"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (and Stoicism, Hinduism, and many other traditions) is that you can never achieve happiness by making the world conform to your desires. But you can master your desires and habits of thought. This, of course, is the goal of cognitive behavioral therapy. With this in mind, here are some steps that might help reverse the tide of bad thinking on campus."
The most interesting paragraph to me in an article in The Atlantic that's getting a lot of attention, "The Coddling of the American Mind" (subtitle: "In the name of emotional well-being, college students are increasingly demanding protection from words and ideas they don’t like. Here’s why that’s disastrous for education—and mental health."), by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt.
If you've already been reading and thinking about this article, I wonder if you noticed the Buddhism-Stoicism-Hinduism angle and the "cognitive behavioral therapy." This isn't the usual stuff of American free speech and political debate. It's strangely aligned with the "coddling" that's supposed to be bad, because it circles around inner peace, not getting shaken up and challenged and activated.
याची सदस्यत्व घ्या:
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा (Atom)
पोस्ट्स
८० टिप्पण्या:
Not the shortest route to tenure this.
Colleges have retreated from reality, with the possible exception of STEM courses, and I see no reason why an 18 year old should subject themselves to this. Junior colleges are probably not yet infected and the military is a good choice for kids who want to grow up but I just don't see the benefits these days. Apprenticeships would be a good alternative but labor unions have lost interest in that sort of thing except for a few.
If a boy of mine were going to go to college now, as three boys of friends of mine in Tucson are doing now, I would see that they did not live in the dorm and had good family support. Preferably, they would live either at home or, as my friends do, in an apartment near campus but in the same town or area as the parents. The boys are all engineering majors, one graduated and is commissioned in the Marine Corps. They are handsome boys but have had good moral instruction by their parents. That doesn't mean they are virgins but they are very unlikely to be into the "hookup" culture in college. Parents are more important these days for boys than for girls.
My grandson is ten and I hope the worst of this is over by the time he is ready for college. My youngest daughter graduated three years ago and had none of the rape fantasy stuff we read about. She worked all through the university and did not live in a dorm. Both probably a good thing. She did get some leftist indoctrination in her first year but I spotted that and she is now a conservative.
I haven't set foot on a college campus in probably 13 years so I have no first hand experience with this weird modern phenomenon, but I certainly have read and heard a lot about it over the past couple of years or so. How bad is it? Are these tales and articles a bit over sensationalized? Or are these campuses really becoming these weird Puritan enclaves weird those who commit thoughtcrime are heavily prosecuted?
If it's the latter that's getting pretty scary.
I think that couching their advice in those terms is a bit like the kinds of adjustments one needs to make when speaking to the partially deaf. Purblind college administrators are going to simply reject any suggestions that sound even vaguely "right wing." As Jonathon Haidt says of liberals "Reject first! Ask questions later!"
How do you get past a filter like that to make a point you feel needs to be made?
Plus, if you want to get a good look at an first rate eye roll, just say "question authority" around a lefty these days.
This is purely a left-wing phenomenom, and the Left should be held accountable for all these Orwellian speech codes.
I've been to the U of Arizona campus in the last few years. In 2012, the campus had big flat screen TVs all over campus running Obama ads. It was creepy.
My daughter never lived in the dorms as they were quickly filled early in the summer when she was a freshman. It was OK with me but I did;t realize until lately how bad it was.
Here is an example of how bad it is.
It's gotten a little better since this was the case in 2008.
September floor meeting: “levels of engagement and leadership” seems innocent in itself, but it recalls the final exercise that freshmen were subject to last year, when students were pressured to identify which of thirty commitments they would make in college based on their “level of activism.” Their choices included these:
1. Create an anti-prejudice slogan for your floor, such as “I Don’t Put Up With Put-Downs.”
17. Investigate the cultural diversity of various performers [brought] to campus.
30. Examine your textbooks and course work to determine whether it is equitable, representative and multicultural.
Orwell would be proud.
The goal is inner peace. You can either get there by demanding everyone coddle you, or learn to get there no matter what is going on around you. The latter is not coddling.
Certainly the goal should not be inner turmoil. That doesn't serve anyone.
I did notice that passage, Prof, but I mentally mapped it to a distinction between a Progressive and Conservative worldview--Conservatives are supposed to believe that man can't be perfected and one should accept both the fallen nature of humanity and the fact that one must do one's duty (one's best, etc) in a world constrained by imperfections. Progressives, especially those of a technocratic bent, are supposed to believe that man is almost infinitely malleable and can be made perfect--that the world's problems and conflicts can be solved if the right (Progressive) solutions are put into place.
It's the difference between a "No Justice, no Peace!" idealism on the one hand and a pragmatic, sober realism on the other.
Stoicism doesn't necessarily match up perfectly to Conservatism, but Progressivism is incompatible with Stoicism.
Hey whatda'ya know, philosophy matters!
@Michael K
"I've been to the U of Arizona campus in the last few years. In 2012, the campus had big flat screen TVs all over campus running Obama ads. It was creepy."
They should play "Animal House" on the screens to return these kids to their proper roots.
The only 'inner peace' worth having is the calm and pride that comes from knowing that you are an honest, just, independent person who earns their own way in the world by bringing something of value to the marketplace to trade, and refuses to live of the 'taken by force' property of others.
"..for I have learned, in whatsoever state I am, therewith to be content."
Conservatives believe what they see.
Progressives see what they believe.
To be more specific: I'm not sure it's accurate to equate taking a Stoic approach when educating students about how to get along in the world with coddling. I'd hope both the Left and Right would agree that a central function of education (generally understood) should be to help young people understand how to relate to the world--how to conceptualize the self in relation to society, that sort of thing. That goal isn't really coddling, per se.
If CBT approaches that problem with the idea that people are responsible for their own emotions and ought to take actions to reconcile the problems of the world with their own inner well being I don't think that's coddling. It seems like coddling would involve saying the opposite, that people have no control over how they react to the world and are just victims of bad things that create uncontrollable emotions/reactions, so people must therefore be protected from the world while simultaneously working to improve it along Progressive lines--the idea being that once the work of the Progressives is complete the world will be a just, safe place, so no one will need to fear the bad external forces that uncontrollably victimize helpless people (and alter their mental states, etc).
Although in a sense they may have the same goal I don't think these two approaches are really equivalent.
Megan McArdle wrote a related article at Bloomberg News.
The obvious objection to this is that it is not possible to have a community of ideas in which no one is ever offended or upset2. By the time you're done excising the Victorian literature that offends feminists, the biology texts that offend young-earth creationists, and the history lessons that offend whichever group was on the losing side, there's not much left of the curriculum3. The less obvious, but even more important, objection is raised by Greg Lukianoff and Jonathan Haidt in this month's Atlantic: It's bad for the students themselves.
Students demanding that campus life be bowdlerized to preserve their peace of mind seem to believe that the best way to deal with trauma is to avoid any mention of it. But Lukianoff and Haidt argue that this is exactly backward; chronic avoidance breeds terror. The current climate on campus is a recipe for producing fearful adults who are going to have difficulty coping in an adult world. It's as if we were trying to prepare the next generation of American citizens by keeping them in kindergarten until the age of 23.
If this is as widespread as is being reported, colleges are failing to educate students to live in any other reality than the distorted world of government employment or academia. No one in the real world of private sector employment will long tolerate walking on eggshells to avoid upsetting the perpetually offended. Even if they manage to get hired, they won't last long in the real world.
Cognitive behavioral therapy is about as rigorous as therapy gets. Stoicism is no joke. The theory of the mind encompassed by many zen practices is plenty deep. This is to coddling what interval training is to diet soda.
The Lukianoff/Haidt characterization of Buddhism-Stoicism-Hinduism-cognitive behavioral therapy aligns pretty well with my (admittedly shallow and cursory) understanding of these. "This isn't the usual stuff of American free speech and political debate. It's strangely aligned with the "coddling" that's supposed to be bad, because it circles around inner peace, not getting shaken up and challenged and activated..." indicates a very different understanding. I see "inner peace" as inner strength, "not getting shaken up/challenged/activated" as being rational and logical rather than emotional. The article is very clear about this. The equate coddling with recognizing emotional thinking as inherently valid.
"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (and Stoicism, Hinduism, and many other traditions) is that you can never achieve happiness by making the world conform to your desires. But you can master your desires and habits of thought.
Or as the captain told Luke, "Get your mind right."
The Universe Is One Zen Buddhists chanting on a mountain top are one day going to be saved, along with the whole ungrateful world, by dedicated-to-Reason White and Asian Science Guys (yup, guys) who first detect, and then deflect an otherwise planet-busting asteroid.
Ooooommmmm, indeed.
A good thing about the draft was that you met a lot of different people in the army and learned to get along with them. Had to; we are all in that mess together and had to cope.
And as for being offended - the army sure taught you to take a lot of that and still survive!
what psychobabble..........
Self-help...I help myself
And after two years in the army, we certainly had learned to be sceptical of authority!
And allergic to dorm life.
And two years in the army - GI Bill would pay for 4 years of tuition and books and you could always find ways to keep body and soul together somehow. No student debt.
Hagar, the kids I see joining the military are doing the right thing and many of them are college material. About half, I would say.
I talk to my medical students and suggest they look into the military sending them to medical school. They seem to prefer students loans.They will regret that choice.
Christianity doesn't buy into this "one of the great truths" poppycock cited.
Purveyors of "all religions are the same" take note.
"to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control."
It would be nice if L&H were right, but they are wrong. Colleges are doing a good job preparing students for a world in which major institutions are run by Progs, most words and ideas unacceptable to Progs are sanctioned, and anyone who runs afoul of Prog orthodox will be vilified.
"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (and Stoicism, Hinduism, and many other traditions) is that you can never achieve happiness by making the world conform to your desires."
Fine, they can keep their stinking truths. Progs are not Stoics. Buddhism is the favorite religion of Prog secularists, but only insofar as it teaches compassion and veganism. Hinduism still has castes, doesn't it? Nothing to learn there. Progressivism collectivizes and regiments the pursuit of happiness, recasting reality in its fantasy image. They desire more government control, more redistribution, destruction of bourgeois morality, and a weaker America in a world in which power is more equally distributed (including to US adversaries). They're happily doing and getting it.
"chronic avoidance breeds terror"
This is also wrong. It breeds useful conformity. There's no need for Progs in power to feel "terror." Sure, they can fake it for dramatic effect (trigger warnings etc.). Progs don't fear conservative ideas, male sexuality, white privilege, traditional morality, or a literary canon, etc. They just despise it all and aim to control or destroy it. Colleges are teaching students exactly what they need to know.
Hagar said...
A good thing about the draft was that you met a lot of different people in the army and learned to get along with them. Had to; we are all in that mess together and had to cope.
One thing about the military is that you quickly learn that no one racial or ethnic group cornered the market on assholes. I served (Army enlisted airborne infantry and Air Force, enlisted and officer) with people of all shades and most religions. Most of us got along great. We all quickly learned who the assholes were and hated them equally.
And as for being offended - the army sure taught you to take a lot of that and still survive!
There's something about having a Drill Sergeant get very much in your face to thicken your skin. The only trigger warnings were on the weapons ranges and there was no such thing as microaggressions. All aggressions were very macro.
Not having spent much time on a campus since 1994, I wonder how prevalent these really are. But it does keep popping up a lot. I don't know.
If it is true, I still feel the same way I felt when I read the essay by the liberal professor terrified by his liberal students -- this is the world the liberal academia created so bugger off if you expect me to feel bad for you. Come back in 7 years when I have to start paying tuition for my sons though (though that will be tears over my bank account). Can we say that university tuition bills need a trigger warning?
Not used to thinking about stoicism and coddling as being related.
It's women who are demanding the coddling. What does Althouse think of that?
Apologies for going completely off-topic, but check out this this video from the Washington Times. Notice particularly Hillary's outfit, the black and white horizontal stripes. Is she subconsciously telegraphing her fate?
Paranoia strikes deep
Into your life it will creep
It starts when your always afraid
Step out of line the Man comes and takes you away..
That's a true line right there.
There is another true line in that song
Soldiers are cutting us down.
Should have been done long ago.
OK, I don't really believe that last bit, but for a long time that is how I always heard that song.
The age of critical thinking is over (for the time being) in higher education.
Ngram of "trigger warning".
Traditionally, higher education has always been more about indoctrinating and training a ruling class than it has been about research and promoting critical thinking.
The age of critical thinking is over...
A.K.A. The Enlightenment.
So am I OK sleeping with a college girl, or is that now wrong?
I thought 'over eighteen' was all I now needed to worry about.
I hate having to check a girl's ID before she sucks my cock.
I am Laslo.
I want inner amusement.
Young leftists/liberals are the same as older leftists/liberals. They are extremely fragile intellectually, must never be challenged and require continuous external reinforcement of their belief systems.
This has nothing to do with hurt feelings and offensive ideas. This is a power grab. Children getting adults to dance to there whim. When I tried shit like this, the adults slapped me down. And I deserved it.
EPIC FAIL!
Those religious mindsets are about inner peace. Inner peace, get this!, comes from within.
Coddling comes from without. Worrying about triggers is about what is without.
A woman like Althouse has found herself. Does she need coddling or trigger warnings? Would Althouse's confidence be shaken from without? The query answers itself.
jake, it's just capitalism-town.consumerism rules.
Marc Snyder,
Are you attempting to self-identify?
I didn’t go to religion to make me happy. I always knew a bottle of Port would do that. If you want a religion to make you feel really comfortable, I certainly don’t recommend Christianity.
C.S. Lewis
Teaching anyone to manage difficult emotions using their own internal resources doesn't strike me as particularly coddling. Coddling is what we do with children -- managing their environments to maintain their well-being. If someone manages their internal world so that they aren't a victim to whatever stimulus appears in their environment is what civilization is all about. Without that, we have anarchy.
Ah, Laslo, if only you were gay. You could put your mind at ease. Nobody really cares about homosex age limits, do they? What would be the point?
I mean even the crudest husband-high, grass on the field, old enough to bleed, etc, rubrics applied to "breeders" have at least some shall we say evolutionary incentive behind them. Social/family pressures likewise at least at one point (you know, back in prehistoric times, like before the internet)
Hard rules like "18" or "one year apart" or "half the man's age plus seven" attempt a more formal metric, but then we have to process-itize everything because nobody can be trusted anymore outside of a "curated(?)" circle or network of People You Can Work With, all too few ...but I digress...
With man on man, or vice versa, what's the point? Same as with sex with animals and children. Easily available, low risk of consequences. No child will be conceived of those unions ! It's practical and efficient theoretically, like an egg salad sandwich. Much more trouble free than man and woman. All that sploogery and stoogery! No, you can't ban those in the end, because reasons, because LUV!!!1! TWUU WUVV! is the only future decision rule. Love, man! It's creamy like my center! Cmere poolboy!
Yes all that is fine but NO POLYGAMY!!!1! THST WOUKD BE WRONG!!!!!!!eleventy!!
Buckley you whore, you think you're the only one?
A friend of mine does hair for all the movies that come to Boston. Dwanye, The Rock, Johnson is here and my friend said he has a huge cock.
He is currently doing the next Ghostbusters movie and all the women's beave's are shaved, he said even Melissa McCarthy.
tits.
Shall I grant that your friend the hairdresser regularly sees his customers naked? Does he shave them or do they shave themselves or is it all waxing now? C'mon man, try harder!
...I'll be in my bunk...
@Althouse, just so you keep exposing your own students to Scalia and Alioto and Thomas.
Alito, sorry
Reckon I was fortunate to attend college 30 years ago.
What are these special snowflakes going to do once they're out in the world running things and Abu Bakr Skyhook al Baghdadi and the Black Flag boys roll in to round up some Kaffirs and war wives?
"...to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control."
there, fixed it for you.
The last year or two I've been thinking I've reached the age that I should start studying Stoicism.
"...colleges should do all they can to equip students to thrive in a world full of words and ideas that they cannot control."
Some do.
You think stoic philosophy is about being coddled?
(Or Buddhist, outside of the California sect...)
The State does not want adults. The State wants dependents. Productive workers it imagines it can always get from somewhere, since those workers have always come from outside the nomenklatura anyway.
"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (and Stoicism, Hinduism, and many other traditions) . . ."
The Atlantic writer just couldn't bring himself to mention Christianity. What a shitty excuse for an American magazine.
My son is going to college this year. I have prepared him as well as I can to protect him from the liberal elitists of the UW System by explaining to him exactly what Nonsense they will attempt to fill his head with. My idea is to get him to critically think about the crap thrown at him (essentially doing what the universities are now failing to do) and to call BS on his profs when they need to be called out. Hopefully, I have prepared him well to resist the brainwashing on the road to hisb degree.
11:22 +1.
"You think stoic philosophy is about being coddled?"
No. I connected them the way I did. Think about it.
No. I connected them the way I did. Think about it.
Whatever is being taught in the Academy today it certainly isn't Stoicism.(Perhaps taught in the sense of formal instruction is too strong a word; taught by example, absolutely.) Nor is it Buddhism, at least not the philosophy of Buddha. Buddhism teaches that life is suffering. Suffering comes from unfulfilled desires and contention with Nature and with others, therefore the enlightened one seeks to separate himself from desire and contention. The enlightened one finds solace in passivity and contemplation of Universal Oneness, which is often translated as "God," though the universal Oneness is not a predicate.
Stoicism does not teach passivity, it teaches apatheia, which, though it superficially resembles our English word, apatheia definitely can not be translated as apathy. Literally it means "without passion," which is to say the Stoic deals with the world as a man in control of himself. The Stoic values reason and disdains emotion. The best example of a Stoic that most people would know is the character Spock from Star Trek TOS. Stoics are never apathetic, though they are cool, contemplative, and logical. Unlike the Buddhist (and the Cynic) the Stoic is both in and of the polis. His concern is not to escape suffering, but to live a responsible life; one that values justice and truth, and one that challenges injustice and falsehood through personal courage.
Washington lived and conducted himself as a Stoic, though he never described himself in those terms. Adams, no, too prickly and jealous of his rivals. Jefferson, no, too in love with himself. Lincoln was a Stoic in the mold of Cicero himself. Maximilien Robespierre was also a Stoic, sad to say, which goes to show that no philosophy leads inexorably to goodness of the soul.
It's strangely aligned with the "coddling" that's supposed to be bad, because it circles around inner peace, not getting shaken up and challenged and activated.
But it changes the responsibility for change from the world to the individual, which is in direct opposition to the coddling.
That is, coddling it saying, 'The mean old world is bad. Lets change it for you. You are fine the way your are.' The other way is. 'So it's raining. If you don't like it, get an umbrella, a rain coat, get under cover, or suck it up.' Saying it aint' fair is not an effective response.
And to be blunt, trying to control what OTHER people think or do is about as effective as stopping a rainstorm.
But Ann, the current negative part of the "rights" movement on college campuses is strongly focused on feelings, and mostly negative feelings. Fixating on microaggressions and shirts is teaching college students to be perpetually outraged and to perpetually seek out ways in which to cognitively construct themselves as victims. They are then taught to resort to the symbolic womb (safe places) and suck their thumbs. They are literally being taught that being the most psychologically incompetent person in the room is the key to getting the most resources. They are being trained to be malignant narcissists, and when they graduate, they are flung out into a real world that won't tolerate this.
It is a recipe for misery and early death, and I mean that quite literally. These kids are being taught ways of thinking and behaving and reacting that will destroy their ability to construct enduring intimate relationships, to be successful at any career, and to weather life's bad periods.
If the justification for censuring someone else's speech and/or symbolic speech is due to how it makes oneself feel, than the justification to rebut that should also focus on how it makes you feel and act.
Our higher education system is becoming more toxic and vicious (in the literal sense - full of vice) by the minute. If I had a kid of college age currently, I would probably send the kid to school in Europe.
And you really know this. I remember when you posted a quote from Cook of Apple, saying something about that being gay had trained him to be psychologically tough, which was a huge asset in business. Seeking your "safe place" continually unfits the individual to be a mother, father, colleague, or professional success.
"Life is difficult."
Sometimes a little phrase comes along just when you need to hear it.
Terry said...
"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (and Stoicism, Hinduism, and many other traditions) . . ."
The Atlantic writer just couldn't bring himself to mention Christianity. What a shitty excuse for an American magazine.
How much have you really thought about Christianity's core teachings?
Man is born Fallen, somehow inheriting and sharing in guilt for another's transgression. Throughout life, you remain a wretch in constant need of redeeming. Great for self-esteem!
You are your brother's keeper. So if you are merely responsible and self-sufficient, that don't cut it by a long shot, cousin. Your needy 'brother' has a claim to your bounty.
Love your enemies. Currently working out great as a strategy in the Middle East.
All in all, a totally inadequate and dangerous world view.
"All in all, a totally inadequate and dangerous world view."
I heard the religion's founder got in trouble with the authorities and was killed.
Why is it that the left is so averse to judging others and yet have entire school curriculums built around judging patriarchies and American colonialism and white racism and privilege?
I as a white male should express my sensitivity to how black people and women treat my race and my sex respectively. They should have to stop teaching feminism and afro american studies on campus as to do so affronts my self identity.
(cont) and yet I, as a white male am expected to grin and bear it, while feminists and gender queers and afro american race merchants unload on me for my sins as a white heteronormative cis male. I don't cry about micro aggressions. Those slights are not microagressions at all, they are macro aggressions. it's as if the Klan is on campus with a whole program about the evil of the black man. It would never be tolerated were it reversed.
The left has daily pogroms against its selective targets. Yet, still argue that we can't judge people or groups. they are offended if you say Islam is not a religion of peace. Have you heard what the left says about christianity? Its not judgment free.
So we have the most judgemental groups who's sole basis is to demagogue the groups they are attacking,also arguing that it's wrong to judge people or groups. What drugs are they smoking?
"One of the great truths taught by Buddhism (...) is that you can never achieve happiness by making the world conform to your desires.
...
With this in mind, here are some steps that might help reverse the tide of bad thinking on campus."
Since you can't achieve happiness by making the world conform to your desires, let's make the world conform to our desires. Oops.
What we are doing is creating a world where everyone thinks like human resource managers.
Here's another thing Christianity gets 100% wrong.
Judge not.
Bullshit. Judge. And be prepared to be judged, in turn.
That's puts the proper focus on one's character. Earn love. Earn respect.
The unintended consequences of the Christian world-view have been a disaster.
SomeoneHasToSayIt wrote:
"Here's another thing Christianity gets 100% wrong.
Judge not."
It's like the Christian religion is entirely constructed of aphorisms.
Only a dogmatic, collectivist, dictatorial and extremely narrow mind could harbour the idea that university students should be protected from views that they may not like or (how telling) cannot “control”. There is no need to invoke traditions like Stoicism or Buddhism. The spirit of intellectual freedom that is supposed to imbue academic life ought to be enough.
The idea of protecting students from “harmful” ideas is so silly that I have been tempted to think of a hoax.
"But Ann, the current negative part of the "rights" movement on college campuses is strongly focused on feelings, and mostly negative feelings. Fixating on microaggressions and shirts is teaching college students to be perpetually outraged and to perpetually seek out ways in which to cognitively construct themselves as victims. They are then taught to resort to the symbolic womb (safe places) and suck their thumbs. They are literally being taught that being the most psychologically incompetent person in the room is the key to getting the most resources. They are being trained to be malignant narcissists, and when they graduate, they are flung out into a real world that won't tolerate this."
Why does this comment begin "But Ann"? What have I said that you are disagreeing with.
I think I found a new insight, so I am disappointed that instead of engaging with that you imagine me to be saying something that it's easy to disagree with.
Ironically, you went to your safe place.
While true, it is also true that Hinduism, in particular, lead to a very stagnant social system. Strive to thrive in all social environments, but don't stop pushing for justice and change. It does happen, over time.
The millennial delicate flowers have been so offended by the American working world "realities" en masse that the working world has had to accommodate them and become less harsh, to a degree. Good for them.
I thought cognitive behavioral therapy was a method of teaching people to be activated and challenged without being neurotic.
You think you're sane, do you?
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा