Asuka Koda, Contributing Photographer

Alfred Cowles Professor of Political Science Steven B. Smith first began teaching at Yale in 1984. Forty years later, he says, the character of the elite university has fundamentally changed. 

At an Allan Bloom Forum speaker event entitled “Yale, Then and Now,” Smith reflected on the effects of higher education’s push toward both STEM disciplines and diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives.

Smith began the talk with praising some DEI programs, like the G.I. Bill, which Smith said was undeniably beneficial for university culture.

“In the early days of the meritocracy, new attitudes and new experiences did, in fact, prevail. The spirit of openness and inclusion took the place of older assumptions of privilege and entitlement, by opening their doors to merit,” Smith explained. “Yale is, no doubt, a better place for these changes. Imperceptibly, many of these changes began to undermine themselves.”

Smith referenced English sociologist Michael Young as he explained how meritocracy generates apathy from those with merit toward those who are perceived to have less. A purely meritocratic society, he said, would not encourage a sense of social responsibility. 

According to Smith, Yale is focused on fostering a sense of belonging at the University. Yet this motivation raises moral conundrums as to who should belong, Smith suggested. 

“Would there be a place for Socrates, Spinoza or Ralph Waldo Emerson, even me on today’s campus? These are questions that never seem to occur to our DEI establishment,” Smith said. “This development has led to an alarming politicization of the university.” 

A University spokesperson did not respond to comment.

Smith detailed the vetting process of analyzing implicit bias that is now commonplace in universities, brought on by a push toward inclusivity efforts. These processes, he said, imply that many, if not most, candidates hold prejudices that must be evaluated by hiring committees.

He suggested that this focus on DEI has also incentivized students to victimize themselves.  

“Ironically, the most culturally disadvantaged or frequently ignored groups on campus tend to be not minorities, but working class whites from small towns in the South and the rural Midwest,” Smith said. “Many of these students … have grown up far from the centers of power and influence.”

Smith suggested that in the absence of “enrichment programs” or University supports, these students often feel excluded and socially isolated themselves.

He added that students are now encouraged to think of themselves as survivors who have escaped from some kind of trauma.

“The response has been the creation of an army of therapists, mental health counselors and other administrators always ready to go. The demand for more mental health services is something I constantly hear,” Smith said.

Smith suggested that these services, as well as efforts to install comfort puppies and normalize trigger warnings, lead to a culture of paternalism that does not properly prepare students for adulthood.

Aside from the threat posed by DEI efforts, Smith suggested that the push toward a STEM-dominated intellectualism is a present danger to the University. This push, he said, has led to the proliferation of the belief that science is the only basis for rational knowledge, which devalues any process of learning that is not backed by empirical evidence.

“This is not so much science as scientism, with its belief that all the great problems facing civilization are technological in nature and can be resolved by experts trained in game theory, rational choice analysis and scientific methods of decision making,” Smith said. “Consequently, the scope of research has become narrow to fit with the demands of what can be empirically tested. By narrowing the lens, they have flattened the screen.”

Smith used his experience as a professor of political science to enumerate the effects of this empirically based pedagogical philosophy. He has observed that modern expectations for a political science class consist of the analysis of current political polarization and current events and have led to a de-emphasis on political philosophy. One would be hard-pressed to find courses centering around one author, Smith claimed, and the relevance of “old books” has been greatly diminished.

Smith also pointed out that, like DEI initiatives, these STEM-focused philosophies have had significant effects on Yale’s hiring processes. 

“Department hiring is increasingly governed by a candidate’s Google Citation Index and other quasi-scientific metrics. … The problem is that these citation statistics tilt the field in favor of a very specialized kind of research that can easily be surveyed and quantified,” Smith said. “In the past, political science was largely what we call a book field. … Articles were always deemed important, but the real measure of scholarship was the book.”

Compounding upon the push for STEM education, Smith suggested, are trends towards professionalization and social pressure against the study of humanities. Students are often dissuaded from pursuing engagement with ancient texts due to concerns about their relevance to modern culture.

Still, Smith offered, many students have retained an interest in classical and philosophical texts. While these students may have to seek them out, programs such as Directed Studies more than rise to the challenge of satiating this desire for a “great books” curriculum, according to Smith.

“The Directed Studies program has managed to withstand many of these pressures of globalization and identity politics I discussed. It remains unapologetically, of course, in the Western political and philosophical tradition,” Smith said. “There are many genuine objections to the program of which I’m fully aware.”

Directed Studies has faced opposition due to its focus solely on the Western canon, which some say foster a distinctly Eurocentric bias. Smith has observed the changes its curriculum has undergone over the years in response to this pushback and questions the longevity of the program. 

Still, Smith has observed the benefits bestowed on both professors and students who have been involved with Directed Studies, a recognition shared by other attendees of the event.

“A lot of the students I’ve worked with have come through [Directed Studies] and my impression of it is very positive. So I am somebody who feels I have a stake in it staying around,” said Peter Wicks, a scholar-in-residence at New Haven’s Elm Institute and Yale lecturer who attended the event.

In fact, Smith’s first mention of the Directed Studies program was met with prolonged applause from many audience members. Similar displays of assent were frequent at other points during the event.

Smith’s talk was an installation in the Allan Bloom Forum’s speaker series, which invites guests to lecture on relevant political, historical and philosophical ideas. 

A spokesperson for the Forum said that the series tries to get prominent speakers in history or philosophy, and that they were lucky to get Smith because “he’s sort of the patron saint of the conservative party.”

In his talk, Smith added that he is a Democrat.