国产69精品久久久久777_午夜天堂一区人妻_成年私人影院网站在线看_A级毛片免费高清视频

Elite精英留學(xué) | Agnes老師

高級(jí)特邀顧問(wèn)(CNP)
107贊 45粉絲 6最佳回答
短信

耶魯大學(xué)校長(zhǎng)2022開(kāi)學(xué)演講:面對(duì)世界變局,要識(shí)別事實(shí)和謊言

閱讀: 864     發(fā)表:2年前

美東時(shí)間8月22日上午,耶魯大學(xué)舉行了2022-2023年度耶魯本科學(xué)院的開(kāi)學(xué)典禮。耶魯大學(xué)校長(zhǎng)Peter Salovey和耶魯本科學(xué)院新任院長(zhǎng)Pericles Lewis向2026屆新生表示歡迎!

開(kāi)學(xué)典禮上,Peter Salovey校長(zhǎng)發(fā)表了題為“在耶魯踏上追尋真理之路”的演講,他呼吁學(xué)生:

  //  

“以對(duì)不同觀點(diǎn)的包容,以尊重和積極的心態(tài),以耐心的傾聽(tīng)和深刻的思考,以滿懷同理心和理解的表達(dá),為耶魯?shù)男@再傾注一些對(duì)真理的追尋。”


*點(diǎn)擊視頻,觀看耶魯大學(xué)2022開(kāi)學(xué)演講現(xiàn)場(chǎng)


耶魯校長(zhǎng)演講全文(翻譯)


早上好!很高興能在耶魯本科學(xué)院開(kāi)學(xué)典禮上見(jiàn)到各位新生和你們的家人。今天是你們正式開(kāi)啟耶魯本科生涯的第一天,我謹(jǐn)代表臺(tái)上的同事們,對(duì)這一天的到來(lái)感到由衷的喜悅。


如各位所知,耶魯大學(xué)的校訓(xùn)是“光明與真理”,拉丁語(yǔ)是Lux et Veritas,希伯來(lái)語(yǔ)是Urim v’Thummim。在耶魯?shù)男@里,這條校訓(xùn)隨處可見(jiàn)。今天,我想和大家聊聊我們的校訓(xùn)中很重要的一部分,一個(gè)在世界各地大學(xué)的使命、精神與文化中廣泛存在的追求,那就是真理。


近幾年來(lái),盡管全世界都在竭力應(yīng)對(duì)公共衛(wèi)生危機(jī),我們?nèi)阅慷昧思傧ⅲ踔潦侵囌摰乃僚啊T谶@一過(guò)程中,專業(yè)知識(shí)遭受質(zhì)疑,科學(xué)發(fā)現(xiàn)和學(xué)術(shù)研究面臨考驗(yàn)——事實(shí)上,這些挑戰(zhàn)都是一種對(duì)真理的侵犯。幾乎每天都有這樣的事情發(fā)生:報(bào)道稱有人在家“發(fā)現(xiàn)”科學(xué)家們得出的新冠肺炎病毒有關(guān)結(jié)論有誤;網(wǎng)友又編織出了全新的、毫無(wú)根據(jù)的陰謀論;我們公認(rèn)的歷史事實(shí)也被別有用心之人矢口否認(rèn)。


這里列舉5個(gè)簡(jiǎn)短的例子:年初,美國(guó)一些人(包括處于領(lǐng)導(dǎo)地位的人)把一場(chǎng)企圖顛覆我們民主基礎(chǔ)和反對(duì)選舉制度的暴徒行為稱作“合法的政治訴求”。


當(dāng)毀滅性的山火、局部嚴(yán)重干旱和歷史罕見(jiàn)的洪水等昭示著災(zāi)難性的氣候挑戰(zhàn)時(shí),一些人卻篤信毫無(wú)根據(jù)的懷疑論,無(wú)視廣泛建立起的科學(xué)共識(shí)。在美國(guó)的一些縣城里,一半的居民還不相信全球氣候變化正真實(shí)地發(fā)生著。


最近幾個(gè)月,人們關(guān)于俄烏戰(zhàn)爭(zhēng)的情緒被誤導(dǎo)和激化。社交媒體平臺(tái)上,有些人通過(guò)宣傳虛假內(nèi)容煽動(dòng)種族主義情緒,比如在緬甸和埃塞俄比亞所發(fā)生的事。


最近的一樁誹謗罪判案中,一位臭名昭著的陰謀論者稱發(fā)生在距離耶魯校園約半小時(shí)車程的康涅狄格州桑迪胡克謀殺案(20名小學(xué)生和6名成年人在此次事故中喪生)系美國(guó)政府所為。當(dāng)然,傳播假消息已經(jīng)不是什么新鮮事了。歷史充斥著謊言招致的惡果。


20世紀(jì)哲學(xué)家Hannah Arendt,曾于1971年獲得耶魯名譽(yù)學(xué)位。她在敘述人性黑暗和殘酷政權(quán)時(shí)寫(xiě)道,真正的極權(quán)主體不是某一黨派的堅(jiān)定支持者,而是那些對(duì)事實(shí)與杜撰,正確與錯(cuò)誤不加區(qū)分的人。


沒(méi)錯(cuò),惡毒可以在缺少真理的環(huán)境中猖獗。因此,在對(duì)真理的持續(xù)探索中,人性本身也岌岌可危。


就耶魯而言,高校必須首先通過(guò)支持教師來(lái)打擊虛假信息、阻止煽動(dòng)和臆造陰謀論的傳播,因?yàn)樗麄兯龅恼鞘占茖W(xué)數(shù)據(jù)并提出學(xué)術(shù)見(jiàn)解。教員們必須能夠自由地傳授知識(shí),并教學(xué)生批判性地思考各種觀點(diǎn)及其來(lái)源。


但要有效地做到這一點(diǎn),高等教育體系中的老師和學(xué)生都必須對(duì)多元的思想保持開(kāi)放,無(wú)論是傳統(tǒng)還是非傳統(tǒng)的,左派還是右派。耶魯大學(xué)長(zhǎng)期以來(lái)代表并致力于對(duì)真理的堅(jiān)守,因此我們有責(zé)任應(yīng)對(duì)公信力危機(jī)。


對(duì)于窮極一生追尋真理的藝術(shù)家、學(xué)者、科學(xué)家與一線實(shí)踐者們,像耶魯這樣的大學(xué)是他們的家園。然而,社會(huì)上觀點(diǎn)的極化,無(wú)論是否被某一特定派別所接受,都無(wú)疑阻礙了追尋真理的進(jìn)程,也將會(huì)蠶食公眾對(duì)專業(yè)知識(shí)的信心,并在人們亟需純粹的真相時(shí)消解著大學(xué)的影響力。


當(dāng)有思想的人負(fù)責(zé)任地闡述了不受歡迎的或非主流的觀點(diǎn),而我們對(duì)此保持開(kāi)放,那么全體師生乃至整個(gè)大學(xué)將被視作可靠信息的來(lái)源。大多數(shù)美國(guó)人仍然對(duì)大學(xué)持有積極看法,認(rèn)為大學(xué)教育對(duì)一個(gè)人的未來(lái)發(fā)揮著重要的作用。但是,對(duì)于高等教育將為社會(huì)帶來(lái)有益影響的信心卻被一種質(zhì)疑所侵蝕,那就是我們不愿接受挑戰(zhàn)的聲音。


或者說(shuō)有些人相信,學(xué)生中認(rèn)為可以安全地發(fā)表不受歡迎的觀點(diǎn)的比例在下降。實(shí)際情況絕非如此,學(xué)生們不愿校園成為多元觀點(diǎn)的匯聚之地是一個(gè)謠言。根據(jù)美國(guó)奈特基金會(huì)(Knight Foudation)最近的一項(xiàng)調(diào)查,大多數(shù)學(xué)生認(rèn)為接觸各類言論比通過(guò)禁止冒犯性或偏見(jiàn)性的言論來(lái)保護(hù)大家更為重要。一些人所說(shuō)的“取消文化”并不是學(xué)生群體的主流思想。


耶魯擁有美國(guó)歷史最悠久的大學(xué)辯論文化,持有任何政治立場(chǎng)的學(xué)生都可以加入到激烈而文明的討論中。在耶魯,你會(huì)看到美國(guó)民主黨籍政治家、耶魯法學(xué)院73屆校友希拉里·克林頓作為耶魯本科生畢業(yè)日的受邀嘉賓演講,也會(huì)看到共和黨派、美國(guó)前總統(tǒng)布什父子榮獲耶魯本科生終身成就獎(jiǎng)。同時(shí),耶魯大學(xué)為持有不同意識(shí)形態(tài)的人提供互動(dòng)機(jī)會(huì),比如此前一場(chǎng)對(duì)話中齊聚了來(lái)自兩黨的四任美國(guó)前國(guó)務(wù)卿。


但是坦白來(lái)講,在校園里發(fā)表不受歡迎的見(jiàn)解的確有些困難。我剛提到的奈特基金會(huì)調(diào)查也顯示,只有大約一半的學(xué)生“能夠自如地表達(dá)不同意見(jiàn)”。


因此,我們需要提升學(xué)生每天在教室、餐廳和會(huì)議室內(nèi)與不同觀點(diǎn)探討的持續(xù)渴望,并認(rèn)識(shí)到向他人表達(dá)不同見(jiàn)解的重要性。事實(shí)上,在大學(xué)這個(gè)環(huán)境中,我們必須能夠?qū)⒄?dāng)?shù)漠愖h與徹頭徹尾的謊言區(qū)分開(kāi)來(lái),必須堅(jiān)定地為令人不悅的真知灼見(jiàn)留有空間,正如我們駁斥謬論時(shí)一樣堅(jiān)定。


因此,我們必須培養(yǎng)一種開(kāi)放的態(tài)度,尤其是當(dāng)我們最根深蒂固的思想受到挑戰(zhàn)之時(shí)。這樣的氛圍承載著對(duì)真理的探尋,以及相信真理所需要建立起的公信力。


當(dāng)然,在我們追尋真理的過(guò)程中,我們必須銘記耶魯?shù)葘W(xué)術(shù)機(jī)構(gòu)的權(quán)力和影響力。我們必須謙虛地認(rèn)識(shí)到,謬論也可能偽裝成真理,比如,歷史上我們?cè)e(cuò)誤地認(rèn)為男女不應(yīng)該同校,以及引領(lǐng)了“優(yōu)生運(yùn)動(dòng)”的風(fēng)潮。當(dāng)權(quán)力同時(shí)意味著責(zé)任時(shí),這些困擾成為了一些人拒絕使用“真理”一詞來(lái)描述耶魯使命的原因。


盡管如此,在耶魯,我經(jīng)常看到教師們鼓勵(lì)學(xué)生對(duì)數(shù)據(jù)和觀點(diǎn)提出質(zhì)疑,也看到學(xué)生們面對(duì)相悖的證據(jù)時(shí)改變自己的觀點(diǎn)。你們每個(gè)人都將在耶魯經(jīng)歷這些,并且經(jīng)常經(jīng)歷,這是耶魯教育的一部分。


在耶魯可選的課程中,經(jīng)常可見(jiàn)兩位代表不同學(xué)科的教授共同教授一門課。在他們的課上你將體會(huì)到,從不同的視角審視同一個(gè)問(wèn)題將促生全新觀點(diǎn)。比如,電影史教授與物理學(xué)家共同教授的電影課程,哲學(xué)家與經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)家共同講解自然選擇,美國(guó)研究和護(hù)理學(xué)院學(xué)者共同教授跨性別健康課程。類似地,最近一個(gè)學(xué)期,三位持不同政見(jiàn)的專家共同開(kāi)設(shè)了一門關(guān)于自由主義危機(jī)的課程,橫跨了奧巴馬與特朗普的總統(tǒng)任期。


我們將繼續(xù)為你們創(chuàng)造可以自由爭(zhēng)論復(fù)雜問(wèn)題的對(duì)話機(jī)會(huì)。這些時(shí)刻讓我們意識(shí)到,現(xiàn)實(shí)中沒(méi)有任何意識(shí)集團(tuán)真正擁有真理;事實(shí)不會(huì)歸順于我們?nèi)魏纹虻慕Y(jié)論。因此,實(shí)證必須引導(dǎo)我們持有的觀念,而非順從于它。


講到這里,我想到了一本名為《真理之死》的書(shū),它的作者是耶魯本科學(xué)院1976屆校友、普利策獎(jiǎng)獲得者角谷美智子,一位我們所追尋真理的捍衛(wèi)者。角谷美智子在書(shū)中對(duì)理性與客觀的呼吁,以詹姆斯·麥迪遜(美國(guó)第四任總統(tǒng)、美國(guó)憲法之父)的一句話結(jié)束,這也是對(duì)我們這個(gè)時(shí)代提出的警告:“一個(gè)公眾的政府,若沒(méi)有供民眾獲取的信息或獲取信息的方式,將會(huì)奏響一場(chǎng)鬧劇或悲劇,或兩者兼具的慘劇的前奏。”


當(dāng)然,角谷美智子在書(shū)中認(rèn)為,“如果沒(méi)有公認(rèn)的事實(shí),這種事實(shí)不是指民主黨或共和黨眼中的事實(shí),也不是指經(jīng)過(guò)改編了的單一來(lái)源的信息,人們無(wú)法對(duì)政策展開(kāi)理智的辯論,無(wú)法實(shí)際評(píng)估政治職位候選人,無(wú)法讓他們對(duì)人民負(fù)責(zé)。沒(méi)有真理,民主將步履蹣跚。美國(guó)開(kāi)國(guó)元?jiǎng)讉冋J(rèn)識(shí)到了這一點(diǎn),那些尋求民主生存空間的人也必須認(rèn)識(shí)到這一點(diǎn)。”


我還想到了James Hatch,一位曾在美國(guó)海軍特種作戰(zhàn)司令部服役二十年后重返校園的耶魯本科生。他這樣描述耶魯?shù)男@氛圍:“這里的大多數(shù)學(xué)生都同意,為改善人類的狀況,必須存在這樣一個(gè)——觀點(diǎn)可以被公開(kāi)挑戰(zhàn),討論可以激烈而有序進(jìn)行的地方。”


*耶魯大學(xué)2022開(kāi)學(xué)典禮現(xiàn)場(chǎng)


耶魯大學(xué)致力于承擔(dān)提高學(xué)術(shù)研究、專業(yè)知識(shí)和高等教育機(jī)構(gòu)公信力的責(zé)任,確保Hatch先生的體會(huì)是每名耶魯學(xué)子在任何時(shí)刻和任何角落都能感同身受的。


耶魯大學(xué)的一門名為《哲學(xué)與人性科學(xué)》的哲學(xué)課正反映了耶魯在這方面的努力。在課程中,耶魯文理學(xué)院院長(zhǎng)Tamar Gendler將當(dāng)代認(rèn)知科學(xué)與古代哲學(xué)家的作品聯(lián)系起來(lái),幫助我們更好地理解在研讀這些作品時(shí),我們的大腦產(chǎn)生了怎樣的活動(dòng)。在她的課上,同學(xué)們重新解讀柏拉圖的洞穴寓言,洞穴里的人們將墻上的影子誤認(rèn)為現(xiàn)實(shí)。Gendler院長(zhǎng)進(jìn)一步引導(dǎo)學(xué)生對(duì)這一觀點(diǎn)提出挑戰(zhàn):既然人類的頭腦并不十全十美,真理又如何能夠被發(fā)現(xiàn)呢?


當(dāng)然,我們的局限并不能阻擋我們對(duì)真理的探尋。因?yàn)樗鼈兪蔷S系我們保持好奇的動(dòng)力。心懷謙遜,我們便可以擴(kuò)展自己的認(rèn)知。


所以,在耶魯,我們不會(huì)重申你在來(lái)時(shí)已有的想法。相反,我們會(huì)在四年時(shí)光里激發(fā)你發(fā)現(xiàn)自己未知的事物。我們會(huì)幫助你打磨過(guò)濾假象的能力,因?yàn)橥ㄗR(shí)教育的核心是由理性、邏輯與批判性思維組成的。


不久,你將從這種教育中受益。當(dāng)然,你們也應(yīng)該積極參與其中,無(wú)論現(xiàn)在作為一名學(xué)生,還是之后成長(zhǎng)為一位校友。


今天,在你們即將開(kāi)啟自己的本科生涯之時(shí),我呼吁所有人,在每一次研討會(huì)上、每一所寄宿學(xué)院里與每一場(chǎng)深夜談話之中,以對(duì)不同觀點(diǎn)的包容,以尊重和積極的心態(tài),以耐心的傾聽(tīng)和深刻的思考,以滿懷同理心和理解的表達(dá),為耶魯?shù)男@再傾注一些對(duì)真理的追尋。讓我們一同提升自己的包容度和參與度,反對(duì)公開(kāi)羞辱、挖苦和排斥的文化。


讓我們恪守歷經(jīng)歲月考驗(yàn)的優(yōu)良傳統(tǒng),在耶魯秉持公開(kāi)討論的學(xué)術(shù)氛圍。在這樣的社區(qū)中,我們才能產(chǎn)生推動(dòng)世界的學(xué)術(shù)成就和科學(xué)突破,并不斷超越。


正是這樣,你們才能拓展專業(yè)知識(shí),挽救知識(shí)的地位;你們才能夠在日漸黑暗的世界里,讓“真理”與“光明”同在;你們或許能夠改變這個(gè)割裂世界的命運(yùn),讓真理光芒四射。歡迎來(lái)到耶魯!


耶魯校長(zhǎng)演講原文:

向上滑動(dòng)閱覽

Good morning. It truly is a thrill to welcome all of you, our entering students, and your family members to campus for our Yale College Opening Assembly. Today is the official start of your undergraduate education at Yale, and on behalf of all my colleagues here on stage with me, we are delighted this day has arrived!


As you know, Yale’s motto is Light and Truth—Lux et Veritas in Latin, Urim v’Thummim in Hebrew—and you will see it etched ubiquitously on crests around campus. Today, I want to speak with you about the part of our motto we share with many other universities around the world through their mission, ethos, or culture: Veritas, or Truth.


For several years now, even as the world struggled to contain a public health crisis, we have witnessed the virulent spread of deceptive information, even outright lies. We have seen an assault on expertise, an assault on scientific and other scholarly findings—indeed, an assault on truth. Hardly a day passes without a report on someone who has “discovered,” in the comfort of his or her own home, that the scientific experts are wrong about COVID. Hardly a day goes by when someone on the internet does not spin some new, fact-free conspiracy theory. Historical events we all know to be true are denied by individuals with nefarious motives.


Here are five brief examples: Earlier this year, some in our country, including those in positions of leadership, depicted a violent mob’s attempt to disrupt the most basic functioning of our democracy by denying an election outcome as “l(fā)egitimate political discourse.”


As destructive wildfires, severe drought in some places, and historic flooding in others portend a catastrophic climate emergency, we see those faithful to unfounded skepticism disregard overwhelming scientific consensus. In some counties in the United States, half of the residents still do not believe global climate change is real.


In recent months, Vladimir Putin has propagated misinformation about rooting out Nazis as the motivation for his unprovoked invasion of Ukraine. Social media platforms have been mobilized to incite or stoke ethnic violence by propagating falsehoods in countries like Myanmar and Ethiopia.


And finally, a recent defamation trial focused on a notorious conspiracy theorist who claims that the murder of twenty school children and six adults in Sandy Hook, Connecticut—about a half-hour’s drive from here—was staged by the U.S. government. Of course, spreading misinformation is not new. History teems with the haunting consequences of lies.


Philosopher Hannah Arendt—on whom Yale bestowed an honorary degree in 1971—writes of some of humanity’s darkest chapters and the malignant regimes that authored them: “the ideal subject of totalitarian rule is not the convinced Nazi or the convinced Communist.” It is rather, Arendt continues, “people for whom the distinction between fact and fiction (i.e., the reality of experience) and the distinction between true and false (i.e., the standards of thought) no longer exist.”


Yes, malevolence can feast on the environment devoid of Veritas. And at stake, therefore, in the abiding search for truth is humanity itself.


For our part, colleges and universities must combat the spread of misinformation, propaganda, and conjured conspiracy theories first by supporting faculty; they generate scientific data and scholarly insight. Faculty must be free to disseminate knowledge and teach you to think critically about ideas and their sources.

But to do so effectively, our institutions of higher education—faculty and students—must be open to engaging with diverse ideas, whether conventional or unconventional, of the left or of the right. It is Yale’s obligation to address the credibility crisis, for we have long stood for the pursuit of truth and devoted ourselves to it.


Colleges and universities like Yale are home to artists, scholars, scientists, and practitioners who spend their entire lives searching for truth. Yet, the growing polarization in society around ideas, whether embraced or eschewed by a particular faction, impedes this search, and threatens to erode public confidence in expertise, minimizing the impact of universities precisely when unvarnished truth is so desperately needed.


Faculty and students—indeed the university itself—will be viewed as reliable sources of information if we do not appear closed off to unpopular or otherwise nonmainstream ideas from thoughtful individuals responsibly articulated. Most Americans still have a positive view of universities and consider a college education important for future success. But confidence that higher education has a salubrious impact on society is eroded by a belief that we will not engage with ideas that challenge us.


Let me discuss a familiar example: that there has been a steady decline in the percentage of college students who believe the freedom to express unpopular points of view is secure. Actually, it is a myth that students do not want their campuses to be home to a broad range of perspectives. Recent opinion polling by the Knight Foundation confirms that most students believe it is more important to be exposed to all types of speech than to protect people by prohibiting offensive or biased speech.[5] What some refer to as “cancel culture” is not the dominant ideology of students.


Here at Yale, which is home to the country’s oldest collegiate debate society, students across the political spectrum can engage in spirited, yet civil discussions. Yale College students have selected Hillary Clinton as a Class Day speaker and honored both George H.W. Bush and George W. Bush as Yale Undergraduate Lifetime Achievement Award recipients. And the university has hosted interactions between individuals with ideological differences, such as a recent conversation between Emily Bazelon and Ross Douthat, and another one among four former Secretaries of State, Democrats and Republicans.


But let’s be frank. It can be difficult to articulate unpopular views on college campuses. That Knight Foundation survey I cited a moment ago suggests that only about half of all students feel “comfortable offering dissenting opinions.”


So, we need to build on an existing desire among students to engage each day—in classrooms, dining halls, and meeting spaces—with different viewpoints and to appreciate the importance of expressing their disagreement with one another. Indeed, in a university setting, we must be able to distinguish—emphatically—legitimate dissent from outright deceit. We must make room for beliefs we find objectionable as faithfully as we reject falsehoods we know to be lies.


And we must, therefore, nurture a bias toward openness, even—and especially—when this ethos exposes us to points of view that test our most strongly held assumptions. Such a climate affords the search for truth—and the credibility necessary to trust it.


Of course, as we search for truth, we must also be mindful of the power and influence of institutions like Yale. We must recognize, with humility, that what looks like a truth might not be one. I think, for instance, of our own history: our resistance to co-education for so long or our leadership at one time in eugenics. With power comes great responsibility. These disturbing realities are why some are reluctant even to use the word “truth” in describing our mission.


Nonetheless, at Yale, I have often observed our faculty actively encouraging students to interrogate data and other ideas presented to them, and I have seen students change their minds when confronted with contrary evidence. Every one of you will have that experience as part of your Yale education. I suspect you will have it often.


You can enroll in courses that bring together pairs of professors representing different disciplines, who model how looking at a problem from divergent perspectives can lead to new insights: a course on film taught by a film historian and a physicist, a course on the nature of choice taught by a philosopher and an economist, a course on transgender health taught by faculty members from American Studies and the nursing school. Similarly, in a recent semester, three experts from across the political spectrum co-taught a course on the crisis of liberalism, covering the Obama and Trump presidencies.


We will continue to create opportunities like these for you to have open conversations about contentious, complex issues—opportunities rooted in the reality that no ideological bloc can claim ownership of truth; that facts pledge no fealty to any of our preferred conclusions. And, therefore, that evidence must guide the beliefs we hold rather than conform to them.


In considering this imperative, I am reminded of the book, The Death of Truth, by Michiko Kakutani—a winner of the Pulitzer Prize, an alumna of Yale College (Class of 1976), and a champion of the sense of truth we seek to promote.

Kakutani’s stirring appeal for reason and objectivity concludes with an especially, if not unnervingly relevant warning for our era issued by James Madison: “a popular Government, without popular information, or the means of acquiring it, is but a Prologue to a Farce or a Tragedy; or perhaps both.” Indeed, “without commonly agreed-upon facts,” Kakutani posits, “not Republican facts and [not] Democratic facts; not the alternative facts of today’s silo-world—there can be no rational debate over policies, no substantive means of evaluating candidates for political office, and no way to hold elected officials accountable to the people. Without truth, democracy is hobbled. The founders recognized this, and those seeking democracy’s survival must recognize it today.”


I think, too, of James Hatch—an extraordinary Yale undergraduate who spent over two decades with the Naval Special Warfare Command before returning to complete his college education. As he wrote, the climate at Yale “is one where most students understand that there HAS to be a place where people can assault ideas openly and discuss them vigorously and respectfully in order to improve the state of humanity.”


Yale is committed to the responsibility of promoting the public’s trust in academic research, expertise, and the value of higher education by ensuring that Mr. Hatch’s experience is typical of every student, every day, and in every classroom.


Philosophy 181 reflects this responsibility. In her course “Philosophy and the Science of Human Nature,” Yale’s Faculty of Arts and Sciences Dean Tamar Gendler ties contemporary cognitive science, which has helped us to gain an understanding of how our minds operate, to the work of ancient philosophers. Students in her class consider anew Plato’s allegory of the cave, in which people mistake shadows on a wall for reality. Dean Gendler walks her students through this allegory to challenge them to consider this question: How do you discover truth given that the human mind is imperfect?


Of course, our limitations pose no impediment to the search for truth. For they are, in fact, what can power the curiosity necessary to sustain it. By embracing our humility, we can broaden our understanding.


So, at Yale, we will not merely reaffirm what you already think as you arrive. We will, instead, provoke you to uncover all you do not know before you leave. We will fine-tune your ability to sift fact from falsehood, for the core of a liberal education is comprised of reason, logic, and critical thinking.


Soon, you will be the beneficiary of such an education. Yet, it behooves you also to be an active participant in it as students—and then, in due course, as alumni.


And so, today, as you begin your college career, I call on all of us to promote a truth-seeking climate at Yale—in every seminar, in every residential college, and in every late-night conversation—by being willing to entertain ideas with which we do not agree, by being willing to extend grace and assume positive intent, by listening carefully, by thinking deeply, and by speaking with empathy and understanding. Let us, together, elevate the virtues of tolerance and engagement, and reject the culture of public shaming, doxing, and ostracism.


And, in time-tested tradition, let us strengthen the open discourse that has, for centuries, been a hallmark of our intellectual community at Yale—and that has produced the scholarship and scientific breakthroughs that have improved the world well beyond it.


By doing so, you can develop expertise—and also help to rescue its standing. You can, in an increasingly dark world, bring Veritas to Lux—Truth to Light. And, perhaps equally as vital in a fragmented world, bring Lux to Veritas—Light to Truth. Welcome to Yale.


     
公眾號(hào)
Elite精英留學(xué)
“精英家庭的國(guó)際升學(xué)管家”,2013年成立于香港,在香港、深圳、美國(guó)均設(shè)有辦公室。近十年來(lái),Elite團(tuán)隊(duì)已為1000+全球高凈值華人家庭提供定制化、一站式的教育規(guī)劃及留學(xué)申請(qǐng)服務(wù),王牌業(yè)務(wù)為香港國(guó)際學(xué)校申請(qǐng)、頂尖海外私立寄宿中學(xué)申請(qǐng)、頂尖英美大學(xué)申請(qǐng)。
... 更多
公眾號(hào)二維碼