#431 — What Is Happening on College Campuses?
In this episode of Making Sense, Michael Roth and Sam Harris examine the current state of ideological diversity in universities, particularly focusing on faculty composition and campus protests. Roth addresses claims about left-wing dominance in academia, noting that while most students pursue career-focused majors, there is a noticeable lack of conservative and moderate voices among humanities and social sciences faculty.
The discussion covers Roth's proposed solutions, including what he calls "affirmative action for conservatives" in faculty hiring, and his approach to managing controversial speakers on campus. They explore how universities can maintain free speech while setting boundaries for protests, using examples from Wesleyan University's experiences with hosting speakers from various ideological backgrounds. The conversation also addresses when political beliefs should or should not affect faculty employment.
This is a preview of the Shortform summary of the Aug 25, 2025 episode of the Making Sense with Sam Harris
Sign up for Shortform to access the whole episode summary along with additional materials like counterarguments and context.
1-Page Summary
Bias and Diversity Concerns in Universities
Michael Roth addresses the current state of diversity in academia, particularly focusing on ideological diversity and the perceived dominance of left-leaning perspectives in universities.
Faculty Diversity and Ideological Balance
While acknowledging concerns about left-wing illiberalism in universities, Roth argues that claims of "ideological capture" by the far left are overblown, noting that most students pursue career-focused majors like economics and finance. However, he recognizes a serious issue in the lack of ideological diversity among faculty, particularly in humanities and social sciences, where conservative and moderate voices are increasingly rare.
To address this imbalance, Roth advocates for what he calls "affirmative action for conservatives" in faculty hiring, suggesting the inclusion of not just conservatives but also libertarians, religious scholars, and those with military backgrounds. This initiative, while initially met with skepticism, has sparked important conversations about ideological bias on campus.
Issues of Free Speech and Campus Protests
Sam Harris raises concerns about campus protests, particularly referencing an incident at Yale involving Nicholas Christakis, where he perceived potential threats of violence. In response, Roth suggests that while such high-profile incidents are concerning, they don't represent systemic problems within academia.
Roth emphasizes that institutions must maintain a balanced approach to free speech, allowing diverse viewpoints while setting clear boundaries against disruptive behavior. He stresses the importance of preparing professors to teach in diverse classrooms while ensuring they aren't compelled to adopt ideological commitments beyond their teaching responsibilities.
Managing Controversial Speakers
At Wesleyan University, Roth implements a model that welcomes speakers from various ideological backgrounds while maintaining clear guidelines for protest. He cites the example of hosting Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, where protesters were allowed to demonstrate but were required to follow specific rules to prevent disruption.
Roth explains that while universities should generally favor free expression, certain extreme affiliations, such as active support of terrorist organizations, remain disqualifying. He maintains that professors' private political beliefs shouldn't affect their employment unless they bring discriminatory views into the classroom.
1-Page Summary
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The effectiveness of "affirmative action for conservatives" could be questioned, as it may not address the underlying reasons for ideological imbalances in academia.
- The claim that high-profile incidents at universities do not represent systemic problems could be challenged by arguing that these incidents are symptomatic of broader issues of intolerance or suppression of speech.
- The idea that ideological diversity among faculty should be increased could be met with the counterargument that academic expertise and scholarly merit should remain the primary criteria for hiring, not ideological background.
- The assertion that most students pursue career-focused majors and are less influenced by faculty ideology might be countered by pointing out that the culture and climate of a university are shaped by more than just the majors students choose.
- The balance between free speech and setting boundaries against disruptive behavior could be criticized for being too subjective and potentially leading to the suppression of legitimate protest.
- The notion that professors should teach in diverse classrooms without ideological commitments might be challenged by arguing that personal beliefs inevitably influence teaching, and transparency is better than the pretense of neutrality.
- The model implemented at Wesleyan University for managing controversial speakers could be criticized for potentially stifling free expression if the guidelines for protest are too restrictive.
- The stance that extreme affiliations are disqualifying could be seen as a slippery slope that might lead to broader censorship or the exclusion of controversial but valuable perspectives.
- The idea that professors' private political beliefs should not affect their employment unless discriminatory views are brought into the classroom could be countered by concerns about implicit biases and the subtle ways personal beliefs can influence teaching and interactions with students.
Actionables
- You can diversify your media consumption by actively seeking out content from ideologically diverse sources. This means subscribing to different news outlets, podcasts, and following thought leaders with varying perspectives on social media. By doing so, you'll expose yourself to a broader range of ideas and arguments, which can help you understand and appreciate the importance of ideological balance in academia and beyond.
- Start a book club with friends or colleagues that focuses on reading and discussing works from a wide array of ideological backgrounds. This not only encourages open dialogue but also helps participants practice engaging with diverse viewpoints respectfully and constructively, mirroring the kind of ideological diversity that can benefit academic settings.
- Volunteer to moderate or participate in local community discussions that aim to bridge ideological divides. This could involve organizing events where people from different political or ideological backgrounds come together to discuss specific topics in a structured, respectful environment. It's a hands-on way to foster the kind of ideological diversity and free speech balance that is often discussed in relation to academia.
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Bias and Diversity Concerns in Universities
Michael Roth and others address the current state of diversity in academia, focusing on ideological diversity, and the perceived left-leaning dominance in faculties and curricula at universities.
Concerns Over Left-Leaning Dominance in University Faculties and Curricula
Intellectual Homogeneity in Humanities and Social Sciences
Roth and Harris engage in a discussion about the political leanings within universities. Roth recognizes the trend of illiberalism from the left as concerning, but he suggests that this is less significant compared to authoritarian measures against freedom of expression by the government. He also counters the idea of an "ideological capture" at American universities by the far left, which Harris describes as a moral panic influencing campus protest movements.
Roth refers to the notion of ideological capture as vastly overblown, explaining that most students are pursuing majors in areas like economics and psychology with career aspirations in finance, indicating that the university culture is not predominantly progressive or neo-Marxist. As a left-leaning individual himself, Roth admits that a serious and worsening issue is the lack of ideological diversity among faculty, particularly in the humanities and social sciences where moderates or conservatives are increasingly absent, not even pursuing graduate education.
Recruit and Retain Diverse Perspectives, Including Conservatives, Religious Scholars, and Underrepresented Viewpoints
"Diverse Faculty Hiring Strategies"
Recognizing the intellectual homogeneity as a problem, Roth calls for affirmative action for conservatives in colleges and universities, aiming to bring in faculty with varied ideological backgrounds. He sees the importance ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Bias and Diversity Concerns in Universities
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- The emphasis on ideological diversity might inadvertently lead to the tokenization of conservative faculty or those with underrepresented viewpoints, which could undermine the genuine intellectual contributions they can make.
- Affirmative action for conservatives could be seen as a form of reverse discrimination, potentially leading to resentment or backlash from those who perceive it as undermining meritocracy.
- The focus on ideological diversity within faculty hiring may distract from other pressing issues in academia, such as funding, accessibility, and the precarious nature of adjunct positions.
- The claim that university culture is not predominantly progressive or neo-Marxist may overlook the experiences of conservative students and faculty who feel marginalized or silenced.
- The argument that illiberalism from the left is less significant than authoritarian measures by the government could be challenged by those who believe that the culture within academia directly influences broader societal norms and political discourse.
- The notion that hiring faculty with diverse ideological backgrounds will necessarily lead to more robust conversations could be contested if such faculty face a hostile environment or if their perspectives are not genuinely integrated into the curriculu ...
Actionables
- Broaden your reading list to include authors from a spectrum of ideological backgrounds, ensuring you're exposed to a variety of viewpoints. Start by identifying books and articles written by conservative, libertarian, and religious scholars, as well as those with military experience. This will help you understand and appreciate the diversity of thought that exists beyond your current scope.
- Engage in conversations with individuals who have different life experiences and beliefs, aiming to understand their perspectives without trying to debate or convince them. You could join online forums or community groups that are known for their ideological diversity, or simply start by asking a colleague or acquaintance about their views on a current issue.
- Reflect on your own ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Issues of Free Speech and Campus Protests/Activism
The article discusses the complex dynamics of free speech on college campuses, illustrated by the example of student protests at Yale involving Nicholas Christakis and the on-going debate about how institutions handle such events.
Student Protests at Yale With Nicholas Christakis Raise Free Speech Concerns
Sam Harris reflects on the incident at Yale University where Nicholas Christakis was confronted by students. Harris views this behavior as a breach of civility and felt there was an implicit threat of violence involved. He was particularly alarmed by the possibility that Christakis may have been at risk of physical confrontation if he attempted to leave the crowd. Additionally, Harris finds it concerning that some of the students were later recognized and commended for their social justice efforts.
Most Campus Protests Don't Block Speakers, So High-Profile Incidents May Not Indicate a Systemic Problem
Providing context to the incident, Michael Roth suggests that although the events involving Christakis and similar situations at other campuses were regrettable, they do not represent a broader systemic issue within academia. He asserts that these high-profile incidents are more likely to be exceptions rather than indicative of the normal atmosphere and practices on college campuses.
Institutions Must Uphold Free Speech and Allow Appropriate Protest
Balanced Approach: Allow Speakers, Set Boundaries, Discipline Disruptive Behavior
Roth further elaborates on the responsibilities of educational institutions in terms of upholding free speech. He argues for a balanced ap ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Issues of Free Speech and Campus Protests/Activism
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While Sam Harris views the confrontation with Nicholas Christakis as a breach of civility, one could argue that civil disobedience and confrontational tactics have historically been effective in bringing about social change, and that civility should not be prioritized over justice.
- The concern about potential violence against Christakis could be countered by noting that the presence of a heated debate does not necessarily equate to a threat of physical violence, and that the fear of such violence might be overstated.
- The commendation of students for their social justice efforts, despite their confrontational behavior, could be seen as recognition of their passion and commitment to their cause, rather than an endorsement of any uncivil behavior.
- Michael Roth's assertion that high-profile incidents are not indicative of a systemic problem might be challenged by pointing out that even isolated incidents can reflect deeper issues of intolerance towards diverse viewpoints on campus.
- The idea of setting boundaries to prevent disruptive behavior could be critiqued by arguing that what constitutes "disruptive" can be subjective and may be used to silence legitim ...
Actionables
- You can foster constructive dialogue by initiating a book club focused on civil discourse, where members read and discuss works that explore the importance of civility in society. This encourages participants to reflect on their behavior and understand the impact of their actions on others, promoting a culture of respect and understanding.
- Encourage a culture of diverse viewpoints by volunteering to moderate a community forum that invites speakers from various backgrounds to share their perspectives. As a moderator, ensure that discussions remain respectful and that all voices are heard, which can help participants learn to engage with differing opinions constructively.
- Support educators in adapting to diverse classrooms by ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Navigating Controversial Speakers and Maintaining Free Speech Principles
As universities invite speakers with controversial views, they often face the challenge of upholding free speech while maintaining community standards.
Inviting Controversial or Offensive Speakers Is a Balancing Act For Universities
No Clear Rule For Speakers, Favor Free Expression
Michael Roth, president of Wesleyan University, advocates for free expression on university campuses, with the caveat that certain extreme affiliations, such as active support of a terrorist organization, remain disqualifying due to legal and ethical considerations. Roth emphasizes that a professor's private political beliefs should not influence their employment as long as those views do not enter the classroom in a discriminatory or harassing manner. Should that occur, Roth maintains that the teacher ought to be fired.
Wesleyan Invites Speakers From all Ideologies, Allowing Peaceful Protest and Dissent
Model Upholds Free Speech on College Campuses
Roth recounts an instance when Wesleyan invited Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia to speak on campus. Despite Scalia's divisive conservative opinions, the university allowed the event to proceed, accompanied by protests. However, the protesters were instructed to either sit down or leave if they obstructed the view or harassed others during Scalia's spe ...
Here’s what you’ll find in our full summary
Navigating Controversial Speakers and Maintaining Free Speech Principles
Additional Materials
Counterarguments
- While Roth advocates for free expression, some may argue that the exceptions for extreme affiliations are subjective and could lead to a slippery slope where more types of speech are excluded under the guise of being "extreme."
- The idea that professors' private political beliefs should not affect their employment unless they manifest in the classroom could be criticized for potentially overlooking the influence that a professor's beliefs might have on their implicit biases and teaching style, even if not overtly discriminatory or harassing.
- The stance that teachers should be fired if their political views negatively impact their teaching could be seen as potentially chilling to academic freedom if not applied with extreme care and clear guidelines.
- Inviting speakers from all ideologies is commendable, but some may argue that it could give a platform to harmful or factually incorrect viewpoints that could misinform students or create a hostile environment.
- The handling of protests during Scalia's speech at Wesleyan might be criticized for potentially suppressing the protesters' own free speech rights, depending on how the instructions to sit down or leave were enforced.
- Wesleyan's approach to ideological diversity and peaceful dissent may be seen by some as not ...
Actionables
- You can foster open dialogue by starting a book club that focuses on texts from a wide range of political perspectives, ensuring that discussions remain respectful and focused on understanding rather than debating. This encourages participants to engage with different ideologies in a structured environment, similar to how universities expose students to diverse viewpoints. For example, one month you might read a book by a conservative author and the next by a liberal or progressive author, with the goal of exploring and discussing the ideas presented rather than convincing others of a particular viewpoint.
- Encourage ideological diversity in your social circles by inviting friends with varying beliefs to a monthly dinner where each person shares their views on a predetermined topic. Set ground rules for civil discourse and active listening to create a safe space for expression, mirroring the way universities like Wesleyan handle controversial speakers and protests. For instance, you could choose a current event each month and have an open conversation where everyone is encouraged to share their perspective while others listen without interruption or judgment.
- Develop a personal policy for engaging with social media that mirror ...
Related Shortform Content
Get access to the context and additional materials
Create Summaries for anything on the web
Download the Shortform Chrome extension for your browser
