Dedicated to Truth: Former UVA Professor Jonathan Haidt Addresses Downfall of American Universities

“For here we are not afraid to follow truth wherever it may lead, nor to tolerate any error so long as reason is left free to combat it” – Thomas Jefferson, on the University of Virginia

Rarely are the seats of the Nau Hall auditorium as packed as they were last Thursday, overflowing with students, faculty members, and alumni deeply troubled by the unfolding fate of American universities. In an era in which top university presidents appear to be resigning en masse, students are protesting at unprecedented levels, and public confidence in universities is at an all-time low, former UVA professor Jonathan Haidt offered attendees a detailed contextualization of these concerns, outlining their sources and potential solutions for school administrations to reverse course.

Historically, Haidt argued, the American university system best cultivated a core goal of higher education: trust. With a brand strictly dedicated to intellectual excellence and absolute honesty, top US schools flourished as strongholds of debate and progress. Even in times of deep political tension, Americans could trust that their universities remained dedicated to the unbiased truth.

Beginning in the early 2010s, this all changed. Haidt, now a social psychologist at NYU-Stern, has written extensively on the dangers of social media for youth, especially for Generation Z. While previous generations grew up playing outside, wrestling with unknowns, and exploring avenues for growth, Gen Z has been “coddled” from birth. The internet has curated a specific life experience for this generation intentionally designed to minimize danger. Angry Birds at age five morphs into Instagram at age fifteen, neither of which effectively prepares its user for the challenges of the real world.

As a result, a deadly mental health crisis has emerged, worsening each year. Teen suicides are spiking, kids are spending less time with their friends, anxiety and depression rates are soaring—the list goes on and on.

Around ten years ago, these teens began to arrive on college campuses. Whereas college freshmen historically approached their studies in what Haidt dubs “discover mode,” freshmen today embrace “defend mode.” Instead of asking new questions, engaging in debate, and admitting shortcomings, students today favor canceling their professors, other students, and anyone who disagrees with them—or, as some might rephrase it, pushes them out of their internet-curated comfort zone. The rise of safe spaces, trigger warnings, and disinvitations of controversial speakers are a result of this “defend mode.”

There is certainly debate to be had as to whether Haidt is overly reductive in his analysis. Of course, not all students are in “defend mode,” and many of the measures he criticizes can help lessen the burden of mental health issues, not reinforce them. Regardless, Haidt is correct that these measures have inhibited the goals of universities. Professors at some institutions now direct energy towards not offending students, and even liberal professors worry about the consequences of upsetting their left-wing students.

The result of balancing academic aims with the “defend mode” of students is “teleological confusion.” For many, including Thomas Jefferson, the purpose of the university should be to pursue truth, a tradition dating back to Socrates. The American university system has been historically successful because it achieved this purpose—or telos, as the Greeks called it—of truth most effectively. By combining the “discover mode” mindset with an institution that brought together individuals from various perspectives, universities could pursue truth to the highest degree.

Over the past decade, Haidt contended, the purpose of many schools has shifted from truth to social justice. Identity now supersedes academic excellence as an institutional priority. For many academics, silence appears safer than defending perceived truth. Haidt claimed that many now fear that speaking the “wrong truth” will cost them their jobs.

Haidt acknowledged that this teleological restructuring is mostly limited to northeastern Ivy-League-tier institutions. He was quite complimentary of UVA, which made a comprehensive commitment to free expression and inquiry in 2021.

Even still, it is absurd to claim that these northeastern institutions are merely vessels of social justice guided entirely by the whims of a monolithic, “defend mode”-oriented student body. Haidt hardly suggested this, though it is not difficult to reach this conclusion from the talk. Princeton University’s president, Christopher Eisgruber, even reduced Haidt’s argument to this characterization in an article he published in The Atlantic on Tuesday. Without action, however, Haidt expressed that schools may eventually reach this unsalvageable state.

Primarily, Haidt suggested that universities fully commit to the promotion of “discover mode.” He recommended that schools mandante a class for first-year students that teaches cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT), a psychological treatment that can help treat depression, anxiety, and other mental health issues. Teaching CBT from a textbook could be cheaper and more effective than spending millions on a network of therapists, Haidt asserted.

Haidt also argued that redirecting the teleological focus of schools from social justice back to truth must also be a top priority. In his talk, he called on university administrators to be strong in advocating for truth, curiosity, and viewpoint diversity, cultivating a culture in which professors are not afraid to challenge their students. Especially during crises, emphasizing nuance is vital.

To conclude his talk, Haidt encouraged professors and other faculty members in attendance to join his organization, the Heterodox Academy, dedicated to fostering the intellectual excellence and pursuance of truth academia was conceived to promote. UVA has the third-largest branch in the country, and dozens of event attendees were already members.

Notably, Haidt’s talk offered little advice to students, encouraging a largely top-down approach. Still, Haidt offers an implied message to students: the current state of universities is not the status quo. Truth is under attack, and it is the duty of all in academia to protect it. It shapes self-awareness, and it forwards our capacities as a human species.

Without truth, we descend into tribalism and bitterness. It is imperative to preserve it, value it, and fight for it, even if it means sacrificing our reputation. That sacrifice is the duty of academia. It has been since its founding, and it must be for ages to come.

Jonathan Haidt’s speech, “The Meltdown of the Universities and Ideas for Rebuilding Them,” was sponsored by The Jefferson Council as part of an ongoing speaker series aimed at promoting free speech at the University. The full video is available to watch here.