On the evening of Jan. 26, Shapiro, recently hired as executive director of Georgetown Law’s Center for the Constitution, posted to Twitter that Sri Srinivasan, Chief Judge of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, would be Biden’s “best pick” for the Supreme Court:
Objectively best pick for Biden is Sri Srinivasan, who is solid prog & v smart. Even has identity politics benefit of being first Asian (Indian) American. But alas doesn’t fit into latest intersectionality hierarchy so we’ll get a lesser black woman. Thank heaven for small favors?
Because Biden said he’s only consider black women for SCOTUS, his nominee will always have an asterisk attached. Fitting that the Court takes up affirmative action next term.
On Monday, Jan. 31, just as dozens of faculty from across the nation joined these warnings by signing an open letter authored by UCLA Law professor and First Amendment scholar Eugene Volokh, Georgetown announced that it had suspended Shapiro “pending an investigation.”
“UW-IT has joined IT organizations at universities around the country that are involved in activities to replace racist, sexist, ageist, ableist, homophobic or otherwise non-inclusive language scattered throughout materials and resources in the software and information technology fields.
The resources provided in this document are mostly focused on language surrounding technology tools, resources and services, or language that is more likely to be used on web properties or documentation platforms.”
Example: a black list or the verb blacklist should no longer be used as they perpetuate “concepts that have been used to oppress people of color”.
The guide published here also contains an extensive list of similar literature from other colleges and institutions.
Georgetown University Law Center faces a barrage of criticism for its suspension of Ilya Shapiro over now-deleted tweets criticizing President Biden’s promise to nominate a black woman to replace Justice Stephen Breyer on the Supreme Court.
The American Association of University Professors’ Journal of Academic Freedom is calling for papers that “critically examine attempts at thought control by the Right, the whitewashing of historical narratives, and specific assaults on academic freedom that cut across the K–12 and higher education sectors.”
Astronomer retracts paper on use of data to make hiring decisions because it could harm ‘women and minorities’
University of Texas at Austin astronomer John Kormendy retracted a paper and paused a book about the use of hard data in the hiring and funding of professors after criticism that it harmed women and racial minorities.
Continue reading the article @The College Fix here
by Richard Vedder Distinguished Professor of Economics Emeritus at Ohio University.
When I am asked “what is the single biggest problem with higher education in America?” some expect me to talk about the high costs, excessive tuition fees, abysmal inefficiencies, learning deficiencies, or poor vocational outcomes characterizing America’s colleges and universities today. But there is a more fundamental problem: increasingly, participants in the learning experience at American universities are afraid to say what they believe. There is growing self-censorship arising from fears that there can be very severe negative consequences from saying something that is not acceptable to the campus community.
I’m an attorney representing a professor at the University of Central Florida who is being subjected by the university to what can only be called an inquisition after expressing opinions on Twitter that led to widespread calls for his firing. Read more here.
Controversies in recent years and months in the academic world (most recently involving Prof. Strumia at CERN) relating to gender issues have shown that there is much disagreement on what constitutes best practice with regard to gender equality. There seems even to be considerable disagreement between scientists of different disciplines as to fundamental aspects of gender identity.
We believe that the resolution of these disputes is not best promoted by discrediting and even discriminating against one side or the other.
For this reason we have asked a number of specialists if they would contribute to any future event debating STEM and gender (Prof. Amanda Diekmann, Prof. Alice Eagly, Prof. David C. Geary, Prof. Lee Jussim, inter alia), in order to facilitate an intellectually honest discussion.
We invite everyone (on both sides of the gender debate) to sign our petition and encourage the administration at CERN to invite these academics to their second Workshop on High Energy Theory and Gender.
Together, we can ensure neutrality, nuance and balance at CERN and in the whole scientific community.
Dr. Jordan Peterson is a clinical psychologist at the University of Toronto and is most renowned for his book “12 Rules for life” which has sold at least 3 million copies worldwide in a considerable number of languages. More information is available on https://www.jordanbpeterson.com
Although this interview/discussion is a year and a half old, I think it is still highly relevant, both for universities and society at large.
Peterson writes this about the interview:
I recently traveled to New York University to talk with Dr. Jonathan Haidt about, among other things, disgust, purity, fear and belief; the perilous state of the modern university; and his work with Heterodox Academy (https://heterodoxacademy.org/) an organization designed to draw attention to the lack of diversity of political belief in the humanities and the social sciences. Dr. Haidt is Professor of Ethical Leadership at New York University’s Stern School of Business and a social psychologist. He studies the psychology of morality and the moral emotions. He has been described as a top global thinker by both Foreign Policy and Prospect magazines.
Dr. Haidt is the author of three books:
The newest is The Coddling of the American Mind: How Bad Ideas and Good Intentions are Setting up a Generation for Failure (http://amzn.to/2AN87a6).