Yes and no. Intelligence enhances the capacity to understand the scope of one's actions' results. Most people do not intend to do bad, but they don't see the consequences of what they are doing or do consider them negligible. However in the case of Germany, this played out for the negative. Intellectuals used their intellectual capacity to follow up on and implement the very flawed hegemonic morals of their times and peer group, without questioning these morals that were open to critique given their krass contradictions. This can't be considered nothing else but cowardice, intellectual laziness and something we call in German Fachidiotentum (the inclination of not looking beyond the borders of your (sub)discipline)
@aaron.aaron.v.b.9448 I agree. All cowardice is essentially moral cowardice. Either through lack of belief, or lack of will to oppose the prevailing political narrative. Going along with things that in your heart you know to be wrong is the laziness part. Although it's understandable within the context of early 20thC Germany. Most of the dissenters didn't survive.
The room for dissent was relatively big in Germany, especially before the war. There was no need to actively embrace the Nazi ideology. As long as you did not actively worked for toppling the regime, you got through with something. With intellectual laziness, however, I mean rather not thinking about the implications of what you know, like stopping thinking when you reached a convenient point and not testing your convictions against what you learned, again and again - the way curious and intellectual honest people should do. The Nazi ideology worked of course against this - contrasting "heart felt" believes with the "cold" intellect.
I believe there are two forms of intelligence that I will name scientific intelligence and rhetorical intelligence. Scientific Intelligence believes truth exists and will appear because it naturally resists critical analysis. Its focus is on reality objectively observed. Rhetorical intelligence is the art of being able to defend any cause and make it appear as the truth. Its focus is on subjective perception and emotions. An indicator of the social evolution between both forms is the shift from scientific and engineering education towards Law, Business and Humanities.
Oh, Sir Niall Ferguson should take a looksie at modern New Zealand universities - you cannot secure employment unless you agree to the "principles of [1840] Treaty of Waitangi." ('Principles" that remain undefined to this day, meaning they can be changed whenever the political agencies decide.)
Or Gender Studies with their tax payer funded war on the Patriarchy which is another name for society in general. Law schools have also come under this spell.
In Canada you have to be committed to decolonization. Does that mean teaching people how to be a 1700's indigenous warrior and survivalist? No it just means trying to implement communism and obliterate anything that might be in it's way. (Which as it turns out is reality, human life and flourishing itself. )
I often tell young people that when I was their age--in the 1960s--the biggest putdown you heard was being 'uptight'. As in, 'Hey, don't be so uptight, Man.' Today, being uptight is considered a virtue.
Not taking anything away from Niall, but even he would admit that Stephen Kotkin is better. Kotkin also did it coming from a working class neighborhood in New York City.
He's alright, but as Christopher Hitchens used to say... Ferguson often has difficulty locating one's G-spot (which may account for the choice of his second wife)... I'd say he's spent too much time around other pampered academic types, which is why VDH generally has a far better grasp of conditions on the ground. It wasn't that long ago that Ferguson was lecturing western nations on their need to accept as many illegal immigrants as possible (because such people are apparently hard working, law abiding and willing to integrate etc etc). Oh, and he's also an advocate of this 'Islam-ism' nonsense!
@@benjamin4894How does he reconcile academic freedom with islam-ism. There's a blatant contradiction there. I expected him to be smarter than that. Does he want his daughters to have their dress code islamised? Or not attend university?
@@Tia-Louisa No explanation? Mine is that Niall purposely avoids the obvious comparisons between the original notzees and the modern ukro&zyo varieties.
Free speech at University is much different than free speech in a workplace. Debate is non existent. Workplaces have gotten filled with people who mistake free speech with hate behavior. Derision. People are extremely derisive and hateful today. Being an adult and treated like you are 5 and also being told you are stupid. Personal attacks on your own intellect. Low emotional control and threats of violence by managers. Workplaces have just become strange.
@@LibertyScott-x6i Yes I agree. But Free Speech at the academic level, trickles down to workplaces etc. Eventually permeating all levels of society. That is why, it is so important to make our institutions Great again.
I am a child of former enemy nations. I am politically active but it is no longer in the traditionally hard left sphere. I research both sides from primary sources. It is why I am on the internet. If we consider ourselves academics or even well educated, now is the time to do our own research.
@@Celtic2Realms That was Ferg’s ‘hook’ to get you to endure his witless whingeings about being so soundly rejected by the Ivy Leaguers, who don’t give a damn about any ‘woke’ causes. They just want the big money and to get rid of obnoxious egotists who are mere annoyances. He’s perpetually bitter about all the ‘unfair’ treatment he’s endured, and sour over the fact that he had to decamp to the wastes of Texas to found his dream lyceum. (Shades of Trump U…?) The chief difference between the German universities of the Nazi era and the US ones of today is the mass corporatization of them by private and corporate funding. So, instead of aiming his watery venom at the right people, he assigns the problem to a few transient officials and some rebel professors. Of course, the corporates are unassailable, even by a giant gnat such as Ferg.
The old saw about those who cannot remember history are condemned to repeat it has a parallel: Those who can remember history are condemned to stand powerlessly by while others repeat it. In other words, we are a curious animal and we seem determined to repeat the same old mistakes in the name building the same old utopias.....no matter what.
Here’s what happens: academics are weak, frightened, and as greedy as the general population. Allowing them to have an important role in policy is an error.
Perhaps the ones you listen to are weak etc. but that's on you. You can't expose yourself to even 0.01% of available academics. So pick ones you approve of. Btw you are as weak frightened and greedy as the population you are a part of.
@@richardyates7280 True. But it's rarer than rocking-horse poop at the moment. Wisdom seems to be the thing that's been sacrificed on the altar of knowledge, bizarrely.
Winston Churchill's quote, “By God, man, it makes you proud to be British,” was a response to being told that a Tory cabinet minister was caught with a guardsman in the early morning. The exchange went as follows: Chief whip: Tells Churchill that a Tory cabinet minister was caught with a guardsman Churchill: “Do you mean to say that so and so was caught with a guardsman?” Chief whip: “Yes, prime minister” Churchill: “On a park bench?” Chief whip: “Yeah, that's right” Churchill: “In this weather?” Churchill: “By God, man, it makes you proud to be British”
This is not an isolated US problem. It has infected primary and secondary education in Sweden and also especially the Humanities and Social Sciences in Swedish universities.
“Of 800 professors, 200 were Jewish and were expelled from academia of which 20 were Nobel Prize Laureate. The biggest Brian drain in history of Academia.” Let’s not repeat history. Let’s learn from the mistakes of the past.
We must remember just how many foreign students arrive in many universities who would prefer not to struggle with these issues and to please their Minders, and these students bring in the biggest fees. Administrators need to protect these students from challenge above all and maintain the incoming University cashflow..
I very much respect Sir Niall, having reading his books & hearing him speak at London School of Economics. He deserves the title. Seeing him speak now at Oxford about odd things happening in America’s 3 top unis is rather worrying. I wish him best wishes in the success of the uni he is founding.
Incidentally, my husband is a proud Stanford alumnus and we have visited The Farm a few times since and donate to their Breast Cancer Research. So it is rather disappointing that Sir Niall’s Cardinal talk series were prevented from happening. 😢
I am greatly appreciative for this survey of the problems fomented by elite educational institutions and for the incitation to further pondering that it has caused me. Sir Niall Ferguson truly did his homework first! Continuing to think about this topic, I express my gratitude to the Pharos Foundation not only for not disinviting this distinguished thinker, but also for making his speech available to the world. I hope that it will continue to be available for wide consideration. I think that there are two reasons for feeling uncomfortable with a topic: 1) disinterest and unfamiliarity in the subject, and 2) finding that it destroys a cherished prejudice based upon ungrounded assumptions. I perceive great value in quashing both of these conditions in the pursuit of intellectual honesty and greatly oppose disinviting a speaker except in the case that the topic will incite to violence against people and property. I am not in favor of giving podium time to Malcolm X, or to Jerry Rubin, or to Adolf Hitler and the ilk.
Read it (and the other article, Whitewashed Plight of Women, on that substack) on your recommendation. Both were excellent, and shocking, reads! Thanks for the signpost.
Just amazing he started with Germany, proving that it was existential threat to Russians, but rounded it all back to russophobic anti-soviet slogans. He should have a discussion with Andrey Fursov.
Great lecture. I don't believe this analysis is wrong at all but I think there's a missing element. A bit of history that might be important to learn from considering the recent election in the US. The shift of political identity of college professors to liberal dominance, from the early 1980s to the late 1990s, may have a lot to do with the Reagan Revolution that played out during this period. I started college in 1980, I was politically neutral but by the time I graduated, I was what was considered 'far left' back then. It had nothing to do with the influence of professors. For me, turning 'far left' had everything to do with the culture war under Reagan. This was a major change and very negative in many ways. For a bit of perspective, simply supporting gays serving in the military without being hunted down and dishonorably discharged put me on the 'far left.' Bill Clinton saw a major asp whooping during the first midterm election of his presidency, many believe it was because of his support for gays serving in the military. I believe that's true, I followed that election cycle closely. This era defined the tribalism we're experiencing today. We stopped listening to conservatives for good reason. They all sounded like moralizing preachers or Rush Limbaugh. Reagan might have brought about a needed correction against the extremes of the 1960s and 70s, but he also brought about a lot of negativity. Believe it or not, religion played a very minor role in political debate prior to Reagan. Evangelicals found their voice in the 80s and this was a calculated strategy, part of the Southern Strategy that turned the south solid 'red' over time. This was the beginning of identity politics as we know it today in many ways. Now we're dealing with the outcome, tribalism, everyone living in rigid bubbles of confirmation bias. This doesn't excuse Woke extremes and intolerance, but there is a cause and effect. I'm optimistic about the recent election, the Woke really needed to be sent a message, but the religious right is still very much a part of the GOP base and they are feeling very empowered by recent events. Barry Goldwater, 'the father of US conservatism', warned us strongly about this anti-Libertarian marriage of fundamentalist Christianity and the Republican Party over 40 years ago. The Woke of today and the Moral Majority of the Reagan Era are two sides of the same coin. The religious right had the power to cancel people 30 and 40 years ago, just like the Woke of 2020. It's very much like a religious war. Democrats seem to have little self awareness but Republicans may have similar issues as we're seeing with the abortion issue and the Ten Commandments getting placed in public, secular spaces. A minor issue perhaps, but a symbol of what's to come imo. We still may need a viable 3rd party to keep the extremes on both sides in check. It's not that I fear the Christian right, it's that their extremes will continue to empower Woke extremes and vice versa. This culture war needs to end imo, but both sides have little interest in that.
@MarcusAxel-p4r And what is your definition of woke? I find this term is thrown around indiscriminately with everyone who employs it seeming to apply their own definition.
It's easy enough to make sweeping statements and then back them up with "examples" particularly when you're dealing with a literate, bureaucratic society like Germany. Someone somewhere will have said virtually anything you care to look for.
54:24 Excellent method, the proudest moment I've had in a presentation was when the assembled staff requested a presentation about Brexit and were split evenly (with two abstentions) as to which side I'd supported Would be good to see a lecture or presentation on how to achieve this by Sir Niall,
Australian friends are relieved that the delightful Tim is employed by Oxford, as it means he is a long way from Australia. The Australian Labor (sic) Party is almost past recovery from the depredations of his intolerant totalitarian ilk.
An excellent talk by Sir Niall... I'd only like to add that it amuses me that today's young people, most particularly but far from exclusively, students, seem hell-bent on enforcing their 'equity and inclusion' agenda by excluding anyone with a different opinion and whose differences are automatically regarded as socially, morally and intellectually inferior to their own and therefore need to be suppressed rather than discussed. Of course the effect of this is to reinforce their 'equity and inclusion orthodoxy', making it ever more dogmatic and unquestionable. Which is wonderful, I suppose, for students who are too lazy to actually bother debating anyone with a different opinion. It also circumvents any danger of them ever learning anything new. But how equitable and inclusive is that? I think the word 'hypocrisy' is probably totally meaningless to such people. I dread to think about (or look at!) the kind of society they are creating though, and I pity the next couple of generations!
Social media helped the ideology of not arguing. There’s no point of arguing with someone in the comment section or on twitter for many reasons. It’s different though in real life of course but it’s easy to see how some people don’t differentiate
In my magnum opus, “Popular Capitalism”, I prove that the cost of sovereignty for any political economy is the provision of the necessities to the citizenry. Such a provision would liberate the people from dependence upon careers in order to have a survival income.
this is, indeed, an eye-opening historical analysis. But I find myself wondering, how many academics joined the rabble in the assaulat against our US Capitol on January 6, 2021?
Objectivity: scholars and jounalists almost all work for or with capitalist adjacent institutions. It is easy to be anti government in a liberal society. Being anti capitalist will be expensive.
The hope in going to university is that the instructors are at least self-aware, have self control and know what they are talking about. This all seems to have been discarded therefore one may as well talk to children for company.
19:19 these are chilling statistics, meanwhile no one seems to be upset or offended by child pornography in school libraries. Who is choosing what one is allowed to be offended by?
I agree that universities are swinging from one extreme to another, even as they go through some of the best years in their history. This zigzagging journey reflects a search for the right balance, and a new reform is needed. But how should it be achieved? Through the establishment of new conservative universities, replacing university presidents, letting universities decline, or some other approach?
44:11 on the contrary, amid all the shrill speakers and short-attention spans, Joe Rogan’s long-form podcast has attracted a huge following and led the way to a lengthy discussion with the now-new president
I BEG OF YOU ALL: the philosopher, historians and academic intellegencia communities: PLEASE REFRAIN from using the word "confused" when referencing the DELIBERATE and WILLFUL moral positions taken by University Admins, Faculty, and Students. While it is true a great many do not posses even the most basic facts on this conflict, their position nevertheless is a MORAL one, not a historical or otherwise factual one, and therefore you demean THEM, their positions they've willfully decided to take, and the meaning of the word itself. These people may be uninformed but they are NOT CONFUSED!!!
Of course being an academic is no guarantor of moral superiority. Academics have power, and that comes from respect for their qualifications and intelligence. This can and does lead to corruption.
I have been reading both Michel Foucault and Heidegger and Foucault owes a huge debt to Heidegger while Derrida acknowledges his debt to Heidegger. Postmodernism has dominated English Literature departments for decades. You start with the Nazis. Why do you ignore the way the ideology is a left evolution from the reactionary academics of late Weimar Germany?
Invite Heather Cox Richardson to debate yourself or someone like Chris Langan and you'll see liberal vs.a well informed (?) American conservative. There are You Tubes of both. It would be interesting. I believe that media disinformation is largely to blame for the liberals' reluctance to debate (due to the body of "alternate facts").
Niall might have been blowing the dust off his book shelves to re-read Michael Burleigh's books. Which is no bad thing as being a good communicator and possibly applying his own intellect to the Profess-ocracy of pre WW2 Germany needs a wider audience. Unfortunately the actual talk here is not really about academia, the professions and the Nazis and, rather more about "cancellation culture." Worthy but a topic already bashed around in the press. On that note I surprised they did not see the role of media outlets selling advertising clicks that gives the oxygen to this. Will no one ever write a first class thesis on the role of the Fourth Estate, which democracy demands is kept in place, quite right, despite all the wrongs.
The academic achievements are, indeed, not a guarantee of either a humain, responsible moral stance or the responsible humain politics. ... As clearly demonstrated in the speaker, Ferguson's gaslightning, by associating a healthy, natural instinct of a student organisations protesting Israeli 🇮🇱 apartheid state and ongoing genocide, with his piers, the career academics dependent on the imperial state for their few pieces of silver (salaries, etc...) and their rented social standing. Students protesting injustices while oppressive, state (or by rich, zionist donors) professors, calling upon "help" by state-police and state courts... And Ferguson, gaslightning, carefully avoiding talking about the decades old Israeli apartheid and now genocide. Whatta picture.
Great! When Niall Ferguson talks about the earlier education and university movements before Bismarck, i think he means the late 18th early 19th century process where the old German Aristocracy saw that wealth and power would no longer be in land but in industry and merchants. So they on mass sent their kids to German Universities to have civil servants and regulation type training. The universities came to meet this. Maybe the interest of German philosophers in turning to Romanticism of aesthetics and nature eg Hegel, was to link the German enlightenments rationalisms with the Aristocracy's interests and traditions. This I get from various new books on German Romanticism and the University philosophers of 18th and early 19th century. Today i trace a left educational movement from Ivan Illich in the 1950's through Social Justice and now to Michel Serres view that information has replaced factory production and the new basis for the left. This mans to me that the class room and lecture theatre is pulled into the "political". That is education is seen as a source of revolutionary societal change, and so its a front in a political battle and the kids are seen as so many "potential" transmitters and translators of left revolutionary theory and praxis. So far only Serres work on ecology and international environmental politics has be taken up, but i think his work on education and n information will be next. He talks of local movements directed to a totality global emergency. however his work is shift from things objects ontology to relations networks and topologies. since this talk is at Oxford maybe mention the massive influence in Germany in the 1920's was the Oxford philosopher historian Huston Stewart Chamberlain. Wagner's "Betroth(?)" was his place and he was joined by a young Hitler there along with the Mitford Sisters. i think this became the Anglo German cultural exchange program jumped on by the N**I's. Universities were central in this as was von Ribbentrop.
At 13.50 Serres began his work from the context of mathematics. He said he found the idea of an unknown "x" difficult, especially when the "same" unknown "x" appears in many different contexts. This leads him to radically rethink Leibnitz's Universal Logic (the logic of burocracy), such that it is not so much a "given" or absolute or pure form over the world, rather it is contextual and perhaps not immune to material or substantial change, driven by the differential logic. In this Leibnitz context Serres is like Deleuze in "Difference and Repetition", but Serres uses it to criticise Structuralism and the radical separations and specialisations of the academic disciplines. I don't know if Serres was like Deleuze adn Derrida also influenced by Heidegger's identity and difference and his "destruction of Western Metaphysics". Serres reads like the other three as implicitly nor explicitly anti Hegelian. Which would imply for many anti totalitarian and pro freedom and liberty, and so anti N***I and anti Soviet. But i think now the differential tactic for changing apparently fixed forms, axioms, and so on is anti Hegelian when they are challenging the existing State, but they would have to thrown the ladder away somehow when they take over the branches of the State. ie they all have to work with differentials on the way up but universal logic when they get there. Indeed on a long and torturous reading of Hegel the notion of differential change progressing towards form, called sublation. It is the replacement or translation trans-substantiation of limited ethical life and its Categories ( family community as inefficient and unjust or unequal) by science and law to actualise the "social world or Spirit " into unlimited Speculative Reason. its real potentiality. Serres work provides justification for the coordination and synchronisation of the different parts of the State and academia into one or a unity. While the structural problems of post 1980's liberalism might be described as problems of apparently independent parts not being the sum for a whole. or That Sidgwick was right that the high mortgages of metropolitan middle classes each were individual rational but collectively irrational or thought under a compositional fallacy. there was after 2008 Financial Crisis calls for more departmental cooperation and so on, at the same time that academia was having its "interdisciplinary paradigm" eg PhD's in law and psychology for better criminal law outcomes. The risk is that calls for interdisciplinary work , translations and "networking" could mean a drift or direction towards "unity" which now can mean totalitarianism and the abandonment of the separations of powers. Indeed i think the left have switched from their anti Hegelian to their Hegelian moment now by regulations. Good old traditional binary logic has found its new dominion. While all the time they are anti fac*st anti racist anti sexist. We need more old 1930's 1940's German black and white movies, not of white male soldiers and N**I's but films of the professors in their offices, PhDs doing their research, doctors and nurses. problem is its hard to make a good narrative of mass murder out of these boring clips. we are still mesmerised by the white man N**I SS or soldier image, we just can't get our heads around the new archetype of PhDs Doctors and women. I mean if the medical profession are not on your side what can you do?
At 19.00 mins The discussion of data, student's disclosure attitudes experiences beliefs dispositions, etc supports a case for what the left would call a general structural problem trans-institutional problem. I guess its a kind of social-psychometric testing project from the psychology department. the irony is of course its is these kinds of test as well as millions of hours of seminars an with students and millions of student essays that allowed the academics to fine tune their approach shift to praxis and away from knowledge. I was in a seminar once when the tutor pointed out to the female students, that on certain issues then men just shut up. Said "take note". I mean when the left are made aware of such problems by data it jsut means they need a new department with new employed people and of course money to sort it out. For the left treat criticism as data, an excuse for more money and new projects. Like it just gives them more reasons to work harder not reflect. Its might even be taken as a kind of free unsolicited consultation or consultancy. I bet by now 5 days on from Fergusons lecture at Oxford, a whole sub department has been hastily set up to deal with his criticisms. Indeed if Fergusons attempt to forge an anti political, anti praxis, academia were successful they would use it to ban this very talk. A Catch 22 i think.
Note 1. to 19 mins: My point is then that Ferguson's use of statistical methods in social science and psychology as an instrument to argue for falling standards and to show a certain what the left call structural as opposed to intentional sources of difference and origin, could be described as just putting to use good science and method. Some might see this as ironic or turning the tools of the left against the left themselves. Or described as a kind of Kantian or Nietzschean return. Not a return just due to an appeal that the return is jsut justice at work demanding now the lefts "bad guys" white men" are victims of a left system intended as regulatory correction for equality, has a gone too far and so the unknow x white man is now in the victims place. Justice as dynamic equilibrium correction. an endless revolution under universal logics inequality structural audit. The problem is though, that surly if you avail yourself of the methods of the social psychological sciences, you will be inadvertently perhaps bring your own subject and all subjects into the whole world view of those sciences. For example structural sciences do not really consider individual intention agency responsibility as internally coherent to the model. indeed in many ways the model has to treat people as tokens of mass phenomena. Not just because the questionnaires are anonymous, but because the structural model only treats of properties or descriptions in the structures mathematical axiom symmetries. The audit deals with entries contain anonymous legs arms heights and weights. in contrast to a person by acquaintance, filling in the questionnaire, which is a meaning and use of "reference and name" not permitted in the audit. For Russell the idea of a definite description list would do this job, but we can say there is a distinction between me being acquainted with two people who "have" the same name, and two people "sharing" the same name in a audit. This though is the long problem of unity of the object and relations of properties. (Leibnitz, Hume, Kant, Frege, Husserl) there are metaphysical and ontological /relational small print covert commitments when one uses scientific structuralism. The other point that Fergusons speech act here at Oxford in trying to claim that others are political or ideological in there teaching, is himself making or doing a politicised or ideological move. The move or aim then would be a kind of performative contradiction, to assert "no politics in class" is its self a politicised assertion. The Dean of the school regulates all teachers who do not regulate themselves. In terms of time and process though we could say Ferguson avails himself "now", of the methods of scientific socialism, even though "later" his own technique or function, will be found itself to have been a political function. here then above, is a way of thinking Serre's distinction between structure and function, universal verses procedural, binary verses algorithm. for the left what matters is aim and outcome: pragmatic sublation. The contradictions and returns are just part of the job, to be dealt with if the contradictions are intuited by others later. i suppose the question is whether the inherent contradictory aspect of these anti social justice acts area problem for liberal individual responsibility or is that end set determined too. But then the procedure would not be anti social justice but just more social justice in reflective regulatory self correction revolution. The Geech use/mention distinction is not recognised by the left. indeed in years working critically with the left in the 2000's, the only time any of my interlocuters did a "freak out ", was when i refused to give them a, or my, definition of racism. i said use/mention precedes it. Oddly they were not a philosopher.
Note 2: another point would be that in social justice in universities it is regulatory structures that pre determine institutional action of “correction”. Even though those in HR departments arrived their though functional algorithmic methods, now in office, the “white man” is structurally absent, from positive rights at least, or even the enemy original or enemy outsiders. Their universal logic might prohibit and resit you in any attempts to make and entry and change the rules: or they will invite you in but on a pre-set card of “white man rights” and equalities. From a global perspective given the ethnic wealth distributions across the world, the poor white Anglo European American white man will be at the back of the cue, and it will also be a tactic covert commitment to the whole social justice world view. You will all be under the Social justice universal even in determining and limiting activities by combination and incrementally. (I worked on Leibnitz and later Serres various original texts in postgraduate seminars in the late 2000’s. I can’t find that material now and so I am going from “Michel Serres: Figures of Thought” Christopher Watkin 2020. I later found that my own methods were simerlar to Serres. I referenced Kant in this; e.g. Kant’s work has to viewed as whole like a cosmology not a list or linear narrative. and Wilfred Sellars “Philosophy is about how things in the most general sense, hang together in the most general sense. I also used from A Level Religion and Ethics the idea of synoptic connections of the different subject areas, or the idea of a system in Habermas from the Boghossain/Benjamin debate on TH-cam. I also was already using some of Serres images like the Harlequin Periot (I got this from David Bowie Space Oddity and Ashes to Ashes). I also used the search for the North West Passage, and many other that Serres uses. My interest in models came well before philosophy when I studied physics and noticed the same mathematical structures appeared in many diverse areas of physics such as radioactive decay, biological growth, cooling of hot objects, and the statistical outcome of tossing a coin and rolling two dice with a function to remove and coins from chess board over time till a dynamic equilibrium occurs. Also the existence and repetition of the constant pie in physics formulae for laws especial when the phenomena is audited as field or group. Now, my interest though is between the sciences and law and the human agent, especially there pre modelling of the human in their sciences. I got this from working on Galileo’s inclined plane experiment and virtue and vice. That is he used his pulse to measure time. This was part of a long series on medieval impetus, Galileo, Descartes, Leibnitz on inertia and Kant’s time relational view of the Categories as functions. This is shown to be loosely isomorphic with Group theory in mathematics, symmetries and relational axioms: eg Serres calls modern mathematics. In Kant it is actively maintaining a permanence of the object in time. Later this can be expressive of a wide scope (the image of the whole cosmos) via legal rights and movements in international law eg as a model of retention of covariance and contra variance between geographical locals of movement. I can maintain a invariant relation here, whereas ironically the lefts flat structure atlas prohibits such global invariance both by Plato race and gender concepts in law and by the absence of any recourse to the natural object as unaffected by change in context and relations. Unlike Serres then I focused on St Paul’s discussion in the New Testament on life and death and the body, and the idea of an horizon as a limit to reach of law and obligation e.g. the loss of the Marionette ship in 19th century. Much of this grew from discussions over xmas and new year with the left on TH-cam: Owen Jones and Novara Media. There was a documentary on the outlaws: Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, which emphasised the arrival of telegraph communications and marking the end of that era of crime.
On interdisciplinary work i was struck by a book on education from the 1980's, where for the first time, an educational researcher had actually shadowed a secondary student for two weeks i think. the endless: i hour maths, i hour English, one hour games, one hour French, one hour physics.... and repeat. My focus was on the limits of measurement in physics (from photomultiplier scintillations' detection and the similarities with human senses.eg sound energy frequency, amplifier response to frequency, and human experience of loudness. Also a cut short discussion of Gotha's theory of colour as difference boundary, light and shadow verses Newton. Jorden Peterson did some stuff on this in a interview with a physicist. then there is Hawking's uptake of information theory in physics in early 1990's in lecture to financial traders who were former physicists. At hat time many physicist went into the stoke exchange, later the background was more from chemistry.
Where are academics like David Irving? Right wingers preach anti racism & Left wingers preach anti racism, so basically if you live in the real world & want to keep your nation you're a bad person. This is all so tiresome.
Keep your nation from what? Corporate oligarchs question people who demonize immigrants as the problem and trans folks as the problem? Keep our nation from what?
According to George Carlin, when you consider the average stupid person, realize that half of them are even more stupid than he is. (The presentation could do with some balance.)
Intelligence is no guarantor of morality. It just makes the evil harder to spot because it's so well camouflaged.
Heresy is the problem. It is the result of ignorance or malice.
Yes and no. Intelligence enhances the capacity to understand the scope of one's actions' results. Most people do not intend to do bad, but they don't see the consequences of what they are doing or do consider them negligible. However in the case of Germany, this played out for the negative. Intellectuals used their intellectual capacity to follow up on and implement the very flawed hegemonic morals of their times and peer group, without questioning these morals that were open to critique given their krass contradictions. This can't be considered nothing else but cowardice, intellectual laziness and something we call in German Fachidiotentum (the inclination of not looking beyond the borders of your (sub)discipline)
@aaron.aaron.v.b.9448 I agree. All cowardice is essentially moral cowardice. Either through lack of belief, or lack of will to oppose the prevailing political narrative. Going along with things that in your heart you know to be wrong is the laziness part.
Although it's understandable within the context of early 20thC Germany. Most of the dissenters didn't survive.
The room for dissent was relatively big in Germany, especially before the war. There was no need to actively embrace the Nazi ideology. As long as you did not actively worked for toppling the regime, you got through with something. With intellectual laziness, however, I mean rather not thinking about the implications of what you know, like stopping thinking when you reached a convenient point and not testing your convictions against what you learned, again and again - the way curious and intellectual honest people should do. The Nazi ideology worked of course against this - contrasting "heart felt" believes with the "cold" intellect.
I believe there are two forms of intelligence that I will name scientific intelligence and rhetorical intelligence.
Scientific Intelligence believes truth exists and will appear because it naturally resists critical analysis. Its focus is on reality objectively observed.
Rhetorical intelligence is the art of being able to defend any cause and make it appear as the truth. Its focus is on subjective perception and emotions.
An indicator of the social evolution between both forms is the shift from scientific and engineering education towards Law, Business and Humanities.
Think how much could be saved by sacking all those HR loons....
Our universities are nihilistic cess pools. It’s grim.
@@brianbennett9478
Real estate
$ ∅ © Ï∆ £
RE Engineering lacking developed redundant civilized traditional social support network.
Death, destruction and construction.
∆$ § € ‡
Appreciation Caste
(AKA ∅.001%) & CO ££¢ ÏNC
Wild
WILD
W € $ ‡
Webbing.
Sticky.
Permanently.
AND
nobody else, really.
NOT!
@brianbennett9478 Couldn't have said it better myself!
They can't see thier fascist ideals
may be in the US, UK and France....not in Japan and Germany...
You speak having never been to one I presume.
The US is very lucky to have people like Niall Ferguson immigrate and become citizens.
He is waking up American academics and warning of the loss of its precise purpose. 😢
Yes, he can sell the lie that the Zionist state despite having broken just about every single humanitarian law against the Palestinian are victims
Oh, Sir Niall Ferguson should take a looksie at modern New Zealand universities - you cannot secure employment unless you agree to the "principles of [1840] Treaty of Waitangi."
('Principles" that remain undefined to this day, meaning they can be changed whenever the political agencies decide.)
Or Gender Studies with their tax payer funded war on the Patriarchy which is another name for society in general.
Law schools have also come under this spell.
In Canada you have to be committed to decolonization. Does that mean teaching people how to be a 1700's indigenous warrior and survivalist? No it just means trying to implement communism and obliterate anything that might be in it's way. (Which as it turns out is reality, human life and flourishing itself. )
@@BenWeeks-ca The ownership group is still fully committed to colonization.
Very true
I often tell young people that when I was their age--in the 1960s--the biggest putdown you heard was being 'uptight'. As in, 'Hey, don't be so uptight, Man.' Today, being uptight is considered a virtue.
As the pendulum swings!
I agree. 'Hippies use the side door' was a mark of pride back in the day. Young people today would see it as persecution and seek therapy.
Right. Being offended is now considered intellectual! I am so sick of it.
@@MarcusAxel-p4rthey were lucky to even be allowed in through any door at all
Very good & true observation.
No one is perfect, but I love your challenge to examine our values and too easy orientations.
Niall on 🔥🔥🔥🔥 as always. Best historian alive today. Shameful what Harvard has done.
Not taking anything away from Niall, but even he would admit that Stephen Kotkin is better. Kotkin also did it coming from a working class neighborhood in New York City.
He's alright, but as Christopher Hitchens used to say... Ferguson often has difficulty locating one's G-spot (which may account for the choice of his second wife)...
I'd say he's spent too much time around other pampered academic types, which is why VDH generally has a far better grasp of conditions on the ground.
It wasn't that long ago that Ferguson was lecturing western nations on their need to accept as many illegal immigrants as possible (because such people are apparently hard working, law abiding and willing to integrate etc etc).
Oh, and he's also an advocate of this 'Islam-ism' nonsense!
Stephen Kotkin is much better.
Shame on Harvard. They lacked the wisdom of neutrality.
@@benjamin4894How does he reconcile academic freedom with islam-ism. There's a blatant contradiction there. I expected him to be smarter than that. Does he want his daughters to have their dress code islamised? Or not attend university?
Yuri Bezmenov is watching from the skies saying; I warned you in 1984 !
That guy was the dictionary definition of a shill
Let this past history have us guard against accepting what the elites say without evidence and documentation.
Elites like billionaires? Or elites like people who have studied something and made their whole careers, elites? Like philosophers for instance?
SIR Niall Ferguson is a HERO of our AGE...
... Reviving THE AGE OF REASON... dismantling POSTMODERNISM one ideologue at a time...
Talking about history while ignoring present day
@@gmw3083 You don't get it do you. Hope you're under twenty five years of age!
@@Tia-Louisa I'm over twice that age. I guess you'll have to explain 'it' to me. 👍for liking your own comment. .
@@Tia-Louisa No explanation? Mine is that Niall purposely avoids the obvious comparisons between the original notzees and the modern ukro&zyo varieties.
Free speech at University is much different than free speech in a workplace. Debate is non existent. Workplaces have gotten filled with people who mistake free speech with hate behavior. Derision. People are extremely derisive and hateful today. Being an adult and treated like you are 5 and also being told you are stupid. Personal attacks on your own intellect.
Low emotional control and threats of violence by managers. Workplaces have just become strange.
Read Hitler's description of his personal experience in Mein Kampf, uncanny parallel to today's world.
@@LibertyScott-x6i Yes I agree.
But Free Speech at the academic level, trickles down to workplaces etc.
Eventually permeating all levels of society. That is why, it is so important to make our institutions Great again.
Yup, and I noticed that became a daily thing in 2016. I don’t recognize this country any more.
The doctrine of free speech is NOT about permission to lie and misinform.
The Democrat Party is deviant in every domain of governance.
I am a child of former enemy nations. I am politically active but it is no longer in the traditionally hard left sphere.
I research both sides from primary sources. It is why I am on the internet.
If we consider ourselves academics or even well educated, now is the time to do our own research.
Exellent talk! Thank you so very much!!!❤
Came to learn about German universities in the 1920s and video went off on an discussion of American universities
That's Good Ol' Empire Niall for you.
If you have a brain you should be able to see that they are related
@@annetteschneider2301 100%. They obviously don't have a brain.
As a Brit, Ferguson should perhaps talk about the horrible devastations the British Empire had causes over centuries.
@@Celtic2Realms That was Ferg’s ‘hook’ to get you to endure his witless whingeings about being so soundly rejected by the Ivy Leaguers, who don’t give a damn about any ‘woke’ causes. They just want the big money and to get rid of obnoxious egotists who are mere annoyances. He’s perpetually bitter about all the ‘unfair’ treatment he’s endured, and sour over the fact that he had to decamp to the wastes of Texas to found his dream lyceum. (Shades of Trump U…?) The chief difference between the German universities of the Nazi era and the US ones of today is the mass corporatization of them by private and corporate funding. So, instead of aiming his watery venom at the right people, he assigns the problem to a few transient officials and some rebel professors. Of course, the corporates are unassailable, even by a giant gnat such as Ferg.
Thank you, Sir. We need to be reminded again and again. People seem not to remember history - or don't want to.
And close our eyes to the reality of now....
The old saw about those who cannot remember history are condemned to repeat it has a parallel: Those who can remember history are condemned to stand powerlessly by while others repeat it. In other words, we are a curious animal and we seem determined to repeat the same old mistakes in the name building the same old utopias.....no matter what.
Here’s what happens: academics are weak, frightened, and as greedy as the general population. Allowing them to have an important role in policy is an error.
Perhaps the ones you listen to are weak etc. but that's on you. You can't expose yourself to even 0.01% of available academics. So pick ones you approve of. Btw you are as weak frightened and greedy as the population you are a part of.
Administrators look after the needs and capabilities of foreign students above all. They bring in so much cash.... and must have their safe spaces.
Wisdom is more important than intelligence
100%. Wisdom saves our lives, intelligence doesn't, the poor Michael Mosley proved that with his tragic passing.
Be sure to get understanding with that wisdom.
@@richardyates7280 True. But it's rarer than rocking-horse poop at the moment. Wisdom seems to be the thing that's been sacrificed on the altar of knowledge, bizarrely.
hi, I am reminded of the story "Forrest Gump". Intelligence 80, but life decisions pure wisdom.
Thank you Thank you Thank you - a warning/wake up for ALL
My favorite historian since 2009. Great storyteller and always right!
Is such a pleasure listening to Sir Ferguson, he is a jewel.
Thank you for sharing this
Niall gives me a rare opportunity to feel proud to be British
Wonderful man
He's Scot, he's not one of yours but by very weak political association.
Winston Churchill's quote, “By God, man, it makes you proud to be British,” was a response to being told that a Tory cabinet minister was caught with a guardsman in the early morning. The exchange went as follows:
Chief whip: Tells Churchill that a Tory cabinet minister was caught with a guardsman
Churchill: “Do you mean to say that so and so was caught with a guardsman?”
Chief whip: “Yes, prime minister”
Churchill: “On a park bench?”
Chief whip: “Yeah, that's right”
Churchill: “In this weather?”
Churchill: “By God, man, it makes you proud to be British”
@@johnsmith1474he’s British then. And he’s not a Scot Nat separatist. He’s one of ours.
Particularly relevant considering this week's events in the U.S....
Trump isn't the one who created a racial caste system in the us, democrats did. Trump literally only cares about legal US citizenship.
Oh grow up. 🤡
This is not an isolated US problem. It has infected primary and secondary education in Sweden and also especially the Humanities and Social Sciences in Swedish universities.
And from there it breaks out into the world
A brilliant lecture by Mr Ferguson. Thank-you.
I think we have speech instead of certain actions. If you take away my speech, Im only left with actions.
The factor that is being missed here is that there is a captive audience who is heavily motivated to please the professor.
.
“Of 800 professors, 200 were Jewish and were expelled from academia of which 20 were Nobel Prize Laureate. The biggest Brian drain in history of Academia.” Let’s not repeat history. Let’s learn from the mistakes of the past.
Education does NOT equal, or guarantee, intelligence.
From South Africa - thank you for sharing this lecture
Fascinating speech Miall!!! Not only did I love ❤️ it but I learned quite a bit
When was this recorded? Was it some time ago?
We must remember just how many foreign students arrive in many universities who would prefer not to struggle with these issues and to please their Minders, and these students bring in the biggest fees. Administrators need to protect these students from challenge above all and maintain the incoming University cashflow..
Excellent discussion. Thank you so much.
I very much respect Sir Niall, having reading his books & hearing him speak at London School of Economics. He deserves the title. Seeing him speak now at Oxford about odd things happening in America’s 3 top unis is rather worrying. I wish him best wishes in the success of the uni he is founding.
Incidentally, my husband is a proud Stanford alumnus and we have visited The Farm a few times since and donate to their Breast Cancer Research. So it is rather disappointing that Sir Niall’s Cardinal talk series were prevented from happening. 😢
Well, this should be unpopular.. Most of what Niall said will go straight over the top of most peoples head. That includes most students.
I suppose that supposition should be included in the main points of his lecture.
Honourable Sir Ferguson, this is what is has been happening in Canada and is being cultivated at the highest possible speed and level. HORRIBLE!!!!
Sir Niall Ferguson would know!
I am greatly appreciative for this survey of the problems fomented by elite educational institutions and for the incitation to further pondering that it has caused me. Sir Niall Ferguson truly did his homework first! Continuing to think about this topic, I express my gratitude to the Pharos Foundation not only for not disinviting this distinguished thinker, but also for making his speech available to the world. I hope that it will continue to be available for wide consideration. I think that there are two reasons for feeling uncomfortable with a topic: 1) disinterest and unfamiliarity in the subject, and 2) finding that it destroys a cherished prejudice based upon ungrounded assumptions. I perceive great value in quashing both of these conditions in the pursuit of intellectual honesty and greatly oppose disinviting a speaker except in the case that the topic will incite to violence against people and property. I am not in favor of giving podium time to Malcolm X, or to Jerry Rubin, or to Adolf Hitler and the ilk.
Worth reading the substack: “Red Flags and the Manufacture of Australian History” to get an idea of the ideological capture of Universities there…
Read it (and the other article, Whitewashed Plight of Women, on that substack) on your recommendation. Both were excellent, and shocking, reads! Thanks for the signpost.
History doesnt teach, it makes note. Its up to society to shine a light on the whole note.
German academy went from first to extinct in these years, so far never to recover.
When I was studying in a university in 1990-92, Heidegger was all the rage.
Just amazing he started with Germany, proving that it was existential threat to Russians, but rounded it all back to russophobic anti-soviet slogans. He should have a discussion with Andrey Fursov.
“There lies madness.” Oh terrific! let’s go there!
Great lecture. I don't believe this analysis is wrong at all but I think there's a missing element. A bit of history that might be important to learn from considering the recent election in the US. The shift of political identity of college professors to liberal dominance, from the early 1980s to the late 1990s, may have a lot to do with the Reagan Revolution that played out during this period.
I started college in 1980, I was politically neutral but by the time I graduated, I was what was considered 'far left' back then. It had nothing to do with the influence of professors. For me, turning 'far left' had everything to do with the culture war under Reagan. This was a major change and very negative in many ways. For a bit of perspective, simply supporting gays serving in the military without being hunted down and dishonorably discharged put me on the 'far left.' Bill Clinton saw a major asp whooping during the first midterm election of his presidency, many believe it was because of his support for gays serving in the military. I believe that's true, I followed that election cycle closely.
This era defined the tribalism we're experiencing today. We stopped listening to conservatives for good reason. They all sounded like moralizing preachers or Rush Limbaugh. Reagan might have brought about a needed correction against the extremes of the 1960s and 70s, but he also brought about a lot of negativity. Believe it or not, religion played a very minor role in political debate prior to Reagan. Evangelicals found their voice in the 80s and this was a calculated strategy, part of the Southern Strategy that turned the south solid 'red' over time. This was the beginning of identity politics as we know it today in many ways. Now we're dealing with the outcome, tribalism, everyone living in rigid bubbles of confirmation bias. This doesn't excuse Woke extremes and intolerance, but there is a cause and effect. I'm optimistic about the recent election, the Woke really needed to be sent a message, but the religious right is still very much a part of the GOP base and they are feeling very empowered by recent events.
Barry Goldwater, 'the father of US conservatism', warned us strongly about this anti-Libertarian marriage of fundamentalist Christianity and the Republican Party over 40 years ago. The Woke of today and the Moral Majority of the Reagan Era are two sides of the same coin. The religious right had the power to cancel people 30 and 40 years ago, just like the Woke of 2020. It's very much like a religious war. Democrats seem to have little self awareness but Republicans may have similar issues as we're seeing with the abortion issue and the Ten Commandments getting placed in public, secular spaces. A minor issue perhaps, but a symbol of what's to come imo. We still may need a viable 3rd party to keep the extremes on both sides in check.
It's not that I fear the Christian right, it's that their extremes will continue to empower Woke extremes and vice versa. This culture war needs to end imo, but both sides have little interest in that.
@MarcusAxel-p4r And what is your definition of woke? I find this term is thrown around indiscriminately with everyone who employs it seeming to apply their own definition.
It's easy enough to make sweeping statements and then back them up with "examples" particularly when you're dealing with a literate, bureaucratic society like Germany. Someone somewhere will have said virtually anything you care to look for.
Hmm. 5 minutes about Germany in the 30s then an hour of America today.
not true.
Liberals are not liberal anymore. Used to call me classic liberal, now I call me a conservative.
54:24 Excellent method, the proudest moment I've had in a presentation was when the assembled staff requested a presentation about Brexit and were split evenly (with two abstentions) as to which side I'd supported
Would be good to see a lecture or presentation on how to achieve this by Sir Niall,
What a wonderfull video - well spoken mr. Ferguson!
Subscribe. This is an important channel.
49:10 “I think I’ve become bilingual in Woke”
In other words, 1984’s doublespeak
Australian friends are relieved that the delightful Tim is employed by Oxford, as it means he is a long way from Australia. The Australian Labor (sic) Party is almost past recovery from the depredations of his intolerant totalitarian ilk.
An excellent talk by Sir Niall... I'd only like to add that it amuses me that today's young people, most particularly but far from exclusively, students, seem hell-bent on enforcing their 'equity and inclusion' agenda by excluding anyone with a different opinion and whose differences are automatically regarded as socially, morally and intellectually inferior to their own and therefore need to be suppressed rather than discussed. Of course the effect of this is to reinforce their 'equity and inclusion orthodoxy', making it ever more dogmatic and unquestionable. Which is wonderful, I suppose, for students who are too lazy to actually bother debating anyone with a different opinion. It also circumvents any danger of them ever learning anything new. But how equitable and inclusive is that? I think the word 'hypocrisy' is probably totally meaningless to such people. I dread to think about (or look at!) the kind of society they are creating though, and I pity the next couple of generations!
So your condemnations of "liberal students" is impartial. objective scholarship and not political activism?
We see this exact same dynamic being played out in various religious organizations all the time
95% of people are cowards.
Do we get a bit of the Glaswegian accent here or is he too far South?. Can anyone point me to where he may channel his inner Scot the most?
Social media helped the ideology of not arguing. There’s no point of arguing with someone in the comment section or on twitter for many reasons. It’s different though in real life of course but it’s easy to see how some people don’t differentiate
51:40 the penny drop indeed…
In my magnum opus, “Popular Capitalism”, I prove that the cost of sovereignty for any political economy is the provision of the necessities to the citizenry. Such a provision would liberate the people from dependence upon careers in order to have a survival income.
this is, indeed, an eye-opening historical analysis. But I find myself wondering, how many academics joined the rabble in the assaulat against our US Capitol on January 6, 2021?
Time to defund the Kommies
Why does it seem to be that upholders of ‘Objectivity’ nearly always seem to be supporters of maintaining the deeper structures of unjust societies?
Objectivity: scholars and jounalists almost all work for or with capitalist adjacent institutions. It is easy to be anti government in a liberal society. Being anti capitalist will be expensive.
26:40 A summons from the chief inquisitor is the time you say your goodbyes to your loved ones 😂. But of course, this is no laughing matter 🤨
Too much education rots the brain. I'm glad my formal education ended at 15.
14:55 Especially when you add to running being under the influence of various drugs and resisting arrest, among other things...
Until the late 1950's most all chemical engineering books were in German.
The hope in going to university is that the instructors are at least self-aware, have self control and know what they are talking about. This all seems to have been discarded therefore one may as well talk to children for company.
Thanks
19:19 these are chilling statistics, meanwhile no one seems to be upset or offended by child pornography in school libraries. Who is choosing what one is allowed to be offended by?
I agree that universities are swinging from one extreme to another, even as they go through some of the best years in their history. This zigzagging journey reflects a search for the right balance, and a new reform is needed. But how should it be achieved? Through the establishment of new conservative universities, replacing university presidents, letting universities decline, or some other approach?
Defund public education.
“Trust the Experts”
Quite so.
All wind, no storm
That's physics not ethics.
44:11 on the contrary, amid all the shrill speakers and short-attention spans, Joe Rogan’s long-form podcast has attracted a huge following and led the way to a lengthy discussion with the now-new president
Charles Murrey is decent, measured and open minded.
Wonderful lecture. Congratulstion and thank you ror share your ideas.
I BEG OF YOU ALL: the philosopher, historians and academic intellegencia communities: PLEASE REFRAIN from using the word "confused" when referencing the DELIBERATE and WILLFUL moral positions taken by University Admins, Faculty, and Students. While it is true a great many do not posses even the most basic facts on this conflict, their position nevertheless is a MORAL one, not a historical or otherwise factual one, and therefore you demean THEM, their positions they've willfully decided to take, and the meaning of the word itself. These people may be uninformed but they are NOT CONFUSED!!!
Groupthink. It's possible to think Nazism was a liberal movement.
Genesis 8:21 applies to ALL human beings.
Wait, he's married with hirsi ali? Lucky dude!
And the American universities too.
Intelligence, like limitless wealth with ill intent is VERY dangerous indeed.
Of course being an academic is no guarantor of moral superiority. Academics have power, and that comes from respect for their qualifications and intelligence. This can and does lead to corruption.
some hope. great analysis.
I have been reading both Michel Foucault and Heidegger and Foucault owes a huge debt to Heidegger while Derrida acknowledges his debt to Heidegger. Postmodernism has dominated English Literature departments for decades. You start with the Nazis. Why do you ignore the way the ideology is a left evolution from the reactionary academics of late Weimar Germany?
Invite Heather Cox Richardson to debate yourself or someone like Chris Langan and you'll see liberal vs.a well informed (?) American conservative. There are You Tubes of both. It would be interesting. I believe that media disinformation is largely to blame for the liberals' reluctance to debate (due to the body of "alternate facts").
Niall might have been blowing the dust off his book shelves to re-read Michael Burleigh's books. Which is no bad thing as being a good communicator and possibly applying his own intellect to the Profess-ocracy of pre WW2 Germany needs a wider audience. Unfortunately the actual talk here is not really about academia, the professions and the Nazis and, rather more about "cancellation culture." Worthy but a topic already bashed around in the press. On that note I surprised they did not see the role of media outlets selling advertising clicks that gives the oxygen to this. Will no one ever write a first class thesis on the role of the Fourth Estate, which democracy demands is kept in place, quite right, despite all the wrongs.
The academic achievements are, indeed, not a guarantee of either a humain, responsible moral stance or the responsible humain politics.
... As clearly demonstrated in the speaker, Ferguson's gaslightning, by associating a healthy, natural instinct of a student organisations protesting Israeli 🇮🇱 apartheid state and ongoing genocide, with his piers, the career academics dependent on the imperial state for their few pieces of silver (salaries, etc...) and their rented social standing.
Students protesting injustices while oppressive, state (or by rich, zionist donors) professors, calling upon "help" by state-police and state courts...
And Ferguson, gaslightning, carefully avoiding talking about the decades old Israeli apartheid and now genocide.
Whatta picture.
❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤❤HONEST, ACCURATE, BRAVE.
Great! When Niall Ferguson talks about the earlier education and university movements before Bismarck, i think he means the late 18th early 19th century process where the old German Aristocracy saw that wealth and power would no longer be in land but in industry and merchants. So they on mass sent their kids to German Universities to have civil servants and regulation type training. The universities came to meet this. Maybe the interest of German philosophers in turning to Romanticism of aesthetics and nature eg Hegel, was to link the German enlightenments rationalisms with the Aristocracy's interests and traditions. This I get from various new books on German Romanticism and the University philosophers of 18th and early 19th century.
Today i trace a left educational movement from Ivan Illich in the 1950's through Social Justice and now to Michel Serres view that information has replaced factory production and the new basis for the left. This mans to me that the class room and lecture theatre is pulled into the "political". That is education is seen as a source of revolutionary societal change, and so its a front in a political battle and the kids are seen as so many "potential" transmitters and translators of left revolutionary theory and praxis.
So far only Serres work on ecology and international environmental politics has be taken up, but i think his work on education and n information will be next. He talks of local movements directed to a totality global emergency. however his work is shift from things objects ontology to relations networks and topologies.
since this talk is at Oxford maybe mention the massive influence in Germany in the 1920's was the Oxford philosopher historian Huston Stewart Chamberlain. Wagner's "Betroth(?)" was his place and he was joined by a young Hitler there along with the Mitford Sisters. i think this became the Anglo German cultural exchange program jumped on by the N**I's. Universities were central in this as was von Ribbentrop.
At 13.50 Serres began his work from the context of mathematics. He said he found the idea of an unknown "x" difficult, especially when the "same" unknown "x" appears in many different contexts. This leads him to radically rethink Leibnitz's Universal Logic (the logic of burocracy), such that it is not so much a "given" or absolute or pure form over the world, rather it is contextual and perhaps not immune to material or substantial change, driven by the differential logic. In this Leibnitz context Serres is like Deleuze in "Difference and Repetition", but Serres uses it to criticise Structuralism and the radical separations and specialisations of the academic disciplines. I don't know if Serres was like Deleuze adn Derrida also influenced by Heidegger's identity and difference and his "destruction of Western Metaphysics". Serres reads like the other three as implicitly nor explicitly anti Hegelian. Which would imply for many anti totalitarian and pro freedom and liberty, and so anti N***I and anti Soviet. But i think now the differential tactic for changing apparently fixed forms, axioms, and so on is anti Hegelian when they are challenging the existing State, but they would have to thrown the ladder away somehow when they take over the branches of the State. ie they all have to work with differentials on the way up but universal logic when they get there. Indeed on a long and torturous reading of Hegel the notion of differential change progressing towards form, called sublation. It is the replacement or translation trans-substantiation of limited ethical life and its Categories ( family community as inefficient and unjust or unequal) by science and law to actualise the "social world or Spirit " into unlimited Speculative Reason. its real potentiality.
Serres work provides justification for the coordination and synchronisation of the different parts of the State and academia into one or a unity. While the structural problems of post 1980's liberalism might be described as problems of apparently independent parts not being the sum for a whole. or That Sidgwick was right that the high mortgages of metropolitan middle classes each were individual rational but collectively irrational or thought under a compositional fallacy. there was after 2008 Financial Crisis calls for more departmental cooperation and so on, at the same time that academia was having its "interdisciplinary paradigm" eg PhD's in law and psychology for better criminal law outcomes. The risk is that calls for interdisciplinary work , translations and "networking" could mean a drift or direction towards "unity" which now can mean totalitarianism and the abandonment of the separations of powers. Indeed i think the left have switched from their anti Hegelian to their Hegelian moment now by regulations. Good old traditional binary logic has found its new dominion. While all the time they are anti fac*st anti racist anti sexist.
We need more old 1930's 1940's German black and white movies, not of white male soldiers and N**I's but films of the professors in their offices, PhDs doing their research, doctors and nurses. problem is its hard to make a good narrative of mass murder out of these boring clips. we are still mesmerised by the white man N**I SS or soldier image, we just can't get our heads around the new archetype of PhDs Doctors and women. I mean if the medical profession are not on your side what can you do?
At 19.00 mins The discussion of data, student's disclosure attitudes experiences beliefs dispositions, etc supports a case for what the left would call a general structural problem trans-institutional problem. I guess its a kind of social-psychometric testing project from the psychology department. the irony is of course its is these kinds of test as well as millions of hours of seminars an with students and millions of student essays that allowed the academics to fine tune their approach shift to praxis and away from knowledge. I was in a seminar once when the tutor pointed out to the female students, that on certain issues then men just shut up. Said "take note".
I mean when the left are made aware of such problems by data it jsut means they need a new department with new employed people and of course money to sort it out. For the left treat criticism as data, an excuse for more money and new projects. Like it just gives them more reasons to work harder not reflect. Its might even be taken as a kind of free unsolicited consultation or consultancy. I bet by now 5 days on from Fergusons lecture at Oxford, a whole sub department has been hastily set up to deal with his criticisms.
Indeed if Fergusons attempt to forge an anti political, anti praxis, academia were successful they would use it to ban this very talk. A Catch 22 i think.
Note 1. to 19 mins: My point is then that Ferguson's use of statistical methods in social science and psychology as an instrument to argue for falling standards and to show a certain what the left call structural as opposed to intentional sources of difference and origin, could be described as just putting to use good science and method. Some might see this as ironic or turning the tools of the left against the left themselves. Or described as a kind of Kantian or Nietzschean return. Not a return just due to an appeal that the return is jsut justice at work demanding now the lefts "bad guys" white men" are victims of a left system intended as regulatory correction for equality, has a gone too far and so the unknow x white man is now in the victims place. Justice as dynamic equilibrium correction. an endless revolution under universal logics inequality structural audit.
The problem is though, that surly if you avail yourself of the methods of the social psychological sciences, you will be inadvertently perhaps bring your own subject and all subjects into the whole world view of those sciences. For example structural sciences do not really consider individual intention agency responsibility as internally coherent to the model. indeed in many ways the model has to treat people as tokens of mass phenomena. Not just because the questionnaires are anonymous, but because the structural model only treats of properties or descriptions in the structures mathematical axiom symmetries. The audit deals with entries contain anonymous legs arms heights and weights. in contrast to a person by acquaintance, filling in the questionnaire, which is a meaning and use of "reference and name" not permitted in the audit. For Russell the idea of a definite description list would do this job, but we can say there is a distinction between me being acquainted with two people who "have" the same name, and two people "sharing" the same name in a audit. This though is the long problem of unity of the object and relations of properties. (Leibnitz, Hume, Kant, Frege, Husserl) there are metaphysical and ontological /relational small print covert commitments when one uses scientific structuralism.
The other point that Fergusons speech act here at Oxford in trying to claim that others are political or ideological in there teaching, is himself making or doing a politicised or ideological move. The move or aim then would be a kind of performative contradiction, to assert "no politics in class" is its self a politicised assertion. The Dean of the school regulates all teachers who do not regulate themselves. In terms of time and process though we could say Ferguson avails himself "now", of the methods of scientific socialism, even though "later" his own technique or function, will be found itself to have been a political function. here then above, is a way of thinking Serre's distinction between structure and function, universal verses procedural, binary verses algorithm. for the left what matters is aim and outcome: pragmatic sublation. The contradictions and returns are just part of the job, to be dealt with if the contradictions are intuited by others later. i suppose the question is whether the inherent contradictory aspect of these anti social justice acts area problem for liberal individual responsibility or is that end set determined too. But then the procedure would not be anti social justice but just more social justice in reflective regulatory self correction revolution. The Geech use/mention distinction is not recognised by the left. indeed in years working critically with the left in the 2000's, the only time any of my interlocuters did a "freak out ", was when i refused to give them a, or my, definition of racism. i said use/mention precedes it. Oddly they were not a philosopher.
Note 2: another point would be that in social justice in universities it is regulatory structures that pre determine institutional action of “correction”. Even though those in HR departments arrived their though functional algorithmic methods, now in office, the “white man” is structurally absent, from positive rights at least, or even the enemy original or enemy outsiders. Their universal logic might prohibit and resit you in any attempts to make and entry and change the rules: or they will invite you in but on a pre-set card of “white man rights” and equalities. From a global perspective given the ethnic wealth distributions across the world, the poor white Anglo European American white man will be at the back of the cue, and it will also be a tactic covert commitment to the whole social justice world view. You will all be under the Social justice universal even in determining and limiting activities by combination and incrementally.
(I worked on Leibnitz and later Serres various original texts in postgraduate seminars in the late 2000’s. I can’t find that material now and so I am going from “Michel Serres: Figures of Thought” Christopher Watkin 2020. I later found that my own methods were simerlar to Serres. I referenced Kant in this; e.g. Kant’s work has to viewed as whole like a cosmology not a list or linear narrative. and Wilfred Sellars “Philosophy is about how things in the most general sense, hang together in the most general sense. I also used from A Level Religion and Ethics the idea of synoptic connections of the different subject areas, or the idea of a system in Habermas from the Boghossain/Benjamin debate on TH-cam. I also was already using some of Serres images like the Harlequin Periot (I got this from David Bowie Space Oddity and Ashes to Ashes). I also used the search for the North West Passage, and many other that Serres uses. My interest in models came well before philosophy when I studied physics and noticed the same mathematical structures appeared in many diverse areas of physics such as radioactive decay, biological growth, cooling of hot objects, and the statistical outcome of tossing a coin and rolling two dice with a function to remove and coins from chess board over time till a dynamic equilibrium occurs. Also the existence and repetition of the constant pie in physics formulae for laws especial when the phenomena is audited as field or group.
Now, my interest though is between the sciences and law and the human agent, especially there pre modelling of the human in their sciences. I got this from working on Galileo’s inclined plane experiment and virtue and vice. That is he used his pulse to measure time. This was part of a long series on medieval impetus, Galileo, Descartes, Leibnitz on inertia and Kant’s time relational view of the Categories as functions. This is shown to be loosely isomorphic with Group theory in mathematics, symmetries and relational axioms: eg Serres calls modern mathematics. In Kant it is actively maintaining a permanence of the object in time. Later this can be expressive of a wide scope (the image of the whole cosmos) via legal rights and movements in international law eg as a model of retention of covariance and contra variance between geographical locals of movement. I can maintain a invariant relation here, whereas ironically the lefts flat structure atlas prohibits such global invariance both by Plato race and gender concepts in law and by the absence of any recourse to the natural object as unaffected by change in context and relations. Unlike Serres then I focused on St Paul’s discussion in the New Testament on life and death and the body, and the idea of an horizon as a limit to reach of law and obligation e.g. the loss of the Marionette ship in 19th century. Much of this grew from discussions over xmas and new year with the left on TH-cam: Owen Jones and Novara Media. There was a documentary on the outlaws: Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid, which emphasised the arrival of telegraph communications and marking the end of that era of crime.
On interdisciplinary work i was struck by a book on education from the 1980's, where for the first time, an educational researcher had actually shadowed a secondary student for two weeks i think. the endless: i hour maths, i hour English, one hour games, one hour French, one hour physics.... and repeat. My focus was on the limits of measurement in physics (from photomultiplier scintillations' detection and the similarities with human senses.eg sound energy frequency, amplifier response to frequency, and human experience of loudness. Also a cut short discussion of Gotha's theory of colour as difference boundary, light and shadow verses Newton. Jorden Peterson did some stuff on this in a interview with a physicist. then there is Hawking's uptake of information theory in physics in early 1990's in lecture to financial traders who were former physicists. At hat time many physicist went into the stoke exchange, later the background was more from chemistry.
He has really hit a raw nerve here, judging from the angry leftist outpourings among the comments here.
Where are academics like David Irving? Right wingers preach anti racism & Left wingers preach anti racism, so basically if you live in the real world & want to keep your nation you're a bad person. This is all so tiresome.
Keep your nation from what? Corporate oligarchs question people who demonize immigrants as the problem and trans folks as the problem? Keep our nation from what?
Very urgent truyhs let out of forgotten archives - wow BUT WE HAVE THE REnaissance as well which was close second in this regard
Welcome Home Niall.
According to George Carlin, when you consider the average stupid person, realize that half of them are even more stupid than he is. (The presentation could do with some balance.)
where do i buy a voice like that?
I thought we were gonna see an interesting discussion on 1920s and 1930s Germany. Instead I get another milquetoast anti-woke lecture.
Hear! It's so boring and predictable. Was looking forward to a proper historical discussion
Shocking times😮