Dangerous Ideas, Approved Beliefs

Here at the GSB, there are unspoken norms about what is acceptable to discuss, which ideas are worthy, and what beliefs are true. Inspired by a conversation with a close friend who is my ideological opposite, I’ve become interested in the notion of “dangerous ideas” and “approved beliefs.”

Our conversation related to free speech on campus. In 1994, Charles Murray wrote “The Bell Curve,” which posited a relationship between genetics and intelligence. Outrage ensued. When Murray appeared at Middlebury College this spring to address an unrelated topic, he was physically attacked by protesters, and the liberal professor who was to interview him was sent to the hospital.

My friend and I disagreed over the morality of research, like Murray’s, that might uncover societally uncomfortable findings. He contended there are topics, which he labeled “dangerous ideas,” that should not be introduced into public discourse. Linking genetics and intelligence, for example, might be interpreted incorrectly by society, with harmful consequences for minorities. His stance was that even if there were statistical significance to the findings, they would be unsuitable for public consumption.

My stance? Only through exploring everything will society uncover the gems that lead to improvement — much as a venture capitalist makes bets on a number of companies to harvest the occasional unicorn. If we truly believe in the scientific method, I argued, we don’t have the right to pick and choose what discoveries to acknowledge.

Following this discussion, I wanted to better understand what other ideas our classmates think dangerous. I also wanted to look at “approved beliefs” — widely accepted as irrefutable. So I asked all my classmates for their thoughts. I defined “dangerous ideas” as anything that, if spoken aloud, would cause social or professional harm to the advocate. “Approved beliefs” I defined as ideas that, if publicly opposed, would cause social or professional harm to the critic.

I received many responses and have included the political or controversial ones below. All were provided anonymously with the understanding they would be shared in my research.

Dangerous ideas:

• I want to be a stay-at-home mom
• I’m a Christian and not 100% sure about gay marriage; I do NOT support abortion
• GSB culture is discriminatory against non-white international students
• Open borders are not a human right; the Trump travel ban wasn’t a big deal
• China may be a dangerous threat to global political stability
• Pre-emptive crime-stopping is likely in our future and may be best for society
• Britain was wrong to give up Hong Kong
• Nobody anywhere should have the right to own a gun
• Questioning American patriotism, democracy, and religion
• Women will find it hard to progress in their careers due to biological imperatives
• Belief in semi-traditional gender roles; genders exist and are not fluid
• Monogamy is not right for everybody and it is unhealthy for it to be imposed by society
• Children should be raised in communities of people rather than one or two parents
• The gender pay gap isn’t as large as popularly believed
• The GSB experience is disgustingly privileged
• Gender inequality can be used as an excuse
• Obama was a terrible president; Trump has a lot of correct points on immigration
• “Social justice” policies are often actually unjust
• Monotheistic religion is a negative force in the world
• Bestiality should not be illegal
• Choosing to not be successful but just live a “normal” life despite GSB education

Approved beliefs:

• I want to change the world
• Global warming is happening and will have catastrophic results
• Any educated person is obviously progressive/liberal/Democrat
• Liberal social values are effectively self-evident and the only valid form of values
• The gender pay gap is real
• Business/capitalism is a force for good
• Being a conservative is bad. Holding strong religious views is bad
• Business creation is the best path to economic growth and government often hinders it
• Brexit was a mistake
• Our veterans fought to defend our country/our values abroad and should not be questioned
• It is not racist to acknowledge that the Chinese government commits human rights violations
• American values are best
• FOAM is cool
• Straight, white, extroverted American males are all privileged, no matter other circumstances
• GSB is worth every penny; Touchy Feely is a valuable use of time

If we are a professional institution that values diversity and inclusion, these are the very ideas about which we should welcome discussions. Our cornerstone class, Interpersonal Dynamics, is dedicated to the idea of conversing across differences. That so many people fear speaking out or challenging the status quo means our culture is not living up to its professed values. These hard discussions are no doubt taking place behind closed doors among close friends, but our community loses when these topics don’t make it to the public square.

As an Evangelical Christian, I was once a fierce advocate for Creationism. While I managed the highest score possible on the Advanced Placement Biology test, which among other things tests for knowledge about evolution, I went so far as to implore my 10th grade teacher to let me give a guest lecture on the Young Earth theory (the notion that God created the Universe less than 10,000 years ago). She demurred. The “dangerous idea” of scientific cosmology, however, had captured my imagination. God could still exist in a world of Science. My progressively deeper understanding of how crazy (and unexplainable) our observed universe actually is did nothing to lessen my faith in a higher power. Redshifts, quasars, and a 14 billion year old universe were exciting new possibilities. Now, obsessed, I’m even taking a class on Black Holes and Extreme Astrophysics to close out my Stanford career.

“Dangerous ideas” can also evolve over time. What is dangerous in one age may be enlightened soon after. Prior to the 1960s, only radicals espoused marriage or racial equality in America, as broader society viewed such ideas as disruptive to societal order. Both of these ideas, however, have turned out to be broadly valuable for society. We need to provide opportunity for radical ideas to emerge, since they could drive our future.

If we’re afraid to engage with or challenge uncomfortable beliefs, we may be unable to see unexpected opportunity when it appears before us. This takes intellectual humility, curiosity and a belief in the good intentions of others, but the payoff is immense. What “dangerous idea” are you eager to explore?