Applies antifragility to universities; safety culture as manufactured fragility
Lukianoff, a free speech lawyer, and Haidt, a social psychologist, argue that three beliefs increasingly taught to young Americans are both false and psychologically harmful. The untruths are that what does not kill you makes you weaker, that you should always trust your feelings, and that life is a battle between good people and evil people.
Their argument is that these beliefs contradict established findings. Antifragility means that children require exposure to stressors to develop capability. Cognitive behavioural therapy works by identifying and correcting distorted thinking rather than trusting it, and the distortions it treats, including catastrophising, emotional reasoning and dichotomous thinking, are precisely what campus culture teaches. Us-versus-them thinking is a well-documented tribal default that institutions should suppress rather than encourage.
They identify six contributing causes: rising adolescent anxiety and depression from around 2012, paranoid parenting, the decline of unsupervised play, the growth of campus administrative bureaucracy, the intensification of political polarisation, and the rise of what they call justice thinking that focuses on equal outcomes.
The correlation between smartphone adoption and adolescent mental health is the empirical claim most disputed, and researchers including Amy Orben and Andrew Przybylski have argued that the effect sizes are very small. Critics also argue that the authors generalise from a small number of elite institutions and that they understate the substantive issues behind campus protests. The application of cognitive distortion categories to institutional culture is the most original element.
Readers thinking about how institutions handle disagreement and discomfort, with the empirical claims about smartphones treated as contested.
Chosen by shared topics, the entries that hold them, and the people who recommended both.