Hillsdale should continue to defend Socratic tradition. Nolan Ryan | Collegian
“Hillsdale should be more careful about Science Initiatives,” according to an opinion piece in the April 20 issue of the Collegian.
The natural sciences, like the liberal arts, are dedicated to the pursuit of truth. This means that the natural sciences, like the liberal arts, are not immune from the radical questioning that comes from this Socratic pursuit. When those in the natural sciences refuse to undertake such self-reflection, they become stumbling blocks to this pursuit and do a disservice to all those who stretch themselves out to know.
The founders of Hillsdale College believed “that the diffusion of sound learning is essential to the perpetuity” of the “inestimable blessings resulting from the prevalence of civil and religious liberty and intelligent piety in the land.” If “sound learning” and “civil liberty” mean anything, as understood from the western tradition passed down to us, they mean not bowing before the unjustified arrogation of power by the credentialed class. The Academy for Science and Freedom (ASF) was born out of this defiance to credentialed tyranny that was so prevalent in 2020. ASF exists to provide a platform for free, reasoned, and civil discourse on fundamental questions of science and public health. ASF therefore provided that platform to speakers from The Broken Science Initiative (BSI) on April 11th to listen to them talk about the replication crisis and the unjustified use of p-values, as well as solutions to those problems.
It has been expressed recently that the College ought to be careful in associating itself with people making such claims because it will hurt the prospects of our graduates pursuing careers in STEM. They will be blacklisted because they are from that “anti-science” school, Hillsdale College. However, what is never mentioned in those cautionary suggestions (although numerous examples were provided at the BSI event) is that there are prominent scientists who agree with many of the claims made by ASF and BSI. For the curious readers, please see the following: Ioannidis, Nature, Nature, The BMJ, NLM, Science, Stanford, The BMJ, NEJM, Nature, The BMJ, Ioannidis, RSC, and Bhattacharya. There is no shortage of scientists sounding the alarm bells, but no mention of them is ever made by detractors.
We would hope that no one would be afraid to be seen or photographed attending a talk hosted by the ASF. That would be an odd concern. Are we not in the business of debating ideas here at the College? Is that not the sole reason for our existence? To “pursue truth and defend liberty”, with emphasis on the “pursue” part? Or should there be no debate allowed because the “consensus” of the credentialed class can’t be wrong?
It was because the credentialed class got it so wrong in 2020 that ASF exists. If Hillsdale merely emulated state schools, as has been suggested it should, commencement would not have happened for the 2020 graduates, in-person fall 2020 classes would not have happened, and experimental vaccines, shown to be harmful to young people, would be required of every student. No, Hillsdale College should not be like state schools who willingly abandoned their duty to question the legitimacy of the demands made in the name of “scientific expertise.”
Hillsdale College should continue its mission to educate young people and the general public to ask questions, think critically, and defend its right to do so. Asking questions is part of sound learning, and if we willingly abandon that at Hillsdale out of fear of “being labeled by our critics,” then our critics will have won without having fired a shot. Death in war is bad enough, but death by suicide is even worse; it’s an ignominious end.
