How We BECOME Civil!

🙌 I’M A SPIRITUAL PERSON…AND A SCIENTIFIC PERSON! 🙌

It doesn’t have to be one OR the other; it can be one AND the other. ↔

I don’t expect my spiritual friends to understand the complexities of science and the search for objective truth. 🧬

But nor do I expect my scientific friends to understand the usefulness of stories and metaphorical truths to help someone live a better quality of life. ❀

The problem I see happening is when each side assumes malicious intent of the other. Each side assumes they are searching for the same definition of “truth”. 👍

𝐁𝐮𝐭 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐊 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐢𝐧, 𝐈 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐲𝐚𝐮 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧’𝐭. 👎

They both have very different epistemologies and methodologies for how they seek “truth”. 😅

↔ Science is focused on precision; spirituality is very broad.

↔ Science uses quantitative measurement; spirituality embraces the abstract.

↔ Science is focused on objectivity; spirituality is focused on subjectivity.

Unfortunately, each side’s misunderstandings of each other puts them both at odds. This miscommunication has both sides end up talking over each other. 🔀

It’s why it’s so easy for each side to label the other side as the “villain”. 👿

Problems arise:

📌 When the spiritual individual misunderstands science and cites studies for which a scientist could easily deduct to be “junk” or “pseudoscience”.

📌 When the scientific individual misunderstands spirituality and thinks the ideas that are taught are useless because they can’t be measured quantitatively.

📌 When the spiritual individual labels scientists and the breakthroughs they discover as “satanic” and “unnatural”.

📌 When the scientific individual labels spirituality and the rituals within these communities as “delusional” and “woo woo”.

In other words, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝟐 𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐍𝐎𝐓 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐊𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐞, 𝐰𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐧𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐊 𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡.

𝐖𝐞 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝟐 𝐬𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐞𝐥𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐢𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐋𝐢𝐟𝐞.

Let me add: I’m NOT saying I treat these fields as having equal usefulness. I’m NOT taking the middle ground here and saying both sides are 50-50. I strongly disagree with that stance. ❌

I have my own personal views and stances towards each field, but that’s not what this post is about.

My point with writing this post is the same point I’ve made in so many of my other posts: 𝒅𝒐 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒓𝒐𝒘 𝒐𝒖𝒕 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒂𝒃𝒚 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒃𝒂𝒕𝒉𝒘𝒂𝒕𝒆𝒓. 👶

Am I saying a scientist or spiritual teacher cannot question authority figures or experts outside their dedicated fields? Of course not! That’s how we learn and understand from the experts in their fields. It’s important we ask questions! 💯

Hell, I’m not an “expert” in either field and I’m still writing this post! 😜

But what I am advocating for is an open communication between the fields, to bring the best of both worlds to the table while at the same time understanding and respecting where the fields are going to irreconcilably differ.

⚠ BUT THIS ISN’T LIMITED TO SCIENCE AND SPIRITUALITY! ⚠

This can also be applied to the political sphere, when it comes to Democrats and Republicans, “the Left” and “the Right”.

Van Jones argued in his recent book “Beyond the Messy Truth” one of the biggest problems facing our modern politics is that political parties are no longer uniting under the ideals of Conservatism or Liberalism, to bring out the best of their parties. Instead, 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫 𝐚 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐟 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢-𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐎𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐲. 🀬

Social psychologist Jonathan Haidt provided a similar argument in his book “The Coddling of the American Mind” but in the context of college campuses. He cites instances where college students have forcibly interrupted and shouted down guest speakers they personally deemed “offensive”. 🀬

In one instance, a college professor disagreed with students about one of their social causes. Literally, student protesters surrounded him, screamed at him when he asked for a civil discussion, and demanded he resign from the university.

To put it simply:

🌟 𝙋𝙀𝙡𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙯𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙀𝙣 𝙗𝙚𝙩𝙬𝙚𝙚𝙣 𝙥𝙚𝙀𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙚 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙙. 𝙏𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙚𝙢 𝙝𝙖𝙚 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙙. 𝘟𝙮𝙣𝙞𝙘𝙞𝙚𝙢 𝙝𝙖𝙚 𝙞𝙣𝙘𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙙. 𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚’𝙚 𝙖 𝙜𝙧𝙀𝙬𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙘𝙀𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙪𝙢𝙥𝙩𝙞𝙀𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙥𝙚𝙀𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙝𝙀 𝙙𝙞𝙚𝙖𝙜𝙧𝙚𝙚 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙪𝙚, 𝙗𝙮 𝙙𝙚𝙛𝙖𝙪𝙡𝙩, 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙢𝙖𝙡𝙞𝙘𝙞𝙀𝙪𝙚 𝙞𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙣𝙩.

𝘌𝙧𝙜𝙪𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙀𝙢𝙚 𝙡𝙚𝙚𝙚 𝙖𝙗𝙀𝙪𝙩 𝙚𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙘𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙛𝙀𝙧 𝙩𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙩𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙖𝙗𝙀𝙪𝙩 𝙗𝙚𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙚𝙀𝙢𝙚𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙀 𝙬𝙞𝙣. 𝙏𝙝𝙚𝙮’𝙫𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙘𝙀𝙢𝙚 𝙡𝙚𝙚𝙚 𝙖𝙗𝙀𝙪𝙩 𝙪𝙚𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩𝙚 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙧𝙚𝙖𝙚𝙀𝙣 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙞𝙣𝙚𝙩𝙚𝙖𝙙 𝙖𝙗𝙀𝙪𝙩 𝙙𝙀𝙢𝙞𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙀𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙀𝙣 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙚𝙢𝙀𝙩𝙞𝙀𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙞𝙣𝙩𝙞𝙢𝙞𝙙𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙀𝙣. 🌟

And I won’t pretend I’m immune from falling into these mindsets either! 🙋‍♂

I’m not here to claim moral superiority with this post. Just like anyone else, I need to remind myself not to fall into these traps at times too! 💯

It’s why I don’t blame you if you fall into them either. 👍

🙌 BUT…IT DOESN’T HAVE TO BE THIS WAY! 🙌

𝙄’𝙢 𝙘𝙝𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙚𝙣𝙜𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙮𝙀𝙪 𝙩𝙀 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙀𝙚𝙚𝙞𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙮𝙀𝙪 𝙙𝙀𝙣’𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙫𝙚 𝙩𝙀 𝙚𝙚𝙚 𝙚𝙀𝙢𝙚𝙀𝙣𝙚 𝙚𝙡𝙚𝙚 𝙖𝙚 𝙮𝙀𝙪𝙧 “𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙢𝙮”. 🌟

It may be good for one’s online branding and business marketing to create polarization and division in the short-term, but it sure as hell isn’t good for humanity’s sake in the long-term. 💯

It’s why we ALL need to be very careful about the environments we surround ourselves in, the people we choose to surround ourselves with, and what we choose to feed our minds on a daily basis. 🧠

It’s not just about maintaining a healthy physical body but also about maintaining a healthy mental mind.

𝑭𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒇 𝒋𝒖𝒏𝒌 𝒇𝒐𝒐𝒅 𝒐𝒏 𝒂 𝒅𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒚 𝒃𝒂𝒔𝒊𝒔, 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒎 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒃𝒐𝒅𝒚. 𝑭𝒆𝒆𝒅 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒇 𝒋𝒖𝒏𝒌 𝒊𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒏 𝒂 𝒅𝒂𝒊𝒍𝒚 𝒃𝒂𝒔𝒊𝒔, 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒉𝒂𝒓𝒎 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒅. 🌟

Did you know Van Jones is close friends with Newt Gingrich? 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐬𝐩𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐊. Van Jones is a Democrat and Newt a Republican.

Van Jones notes in his book they disagree more than they ever agree politically. 😅

But despite that, they’re good friends! 😲

Why? Newt once shared with him this piece of wisdom:

“𝒀𝒐𝒖𝒓 ‘90% 𝒆𝒏𝒆𝒎𝒚’ 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒃𝒆 𝒚𝒐𝒖𝒓 ‘10% 𝒇𝒓𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒅’ – 𝒐𝒏 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒚 𝒑𝒐𝒊𝒏𝒕 𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒆 𝒚𝒐𝒖 𝒂𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒆.” 🌟

It’s why I think Jonathan Haidt was also right, in the same tradition, when he said the greatest wisdom you can find is in the minds of your opponents. Your “villains”. The people you’re emotionally tempted label in your mind as “pure evil”. 👿

⚠ BUT
YOU AND I BOTH HAVE TO BE OPEN TO HEARING THEM OUT! ⚠

A few months ago, I listened to a Joe Rogan podcast where he interviewed Daryl Davis. Daryl is an African American musician who is known not just for his amazing talent on the piano but also for converting over 200 people OUT of the white supremacist group the Ku Klux Klan. 😱

On the podcast he went in-depth about how this all started. But the biggest detail which stuck out to me hearing his story was in how simple his solution was in reaching out to Klan members! 💡

🌟 𝑯𝒆 𝒉𝒂𝒅 𝒄𝒊𝒗𝒊𝒍, 𝒇𝒓𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒍𝒚 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒎. 𝑯𝒆 𝒔𝒉𝒐𝒘𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒈𝒉 𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒇𝒖𝒍 𝒆𝒙𝒂𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆 𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒂𝒔 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒚 𝒏𝒆𝒆𝒅𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒐 𝒃𝒆 𝒂𝒇𝒓𝒂𝒊𝒅 𝒐𝒇. 🌟

He learned what the Klan believed about African Americans, and he (again, respectfully) challenged their ideas. He invited many of them over to his house for dinner! And in turn, they even invited him to their Klan meetings! 😅

It wasn’t long after that one of the top Klan members handed Daryl his Klan robe and said he was leaving the organization. 😱

𝗔𝗎𝗮𝗶𝗻, 𝘁𝗵𝗶𝘀 𝘄𝗮𝘀 𝘁𝗌 𝗯𝗲 𝗷𝘂𝘀𝘁 𝟭 𝗌𝗳 𝗌𝘃𝗲𝗿 𝟮𝟬𝟬 𝗞𝗹𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗺𝗲𝗻!

And you know what, the solution Daryl provided in this situation was not so different from the story of Megan Phelps-Roper either! 🙌

Megan was a former member of the Westboro Baptist Church, a group widely known for their extremist views towards homosexuals (“God hates f**s”).

From birth, Megan was raised in the Church as her grandfather was the founder. Because of her upbringing, she was raised to see a very limited view of the world around her. 👀

𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐀𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐚𝐊𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫. 𝐒𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐡𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐟𝐚𝐊𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐊𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐞𝐚𝐮𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟𝐬.

It was only when she created a Twitter account to promote her Church was she exposed to alternative viewpoints. Anonymous people she had never met were now pointing out logical inconsistencies in her tweets.

One of those people in particular was a lawyer she debated and eventually became good friends with. 🔗

But the difference between him and other people who simply tweeted insults at her?

🌟 𝙅𝙪𝙚𝙩 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚 𝘿𝙖𝙧𝙮𝙡, 𝙝𝙚 𝙬𝙖𝙚 𝙧𝙚𝙚𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙛𝙪𝙡 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙘𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙡 𝙬𝙞𝙩𝙝 𝙝𝙚𝙧. 🌟

Eventually she started to doubt what she was raised to believe. She eventually went to her folks for clarity, but with the new perspectives she had been introduced to she did not receive a satisfactory answer. 🀯

Eventually she left the church along with her sister
and her family shunned her. Today she shares her personal story with others, to provide an inside view when it comes to religious extremism. 🗣

As for that lawyer she once debated
they’re now married! 💍

🙌 WHAT DO ALL THESE STORIES HAVE IN COMMON? 🙌

🌟 𝑻𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒇-𝒓𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕𝒆𝒐𝒖𝒔𝒏𝒆𝒔𝒔 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒌𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒐𝒖𝒓 𝒐𝒑𝒑𝒐𝒓𝒕𝒖𝒏𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒕𝒐 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒄𝒕 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒐𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒓𝒔. 🌟

🌟 𝑻𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒊𝒇 𝒘𝒆 𝒘𝒂𝒏𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒅𝒊𝒔𝒂𝒈𝒓𝒆𝒆 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒔𝒐𝒎𝒆𝒐𝒏𝒆, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒇𝒊𝒓𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒑 𝒊𝒔 𝒕𝒐 𝒔𝒊𝒎𝒑𝒍𝒚 𝒃𝒆 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒇𝒖𝒍. 𝑵𝒐 𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒆𝒗𝒆𝒓 𝒄𝒉𝒂𝒏𝒈𝒆𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒆𝒊𝒓 𝒎𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒇𝒓𝒐𝒎 𝒃𝒆𝒊𝒏𝒈 𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒖𝒍𝒕𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒔𝒄𝒓𝒆𝒂𝒎𝒆𝒅 𝒂𝒕. 🌟

🌟 𝑻𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒘𝒆 𝒄𝒂𝒏 𝒇𝒊𝒏𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒎𝒎𝒐𝒏 𝒈𝒓𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒘𝒊𝒕𝒉 𝒑𝒆𝒐𝒑𝒍𝒆 𝒘𝒆 𝒉𝒂𝒗𝒆 𝒚𝒆𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒖𝒏𝒅𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒕𝒂𝒏𝒅, 𝒃𝒖𝒕 𝒊𝒕 𝒘𝒊𝒍𝒍 𝒕𝒂𝒌𝒆 𝒆𝒇𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒕 𝒕𝒐 𝒅𝒐 𝒔𝒐. 🌟

These all may sound like common sense. But how many people do you see using this common sense on a daily basis?

How about yourself? 😉

Sounds like it’s back to basics, right?!

❀ BUT I GET IT! ❀

Seriously, I do!

Your need to “be right” is the same reason I want to “be right”. 🙌

𝐇𝐚𝐥𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐥𝐢𝐊𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐮𝐧𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐥𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐞𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐊𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞. 𝐈𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐬 𝐬𝐚𝐟𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐮𝐫𝐞. 𝐈𝐭 𝐥𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐮𝐬 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐚 𝐥𝐞𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐥𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐧’𝐭 𝐊𝐚𝐀𝐞 𝐚 𝐊𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐡𝐚𝐊𝐞𝐬. 🌟

𝐁𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐛𝐞 𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐚 𝐧𝐞𝐰 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐚𝐬, 𝐚𝐧𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐞 𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐬𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐟 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐲, 𝐜𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐠𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐞𝐱𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐧. 𝐖𝐡𝐚 𝐰𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐭𝐚 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐀𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐟 𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐧?! 𝐈 𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐰 𝐈 𝐝𝐚𝐧’𝐭! 🌟

𝐓𝐚 𝐚𝐝𝐊𝐢𝐭 𝐈’𝐊 𝐰𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐫𝐞𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐞𝐬 𝐊𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐜𝐀𝐧𝐚𝐰𝐥𝐞𝐝𝐠𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐈 𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐮𝐢𝐥𝐭 𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐊𝐲𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐧𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐫𝐝𝐲 𝐚𝐬 𝐈 𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐟𝐞𝐥𝐭 𝐢𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬. 🌟

𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐚 𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐚 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐈 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐮𝐭 𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐞𝐥𝐬𝐞 𝐰𝐡𝐚 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐬 𝐰𝐚𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐊𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐲 𝐈 𝐜𝐫𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐧 𝐮𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞. 🌟

But there’s 1 big problem:

𝐈𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐧’𝐭 𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐚𝐰 𝐲𝐚𝐮 𝐭𝐚 𝐞𝐱𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐚𝐧 𝐚 𝐝𝐞𝐞𝐩𝐞𝐫 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐊𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐊𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐟𝐮𝐥 𝐥𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥, 𝐛𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐬𝐞 𝐲𝐚𝐮’𝐯𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐊𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐲𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐞𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐡𝐚𝐊𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐚 𝐬𝐊𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐜𝐭 𝐟𝐞𝐰. 🌟

So, I get it
it’s not easy! It wasn’t easy for me either! ❀

🙌 BUT
THERE ARE SOLUTIONS! 🙌

These are solutions we need to start addressing sooner than later, so much as we are going to live together and not die together.

🌟 𝙒𝙚 𝙣𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙀 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙣 𝙩𝙀 𝙩𝙀𝙡𝙚𝙧𝙖𝙩𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙛𝙖𝙘𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚 7.5 𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙡𝙞𝙀𝙣 𝙀𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙚𝙀𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙀𝙣 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙚 𝙥𝙡𝙖𝙣𝙚𝙩 𝙬𝙝𝙀 𝙢𝙖𝙮 𝙣𝙀𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙠 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙖𝙢𝙚 𝙬𝙖𝙮 𝙬𝙚 𝙙𝙀 𝙀𝙧 𝙗𝙚𝙡𝙞𝙚𝙫𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙚𝙖𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜𝙚 𝙬𝙚 𝙙𝙀. 🌟

🌟 𝙒𝙚 𝙣𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙀 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙣 𝙩𝙀 𝙙𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙡𝙀𝙥 𝙢𝙀𝙙𝙚𝙚𝙩𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙝𝙪𝙢𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙖𝙧𝙚 𝙀𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧 𝙥𝙚𝙀𝙥𝙡𝙚 𝙬𝙚 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙡𝙚𝙖𝙧𝙣 𝙛𝙧𝙀𝙢 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙚 𝙩𝙚𝙖𝙘𝙝 𝙪𝙚 𝙚𝙀𝙢𝙚𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙬𝙚 𝙙𝙞𝙙𝙣’𝙩 𝙠𝙣𝙀𝙬 𝙗𝙚𝙛𝙀𝙧𝙚.🌟

🌟 𝙒𝙚 𝙣𝙚𝙚𝙙 𝙩𝙀 𝙙𝙚𝙫𝙚𝙡𝙀𝙥 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙝𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙩 𝙀𝙛 𝙜𝙞𝙫𝙞𝙣𝙜 𝙀𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙗𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙛𝙞𝙩 𝙀𝙛 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙙𝙀𝙪𝙗𝙩. 𝙏𝙖𝙠𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙀𝙣 𝙬𝙝𝙀 𝙘𝙪𝙩 𝙮𝙀𝙪 𝙀𝙛𝙛 𝙞𝙣 𝙩𝙧𝙖𝙛𝙛𝙞𝙘. 𝙔𝙀𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙘𝙚𝙧𝙩𝙖𝙞𝙣𝙡𝙮 𝙘𝙝𝙀𝙀𝙚𝙚 𝙩𝙀 𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙪𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮’𝙧𝙚 𝙖 “𝙝𝙀𝙧𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙡𝙚 𝙙𝙧𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙧”. 𝘜𝙪𝙩 𝙮𝙀𝙪 𝙘𝙖𝙣 𝙖𝙡𝙚𝙀 𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙪𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙮 𝙢𝙖𝙮 𝙗𝙚 𝙞𝙣 𝙖 𝙧𝙪𝙚𝙝 𝙩𝙀 𝙜𝙚𝙩 𝙩𝙀 𝙩𝙝𝙚𝙞𝙧 𝙡𝙀𝙫𝙚𝙙 𝙀𝙣𝙚𝙚 𝙖𝙩 𝙩𝙝𝙚 𝙝𝙀𝙚𝙥𝙞𝙩𝙖𝙡, 𝙩𝙀 𝙖𝙚𝙚𝙪𝙢𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙚 𝙥𝙚𝙧𝙚𝙀𝙣 𝙙𝙀𝙚𝙚𝙣’𝙩 𝙣𝙀𝙧𝙢𝙖𝙡𝙡𝙮 𝙙𝙧𝙞𝙫𝙚 𝙡𝙞𝙠𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙞𝙚. 𝙔𝙀𝙪𝙧 𝙘𝙝𝙀𝙞𝙘𝙚! 🌟

So, who’s with me in being the change we wish to see? 🙋‍♂

It doesn’t mean you won’t make mistakes. I can tell you I’ve made plenty myself! What matters is you acknowledge those mistakes and continue to improve upon them. 👍

If I’ve not convinced you yet to come along on this journey, perhaps I can share with you advice directly from Megan Phelps-Roper herself on how we can better communicate with others…

“🙌 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐟𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐚 𝐧𝐚𝐭 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐮𝐊𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐝 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭.

My friends on Twitter realized that even when my words were aggressive and offensive, I sincerely believed I was doing the right thing.

Assuming ill motives almost instantly cuts us off from truly understanding why someone does and believes as they do. 🌟

We forget that they’re a human being with a lifetime of experience that shaped their mind, and we get stuck on that first wave of anger, and the conversation has a very hard time ever moving beyond it. But when we assume good or neutral intent, we give our minds a much stronger framework for dialogue.

🙌 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐚 𝐚𝐬𝐀 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬.

When we engage people across ideological divides, asking questions helps us map the disconnect between our differing points of view. That’s important because we can’t present effective arguments if we don’t understand where the other side is actually coming from and because it gives them an opportunity to point out flaws in our positions.

But asking questions serves another purpose; it signals to someone that they’re being heard. 🌟

When my friends on Twitter stopped accusing and started asking questions, I almost automatically mirrored them. Their questions gave me room to speak, but they also gave me permission to ask them questions and to truly hear their responses. It fundamentally changed the dynamic of our conversation.

🙌 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐫𝐝 𝐢𝐬 𝐭𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐲 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐊.

This takes practice and patience, but it’s powerful. At Westboro, I learned not to care how my manner of speaking affected others. I thought my rightness justified my rudeness — harsh tones, raised voices, insults, interruptions — but that strategy is ultimately counterproductive. Dialing up the volume and the snark is natural in stressful situations, but it tends to bring the conversation to an unsatisfactory, explosive end.

When my husband was still just an anonymous Twitter acquaintance, our discussions frequently became hard and pointed, but we always refused to escalate. Instead, he would change the subject. He would tell a joke or recommend a book or gently excuse himself from the conversation. We knew the discussion wasn’t over, just paused for a time to bring us back to an even keel.

People often lament that digital communication makes us less civil, but this is one advantage that online conversations have over in-person ones. We have a buffer of time and space between us and the people whose ideas we find so frustrating. We can use that buffer. Instead of lashing out, we can pause, breathe, change the subject or walk away, and then come back to it when we’re ready.

🙌 𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲…𝐊𝐚𝐀𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐮𝐊𝐞𝐧𝐭.

This might seem obvious, but one side effect of having strong beliefs is that we sometimes assume that the value of our position is or should be obvious and self-evident, that we shouldn’t have to defend our positions because they’re so clearly right and good that if someone doesn’t get it, it’s their problem — that it’s not my job to educate them.

But if it were that simple, we would all see things the same way. 🌟

As kind as my friends on Twitter were, if they hadn’t actually made their arguments, it would’ve been so much harder for me to see the world in a different way. We are all a product of our upbringing, and our beliefs reflect our experiences. We can’t expect others to spontaneously change their own minds. If we want change, we have to make the case for it.

🌟 𝐌𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐧 𝐓𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐢𝐝𝐧’𝐭 𝐚𝐛𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐞𝐟𝐬 𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐩𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐩𝐥𝐞𝐬 — 𝐚𝐧𝐥𝐲 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐧. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐞𝐥𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐢𝐧𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐞𝐥𝐲 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐟𝐢𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐧𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐜𝐚𝐊𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐊𝐞 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐩𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐭𝐞𝐊𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐀𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐧𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐡𝐮𝐊𝐚𝐫. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐚𝐜𝐡𝐞𝐝 𝐊𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐡𝐮𝐊𝐚𝐧 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐊𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐰𝐚 𝐟𝐮𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐞𝐜𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐚𝐮𝐭𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞, 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐝𝐚𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐯𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞.” 🌟

❀ SO…HOW ABOUT IT?! ❀

BOOK SUMMARY 📖: The Coddling of the American Mind

In September of 2015, an article written by Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff was published in The Atlantic titled “The Coddling of the American Mind.” 📰

At first glance, the title of this article could easily be mistaken for a right-wing polemic on “the snowflake generation” and “social justice warriors”. 🀬

But it’s far from it! In fact, the authors themselves are openly left-leaning in their political views! 💯

It was the insistence of their publisher asking for a more provocative title than the one they proposed that “Coddling” was born. (https://bit.ly/30URyJt) 😅

Initially, the article was written to discuss various instances happening on college campuses where students were protesting words, ideas, and subjects they deemed offensive. ✊

📌 Guest speakers who were coming to campus were being disrupted and shouted down.

📌 Ideas like “microaggressions”, “trigger warnings”, and “safe spaces” were being introduced and implemented by college administrators.

📌 Words were starting to be equated by some college students as “violence”.

📌 Colleges were catering to student’s demands with little critical discussion.

The point of Haidt and Lukianoff’s article was to illuminate the problems and to try and understand why they were occurring. 🙌

Haidt and Lukianoff could understand the measures being taken by colleges, measures such as Microaggression Training, were being done with good intentions. 👍

But coming from his work as a social psychologist, Haidt saw these measures as being 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐜 𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐊𝐚𝐝𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐏𝐬𝐲𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐠𝐲.

⚠ The idea of “microaggressions” go against the very idea of not making the worst possible assumptions of other peoples’ intentions (a cognitive distortion known as “mind reading”).

⚠ The idea of “trigger warnings” and “safe spaces” go against the very methods used in Exposure Therapy to combat phobias and feelings of anxiety.

⚠ The idea of continuously giving into angry student’s demands reinforces the likelihood they will use the same angry methods for demands in the future.

With the publication of the article, the reception was…controversial! 😅

Many readers, including college faculty and students, sent in responses confirming Haidt and Lukianoff’s concerns. 👍

Both faculty members and college students expressed fears of being unable to share their different viewpoints outside the status quo of their peers, less they not be reported to college administrators. 🔱

Haidt and Lukianoff learned that some colleges had implemented a “Bias Reporting System”, where students could anonymously report anyone (including faculty) for sharing views they perceived to be discriminatory. 🚚

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐚𝐟 𝐢𝐭𝐬𝐞𝐥𝐟 𝐝𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐬 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐩 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐬 𝐚𝐮𝐭 𝐚𝐟 𝐟𝐞𝐚𝐫 𝐬𝐚𝐊𝐞𝐚𝐧𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐚 𝐊𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐢𝐫 𝐰𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐬 𝐚𝐫 𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐊. 🚚

That said, there were also criticisms to Haidt and Lukianoff’s article as well. 👈

The primary criticism was that the authors were using only a few isolated incidents to justify their national concerns. In other words, they were inciting a moral panic over a minor problem. 😅

𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐓𝐇𝐄𝐍…

Only a month after the article’s publication did another college incident happen. And then another. And then another. And then another. 🚚

One of the most infamous incidents happened 2 months later at Yale University. 😱

Erika Christakis, a lecturer at Yale Child Study Care Center had written an email expressing concern over whether Yale administrators should be giving guidance to students about appropriate and inappropriate Halloween costumes. 📧

She believed administrators should let the students make their own decisions and let them talk among each other if they had disagreements. 🗣

After all, they are adults over 18 years old. 👍

“𝘛𝘢𝘭𝘬 𝘵𝘰 𝘊𝘢𝘀𝘩 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘊𝘳”, she noted in her email. “𝘍𝘳𝘊𝘊 𝘎𝘱𝘊𝘊𝘀𝘩 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘊 𝘢𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘊𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘊 𝘰𝘧𝘧𝘊𝘯𝘎𝘊 𝘢𝘳𝘊 𝘵𝘩𝘊 𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘎 𝘰𝘧 𝘢 𝘧𝘳𝘊𝘊 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘱𝘊𝘯 𝘎𝘰𝘀𝘪𝘊𝘵𝘺.” 😊

This email sparked outrage from some Yale students who interpreted Erika’s words as meaning she supported racist Halloween costumes. ❗

Soon after, around 150 student protesters surrounded the courtyard of Christakis’s home on campus, writing statements in chalk which included: “𝙒𝙚 𝙠𝙣𝙀𝙬 𝙬𝙝𝙚𝙧𝙚 𝙮𝙀𝙪 𝙡𝙞𝙫𝙚”. 😠

Erika’s husband Nicholas went out to the courtyard to try and reason with them. Students demanded he apologize and renounce his wife’s email. 🀬

In a tense confrontation which lasted over 2 hours, Nicholas was accused of being “racist”, “offensive”, and “creating a space for violence”. 🀬

At a later point, one student even screamed in Nicholas’s face:

“𝙄𝙏 𝙄𝙎 𝙉𝙊𝙏 𝘌𝘜𝙊𝙐𝙏 𝘟𝙍𝙀𝘌𝙏𝙄𝙉𝙂 𝘌𝙉 𝙄𝙉𝙏𝙀𝙇𝙇𝙀𝘟𝙏𝙐𝘌𝙇 𝙎𝙋𝘌𝘟𝙀! 𝙄𝙏 𝙄𝙎 𝘌𝘜𝙊𝙐𝙏 𝘟𝙍𝙀𝘌𝙏𝙄𝙉𝙂 𝘌 𝙃𝙊𝙈𝙀 𝙃𝙀𝙍𝙀! 𝙔𝙊𝙐 𝙎𝙃𝙊𝙐𝙇𝘿 𝙉𝙊𝙏 𝙎𝙇𝙀𝙀𝙋 𝘌𝙏 𝙉𝙄𝙂𝙃𝙏! 𝙔𝙊𝙐’𝙍𝙀 𝘿𝙄𝙎𝙂𝙐𝙎𝙏𝙄𝙉𝙂!” 🀬

(Excerpt footage of the Yale incident: https://bit.ly/2zBgrPg)

Similar incidents echoed in the coming years. 📅

Another infamous incident happened at Evergreen State College. Every year the school took part in an Day of Absence tradition where minority students and faculty would voluntarily stay off campus to highlight their campus contributions. 🙌

But in 2017 the tradition was flipped. Administrators decided they would now ask white students and white faculty to voluntarily stay off campus to be educated on race issues. 😲

Biology professor Bret Weinstein (who openly identifies as a progressive and left-leaning libertarian) emailed the campus expressing concern over the change. 🙋‍♂

Included in his email 📧:

“𝘛𝘩𝘊𝘳𝘊 𝘪𝘎 𝘢 𝘩𝘶𝘚𝘊 𝘥𝘪𝘧𝘧𝘊𝘳𝘊𝘯𝘀𝘊 𝘣𝘊𝘵𝘞𝘊𝘊𝘯 𝘢 𝘚𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘰𝘳 𝘀𝘰𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘥𝘊𝘀𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘚 𝘵𝘰 𝘷𝘰𝘭𝘶𝘯𝘵𝘢𝘳𝘪𝘭𝘺 𝘢𝘣𝘎𝘊𝘯𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘊𝘮𝘎𝘊𝘭𝘷𝘊𝘎 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘢 𝘎𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘊𝘥 𝘎𝘱𝘢𝘀𝘊 𝘪𝘯 𝘰𝘳𝘥𝘊𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘩𝘪𝘚𝘩𝘭𝘪𝘚𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘩𝘊𝘪𝘳 𝘷𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘊𝘳𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘊𝘀𝘪𝘢𝘵𝘊𝘥 𝘳𝘰𝘭𝘊𝘎 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢 𝘚𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘊𝘯𝘀𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘢𝘚𝘪𝘯𝘚 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘊𝘳 𝘚𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘵𝘰 𝘚𝘰 𝘢𝘞𝘢𝘺. ⚖

𝘛𝘩𝘊 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘎𝘵 𝘪𝘎 𝘢 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘀𝘊𝘧𝘶𝘭 𝘀𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘵𝘰 𝘀𝘰𝘯𝘎𝘀𝘪𝘰𝘶𝘎𝘯𝘊𝘎𝘎, 𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘀𝘩 𝘪𝘎, 𝘰𝘧 𝘀𝘰𝘶𝘳𝘎𝘊, 𝘀𝘳𝘪𝘱𝘱𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘚 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘊 𝘭𝘰𝘚𝘪𝘀 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘊𝘎𝘎𝘪𝘰𝘯. 𝘛𝘩𝘊 𝘎𝘊𝘀𝘰𝘯𝘥 𝘪𝘎 𝘢 𝘎𝘩𝘰𝘞 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘰𝘳𝘀𝘊, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘯 𝘢𝘀𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘰𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘊𝘎𝘎𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘪𝘯 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘧 𝘪𝘵𝘎𝘊𝘭𝘧. 🙌

𝘖𝘯𝘊’𝘎 𝘳𝘪𝘚𝘩𝘵 𝘵𝘰 𝘎𝘱𝘊𝘢𝘬 – 𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘊 – 𝘮𝘶𝘎𝘵 𝘯𝘊𝘷𝘊𝘳 𝘣𝘊 𝘣𝘢𝘎𝘊𝘥 𝘰𝘯 𝘎𝘬𝘪𝘯 𝘀𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘳.” 💯

As with Yale, this email sparked outrage. About a month after his email, students surrounded Weinstein’s classroom entrance and berated him. As with Christakis, students demanded Weinstein denounce his views and lose his job. 🀬

Campus police were called, but students barred them from reaching Weinstein so they had to call for backup. 🚓

The same student protesters eventually marched to the administration building, surrounded the College President’s office, and provided him the same beratement. 🀬

There was even a point where student protesters barricaded the main entrances to the administration building and refused to let President Bridges leave his office unless they escorted him. ❗

𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐡𝐢𝐊 𝐛𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐞𝐬𝐜𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐚 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐫𝐚𝐚𝐊. ❗

(Excerpt footage of the Evergreen incident: https://bit.ly/2XZswqE)

For even more protest instances, I’ve provided Sources at the bottom of this post. ⬇

So perhaps, you may have the same question I was also asking
 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐢𝐬 𝐠𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐧?! 😅

What initially started out as a small article in The Atlantic was now having its initial concerns realized. 🙌

By September 2018, Haidt and Lukianoff had far more incidents and insights to report on, which ultimately was to become their full-length book: “The Coddling of the American Mind: How Good Intentions and Bad Ideas are Setting up a Generation for Failure”. 📖

But before I get to the book, it’s important we back up for just a moment
✋

First off, what is the purpose of a university? What is the aim (or 𝘵𝘊𝘭𝘰𝘎) of a university? 🀔

Most people I know would say it is to learn. To pursue truth. And yes, perhaps to also enjoy the frat parties! 😜

But this idea is even shown on the crests of universities like Harvard (“𝘷𝘊𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘎”/truth) and Yale (“𝘭𝘶𝘹 𝘊𝘵 𝘷𝘊𝘳𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘎”/light and truth)! 😅

The point is: we go to a university to be enlightened, to be exposed to new ideas and viewpoints, to be among other students who may have different life experiences we can learn from. 🙌

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐫𝐧 𝐢𝐬 𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚𝐰𝐚𝐲 𝐟𝐫𝐚𝐊 𝐚 𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒔 𝐚𝐟 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐢𝐧 𝐟𝐚𝐯𝐚𝐫 𝐚𝐟 𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐭𝐚 𝐚 𝒕𝒆𝒍𝒐𝒔 𝐚𝐟 𝐬𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐛𝐲 𝐬𝐭𝐮𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬. 🙌

Let me emphasize: 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐞’𝐬 𝐧𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐲 𝐰𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐬𝐚𝐜𝐢𝐚𝐥 𝐣𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞. But when it becomes a substitute for truth and knowledge, it sets a dangerous precedent on the very purpose of what attending a university is all about. 🏫

In the book, Haidt and Lukianoff go into greater depth on what they see being taught on some college campuses.

The key word here I want to emphasize is “𝐬𝐚𝐊𝐞”. The initial criticism directed at their article about overgeneralizing every college in fact turned out to be correct. 😅

So, for those who are concerned these incidents are reflective of every US college campus, you can be assured they are not! 😅

👉 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬, 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐢𝐧 𝐧𝐮𝐊𝐛𝐞𝐫, 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐊𝐚𝐬𝐭𝐥𝐲 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐚 𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐞 𝐥𝐢𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐚𝐥 𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐬 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐞𝐬. 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐢𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐊𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐟 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐬 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚𝐥𝐬𝐚 𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐩𝐞𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐊𝐚𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐲. 👈

In the book, Haidt and Lukianoff talk about what’s being taught at them in what they call the Three Great Untruths.

🙌 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐔𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐟 𝐅𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐢𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐲: 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐝𝐚𝐞𝐬𝐧’𝐭 𝐀𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐲𝐚𝐮 𝐊𝐚𝐀𝐞𝐬 𝐲𝐚𝐮 𝐰𝐞𝐚𝐀𝐞𝐫.

𝘗𝘎𝘺𝘀𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘚𝘺 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘀𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘊 𝘝𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘊𝘥: 𝘗𝘊𝘰𝘱𝘭𝘊 𝘢𝘳𝘊 ‘𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘪𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘚𝘪𝘭𝘊’; 𝘞𝘊 𝘚𝘳𝘰𝘞 𝘧𝘳𝘰𝘮 𝘮𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘚 𝘮𝘪𝘎𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘊𝘎 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘧𝘢𝘪𝘭𝘶𝘳𝘊𝘎.

🙌 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐔𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐟 𝐄𝐊𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐑𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐚𝐧𝐢𝐧𝐠: 𝐀𝐥𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭 𝐲𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐟𝐞𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐠𝐬.

𝘗𝘎𝘺𝘀𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘚𝘺 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘀𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘊 𝘝𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘊𝘥: 𝘞𝘊 𝘢𝘳𝘊 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘊 𝘵𝘰 𝘊𝘮𝘰𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘳𝘊𝘢𝘎𝘰𝘯𝘪𝘯𝘚 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘊 𝘀𝘰𝘯𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘮𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯 𝘣𝘪𝘢𝘎.

🙌 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐔𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐟 𝐔𝐬 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐮𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐊: 𝐋𝐢𝐟𝐞 𝐢𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐥𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐰𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐠𝐚𝐚𝐝 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐥 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞.

𝘗𝘎𝘺𝘀𝘩𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘚𝘺 𝘗𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘀𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘊 𝘝𝘪𝘰𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘊𝘥: 𝘞𝘊 𝘢𝘳𝘊 𝘢𝘭𝘭 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘯𝘊 𝘵𝘰 𝘵𝘳𝘪𝘣𝘢𝘭𝘪𝘎𝘮 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘥𝘪𝘀𝘩𝘰𝘵𝘰𝘮𝘰𝘶𝘎 (𝘣𝘭𝘢𝘀𝘬-𝘢𝘯𝘥-𝘞𝘩𝘪𝘵𝘊) 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘚.

Now of course, the authors are NOT saying these Great Untruths are LITERALLY being taught, but that they are taught IMPLICITLY. 🙌

Another big problem they mention is what’s known as “concept creep”, where the definition of words have grossly expanded in meaning over time in academia. 📚

📍 The idea of what constitutes “racism” has expanded from individual acts to now include an all-encompassing society (e.g. systemic racism, racial essentialism).

📍 The idea of what constitutes “trauma” has expanded from severe reactions to events like war to now normal aspects of life (e.g. divorce, bereavement, mean text messages).

📍 The idea of what constitutes “safety” has expanded from physical safety to now include “emotional safety” (e.g protection from criticisms you disagree with).

In other words: if you see 2 people fighting over what is or isn’t “violence”, there’s a great possibility they may be using 2 separate definitions of the word! 😅

The dictionary definition of “violence” is NOT the same definition being used in some academic circles, where speech has also come to be equated with “violence”. 😲

As one UC Berkeley alum wrote in an Op-Ed ✍:

“Asking people to maintain peaceful dialogue with those who legitimately do not think their lives matter is a 𝐯𝐢𝐚𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐜𝐭.” 🀬

😩 “BUT DONALD! NONE OF WHAT YOU’RE SAYING TELLS ME WHY THIS IS HAPPENING!” 😩

Great point! That’s what I’m going to talk about right now! 😊

According to Haidt and Lukianoff, they propose the following reasons why they believe these things are happening. ⬇

📌 𝐀𝐧 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐢𝐧 𝐩𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐥 𝐩𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧.

– Because of the political climate, liberal colleges have shifted even further to the Left, thus tribalism is quick to ostracize differing viewpoints out of fear and group loyalty.

– This in turn has created distrust and hostility among those further to the Right, who now see colleges as lacking political diversity (in some places the ratio of Liberal to Conservative professors is 17 to 1), which in turn encourages their racial provocations towards the Left (e.g. “social justice warriors”, “snowflake generation”).

📌 𝐈𝐧𝐜𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐬𝐞𝐝 𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐞𝐬 𝐚𝐟 𝐃𝐞𝐩𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐀𝐧𝐱𝐢𝐞𝐭𝐲 𝐚𝐊𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐞𝐧 𝐙 (𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝟏𝟗𝟗𝟔).

📌 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐢𝐝/𝐡𝐞𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐚𝐩𝐭𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐠.

– The paradox is children are safer today in the US more than any other time in history, yet at the same time they are also the most overprotected.

– Overprotection causes children to mature at much older ages. The emotional maturity of an 18 year old today is more equivalent to a 16 year old of the previous generation.

📌 𝐃𝐞𝐜𝐥𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐚𝐟 𝐟𝐫𝐞𝐞 𝐩𝐥𝐚𝐲.

– Parents driven by unrealistic fears of strangers and kidnappings (which are extremely rare in comparison to the 70’s and 80’s when it was a problem).

– Overuse of smartphones and social media.

– A rising competitiveness for parents to get their kids into top universities.

📌 𝐂𝐚𝐫𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐳𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐚𝐟 𝐜𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐞𝐬.

– Students are treated like customers, so there’s a financial incentive for colleges to continue giving into student’s demands.

– Market pressures to compete with other universities for future students.

– Bureaucratic means of resolving student’s problems may encourage students to become overly dependent on schools to solve their problems.

📌 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐐𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐫 𝐉𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐞.

– There’s an ongoing desire for social justice activism.

– Social justice movements can be used to remove barriers to equality of opportunity. But when social justice efforts aim to include fighting for equality of outcome, it’s aiming for an goal which cannot be reached without also violating equal opportunity.

– Correlation does not equal causation. When there is a correlation of an identity group membership with an outcome gap, it does not automatically mean it is evidence of discrimination. Sometimes it is, sometimes it isn’t.

If individuals cannot raise alternative possible causes without also being shouted down, collectively we will not arrive at the most accurate understanding of a problem.

.

🀔 “SO, IF THESE ARE THE PROBLEMS, WHAT ARE THE SOLUTIONS???” 🀔

𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐏𝐀𝐑𝐄𝐍𝐓𝐒:

📌 𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝 𝐟𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐚𝐚𝐝, 𝐍𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐑𝐚𝐚𝐝 𝐟𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐡𝐢𝐥𝐝.

– Assume your kids are more capable this month than they were last month.

– Let your kids take more small risks.

– Encourage your child to walk or ride bicycles to and from school at the earliest ages possible.

– Send your children to an overnight summer camp in the woods for a few weeks – without devices.

– Encourage your children to engage in A LOT of “productive disagreement”.

📌 𝐘𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐖𝐚𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐄𝐧𝐞𝐊𝐲 𝐂𝐚𝐧𝐧𝐚𝐭 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐊 𝐘𝐚𝐮 𝐚𝐬 𝐌𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐚𝐬 𝐘𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐎𝐰𝐧 𝐓𝐡𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡𝐭𝐬, 𝐔𝐧𝐠𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐝.

– Teach children the basics of CBT (Cognitive Behavioral Therapy).

– Teach children mindfulness.

📌 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐋𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐝𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐆𝐚𝐚𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐯𝐢𝐥 𝐂𝐮𝐭𝐬 𝐓𝐡𝐫𝐚𝐮𝐠𝐡 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐇𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐚𝐟 𝐄𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐲 𝐇𝐮𝐊𝐚𝐧 𝐁𝐞𝐢𝐧𝐠.

– Give people the benefit of the doubt.

– Practice the virtue of “intellectual humility”. Intellectual humility is the recognition that our reasoning is so flawed, so prone to bias, that we can rarely be certain that we are right.

– Look very carefully at how your school handles identity politics.

📌 𝐇𝐞𝐥𝐩 𝐒𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐚𝐥𝐬 𝐭𝐚 𝐎𝐩𝐩𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭 𝐔𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡𝐬.

– Give more recess with less supervision.

– Discourage the use of the word “safe” or “safety” for anything other than physical safety.

– Have a “no devices” policy.

– Cultivate the intellectual virtues (e.g. curiosity, open-mindedness, intellectual humility)

– Teach debate and offer debate club.

– Assign reading and coursework that promote reasoned discussion.

📌 𝐋𝐢𝐊𝐢𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐑𝐞𝐟𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐃𝐞𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐓𝐢𝐊𝐞.

– Place clear limits on device time.

– Protect your child’s sleep.

📌 𝐒𝐮𝐩𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐚 𝐍𝐞𝐰 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐍𝐚𝐫𝐊: 𝐒𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐚𝐫 𝐖𝐚𝐫𝐀 𝐁𝐞𝐟𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥𝐞𝐠𝐞.

– Take a “gap year”.

– Encourage volunteer work.

.

𝐅𝐎𝐑 𝐔𝐍𝐈𝐕𝐄𝐑𝐒𝐈𝐓𝐈𝐄𝐒:

📌 𝐄𝐧𝐭𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐞 𝐘𝐚𝐮𝐫 𝐈𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐅𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐝𝐚𝐊 𝐚𝐟 𝐈𝐧𝐪𝐮𝐢𝐫𝐲.

– Endorse the Chicago Statement (https://bit.ly/3e7Ohu0).

– Establish a practice of not responding to public outrage.

– Do not allow the “heckler’s veto”.

📌 𝐏𝐢𝐜𝐀 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐁𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐌𝐢𝐱 𝐚𝐟 𝐏𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐫 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐢𝐬𝐬𝐢𝐚𝐧.

– Admit more students who are older and can show evidence of their ability to live independently.

– Admit more students who have attended schools that teach the “intellectual virtues”.

– Include viewpoint diversity in diversity polices.

📌 𝐎𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐄𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐟𝐚𝐫 𝐏𝐫𝐚𝐝𝐮𝐜𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐃𝐢𝐬𝐚𝐠𝐫𝐞𝐞𝐊𝐞𝐧𝐭.

– Explicitly reject the Untruth of Fragility: What doesn’t kill you makes you weaker.

– Explicitly reject the Untruth of Emotional Reason: Always trust your feelings.

– Explicitly reject the Untruth of Us Versus Them: Life is a battle between good people and evil people.

📌 𝐃𝐫𝐚𝐰 𝐚 𝐋𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐂𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝐀𝐫𝐚𝐮𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐂𝐚𝐊𝐊𝐮𝐧𝐢𝐭𝐲 – “𝐖𝐡𝐞𝐧 𝐊𝐲 𝐛𝐫𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐭𝐫𝐲 𝐭𝐚 𝐝𝐫𝐚𝐰 𝐚 𝐜𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐞𝐱𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐊𝐞, 𝐈 𝐬𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐝𝐫𝐚𝐰 𝐚 𝐥𝐚𝐫𝐠𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐢𝐫𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐚 𝐢𝐧𝐜𝐥𝐮𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐊.”

– Foster school spirit.

– Protect physical safety.

– Host civil, cross-partisan events for students.

.

While reading all this can be overwhelming and sound like an uphill battle, Haidt and Lukianoff do conclude the book with hope. There are countertrends currently happening! 😃

👍 Recent studies are showing the ineffectiveness of trigger warnings. They also show that trigger warnings may even worsen a person’s feelings of anxiety (https://bit.ly/2YxhzMk).

👍 There are increasing discussions over the negative effects technology is having on kids, especially social media. Organizations like the Center for Humane Technology are aiming to reform the tech industry so products are healthier and less addictive.

👍 More states are passing laws to allow “free-range parenting” so a parent cannot be arrested for allowing their child to play without supervision.

👍 More writers like Timur Kuran, Amy Chua, and Jonathan Rauch are calling for a rethinking on identity politics and how both the far-Left and far-Right are feeding off them.

Even the Dalai Lama tweeted his own statement:

“𝐈’𝐊 𝐓𝐢𝐛𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐧, 𝐈’𝐊 𝐁𝐮𝐝𝐝𝐡𝐢𝐬𝐭, 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐈’𝐊 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐃𝐚𝐥𝐚𝐢 𝐋𝐚𝐊𝐚, 𝐛𝐮𝐭 𝐢𝐟 𝐈 𝐞𝐊𝐩𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐳𝐞 𝐊𝐲 𝐝𝐢𝐟𝐟𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞𝐬 𝐢𝐭 𝐬𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐊𝐞 𝐚𝐩𝐚𝐫𝐭 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐫𝐚𝐢𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐛𝐚𝐫𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐫𝐬 𝐰𝐢𝐭𝐡 𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞. 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐚 𝐝𝐚 𝐢𝐬 𝐩𝐚𝐲 𝐊𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐚𝐭𝐭𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐭𝐚 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐰𝐚𝐲𝐬 𝐢𝐧 𝐰𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐡 𝐰𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐚𝐊𝐞 𝐚𝐬 𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐩𝐞𝐚𝐩𝐥𝐞.”

👍 More universities are starting to emphasize truth as their 𝘵𝘊𝘭𝘰𝘎 and adopting the Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression (https://bit.ly/3e7Ohu0)

👍 Author Jonathan Haidt himself has created Heterodox Academy, which includes thousands of professors, administrators, and students who are dedicated to promoting open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement in higher education.

Since the book’s publication, Haidt has continued to speak at various universities about these issues, and “Coddling” has won numerous awards for its ideas. Lukianoff is the President at the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE), addressing student rights violations on college campuses (freedom of speech, due process, religious liberty, etc). 🏆

Of course, my summary doesn’t do the book justice. If any of this peaks your interest, I’d recommend picking up a copy of the book. It’s only 5 dollars on Amazon Kindle! 😲

𝐁𝐔𝐓 𝐖𝐇𝐀𝐓 𝐃𝐎 𝐘𝐎𝐔 𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐓𝐇𝐈𝐍𝐊? 𝐈’𝐃 𝐋𝐎𝐕𝐄 𝐓𝐎 𝐇𝐄𝐀𝐑 𝐘𝐎𝐔𝐑 𝐓𝐇𝐎𝐔𝐆𝐇𝐓𝐒! ❀

.

.

𝐏𝐑𝐈𝐌𝐀𝐑𝐘 𝐒𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐂𝐄𝐒:

📄 The Coddling of the American Mind (Article): https://bit.ly/3huxlQr

📄 Readers Respond to Coddling (Article): https://bit.ly/3fpfsRl

📖 The Coddling of the American Mind (Book): https://amzn.to/2zvV0yT

📖 The Rise of Victimhood Culture (Book): https://amzn.to/37BH7M5

📄 What is Concept Creep? (Article): https://bit.ly/2YQRqZ5

📄 The Free Speech Crisis on Campus is Worse Than People Think (Article): https://bit.ly/37xX7ii

📄 Free Speech For Me, But Not For Thee (Article): https://bit.ly/2Y46S4O

🖥 Disinvitation Attempts of College Speakers (Database): https://bit.ly/2UGYJAY

📄 Chicago Statement on Principles of Free Expression (PDF): https://bit.ly/3e7Ohu0

.

𝐒𝐏𝐄𝐄𝐂𝐇 𝐒𝐎𝐔𝐑𝐂𝐄𝐒:

📌 Jonathan Haidt Speech About “Coddling” at UCCS (Video, 2019): https://bit.ly/2AAhm2Q

.

𝐏𝐑𝐎𝐓𝐄𝐒𝐓 𝐕𝐈𝐃𝐄𝐎𝐒:

📌 Yale University – Halloween Email Protest (Video, 2015): https://bit.ly/2zBgrPg

📌 McMaster University – Jordan Peterson Protest (Video, 2017): https://bit.ly/2UFfNHG

📌 Villanova University – Charles Murray Protest (Video, 2017): https://bit.ly/2N20epq

📌 Evergreen State College – Day of Absence Protests (Video, 2017): https://bit.ly/2XZswqE

📌 UC Berkeley – Milo Yiannopoulos Riot (Video, 2017): https://bit.ly/3hsQHWl

📌 UC Berkeley – Ben Shapiro Protest (Video, 2017): https://bit.ly/2B6M0Rk

📌 Oberlin College – Gibson’s Bakery Protest (Video, 2019): https://bit.ly/2UIYnd4

.

𝗚𝗣𝗗𝗔𝗧𝗘 𝗊𝗢𝗚𝗥𝗖𝗘𝗊:

📄 Coddling Book Update 1 – Introduction (Article, 2020): https://bit.ly/37wLKqI

📄 Coddling Book Update 2 – Trigger Warnings, Social Media Use (Article, 2020): https://bit.ly/3d2BUyj

📄 Association for Psychological Science – Trigger Warnings Fail to Help and May Even Harm (Article 2020): https://bit.ly/2YxhzMk

How We STOP Throwing Out Babies!

⚠ DON’T THROW OUT THE BABY!!! ⚠

“What the devil are you talking about, Donald?!” 

Let me explain!  For those who knew me a few years ago, I’m not the same person I was back then. I’ve grown A TON, had many personal transformations, and had many new experiences!

Just as we all get older, we’re never the exact same person we were the moment before. We’re 1 more second older. 1 more second alive. 1 more second existing. ⌛

And what we do with the time we have on this planet is our choice! 

For me, I like to spend time creating content for you all, like this post! My desire is to provide thoughtful posts, ones you can use long after you’ve read them. 

If I can have at least 1 person be touched or be inspired by my posts to take action in their lives for the better, that’s all I ask! 

“But Donald! What were you talking about before, about babies?!” 

Oh yes, the baby! Right!

Anyways, with this quick growth of mine has also came valuable lessons I’ve learned. One of these lessons I want to share with you all today. 

I’m talking about: not throwing out the baby with the bathwater.

And since this is the internet where things can be misinterpreted or taken out of context, I want to clarify with you all here: ‘Throw out the baby with the bathwater’ is just a figure of speech. It is not meant to be taken literally, and there is no physical baby or bathwater!

“So Donald, what does this phrase mean?” 

So when you say to someone “Don’t throw out the baby with the bathwater”, you are telling the other person not to get rid of the good with the bad. You are telling them within the bad there’s still some good that can be taken out of it.

Take the example of a broken car: just because a car is broken does not mean every part of the car is also broken too. There may still be some working parts in the car you can use in a working car instead.

⚠ DON’T THROW OUT THE BABY!!! ⚠

So why should we all “not throw out the baby with the bathwater”? Because in our society, we do it A LOT!

It’s the reason why there’s so much division among people. Because we’re unwilling to understand that someone’s political party, religion, or peer group does not 100% define them as a person, we throw out any possibility of getting to know them any further.

We close ourselves off to different perspectives, different ways of seeing the world, different ways of solving problems, and most importantly reminding ourselves we’re all human beings.

Just like the broken car, we wouldn’t automatically assume everything about another person was broken just because we didn’t like them, right?


Or would we?

⚠ DON’T THROW OUT THE BABY!!! ⚠

I don’t say this to sound condescending. I’ve fallen into this trap before too! You’re not alone!

It’s easy for us to stay attached to our personal beliefs and not be open to others. Our beliefs give us a sense of control and order to our lives. Beliefs give us security. Beliefs provide the answers to life’s unanswered questions. Beliefs give us absolute truth where we don’t have absolutes.

Our beliefs are what gives us our identity. It’s completely understandable why people would feel hostility towards people who are not like themselves.

But at the root of that feeling, this refusal to understand, is simply fear.

In order for this to change:

  • We need to be open to accepting the fact there are other people in world who have different perspectives than yourself.
  • We need to be open to being ‘wrong’.
  • We need to develop empathy towards others.
  • We need to remember our beliefs are not our own. Think about it: Beliefs are opinions and viewpoints on life you have picked up over time in your life. You didn’t have them the moment you were born.
  • We need to remind ourselves we’re all human beings on this planet.

Because when we dismiss someone and their beliefs, we don’t just “throw out the baby with the bathwater”. We throw out the human being with their beliefs. 

⚠ DON’T THROW OUT THE BABY!!! ⚠

So the next time you’re talking with another person:

  • Remember we all come from different walks of life, and we all have reasons for believing what we believe.
  • Empathize. Place yourself in the other person’s shoes. You may learn something new you didn’t know before.
  • Seek to understand why the other person believes what they believe. Let me emphasize: this does NOT mean you have to agree with what they believe. It just means you understand why they believe what they do.

As I like to remind everyone, I’m only human too. I sometimes need these reminders myself. This is a lesson I continue to learn too!

But with these solutions in our minds, we all can make further progress towards working alongside our fellow neighbors. 

.

COMMENT “Yes!” if you’re up to using these tools!