not just the universities.

    The NGSS were published in 2013 and have now been adopted by 43 of the 50 states.

    So, the issue affecting our society is not so much about race or sex discrimination, rather it is rooted in pervasive religious discrimination against theists and particularly Christians. I believe it is this religious discrimination that is causing the “breakdown.”

  4. 4
    hazel says:

    kj writes, “News, in the logic-1st principles stream, breakdown of morally governed rationality is clearly a major issue and one fraught with damaging civilisation-level consequences. KF”

    I didn’t even know we were discussing the “breakdown of morally governed rationality” in that other thread.

  5. 5
    vividbleau says:

    A must watch The Devils of Evergreen State” you tube
    https://m.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLLHyNSlsz44_GceBMuwAyflt3lDWMEjTG

    Vivid

  6. 6
    vividbleau says:

    Hazel
    “I didn’t even know we were discussing the “breakdown of morally governed rationality” in that other thread.”

    Hazel don’t know about that other thread but Weinstein does think that “rationality” is under attack. The you tube video I linked is really jaw dropping and very disturbing, at least it was to me.

    Vivid

  7. 7
    kairosfocus says:

    H, that has been context, e.g. see “Logic & First Principles, 21: Insightful intelligence vs. computationalism” where the issue is, that absent genuine significant responsible rational freedom [which per Reppert, computational substrates inevitably lack], reasoning and logic thus warrant and knowledge etc all break down. Where also reason is under the moral government of manifest duties to truth, right reason, prudence [so, inter alia warrant], fairness and justice, etc. In turn, these duties mean mindedness operates on both sides of the IS-OUGHT gap, it is a moral enterprise. This requires adequate grounding for OUGHT and a bridging of the gap. Post Hume’s guillotine, we know this can only be at world root. We need a necessary being [so independent causally] world root capable of founding a world in which there are morally governed creatures, thus such a being needs to be inherently good. This is what gives teeth to what JC pointed out above, that rejection of the root leads to withering of the governance, endarkening of mind, heart and conscience, thence benumbed behaviour and civilisational breakdown. Our civilisation is playing with fire, heedlessly. KF

    PS: Reppert:

    . . . let us suppose that brain state A [–> notice, state of a wetware, electrochemically operated computational substrate], which is token identical to the thought that all men are mortal, and brain state B, which is token identical to the thought that Socrates is a man, together cause the belief [–> concious, perceptual state or disposition] that Socrates is mortal. It isn’t enough for rational inference that these events be those beliefs, it is also necessary that the causal transaction be in virtue of the content of those thoughts . . . [But] if naturalism is true, then the propositional content is irrelevant to the causal transaction that produces the conclusion, and [so] we do not have a case of rational inference. In rational inference, as Lewis puts it, one thought causes another thought not by being, but by being seen to be, the ground for it. But causal transactions in the brain occur in virtue of the brain’s being in a particular type of state that is relevant to physical causal transactions.

Leave a Reply