Philosophy heavyweights defend free speech after Cambridge lecturer is canceled over Substack article that constituted a ''rejection of DEI policies''
Today it’s Nathan Cofnas, tomorrow it's anyone who opposes DEI and woke orthodoxy.
There are dozens of Substack accounts dedicated to writing about IQ — I am not one of them! I’ve written hundreds of articles, and zero have been about race & IQ. I don’t find it very interesting. Some people do.
I am, however, passionate about freedom of speech, especially as it relates to academia, as are many of my readers — 30% of whom possess a PhD. So when I see this core principle of Western Civilization under threat, I feel inclined to speak up, especially now that I have built up a semi-influential platform.
The latest academic to get ‘‘canceled’’ over free speech is Nathan Cofnas, a lecturer and postdoc at the University of Cambridge.
His crime? On February 5th, Cofnas published a Substack article arguing that in order for conservatives to defeat “the woke left” they must accept ‘‘race realism”.
Conservative advocates of soft realism who claim that we can fix the problem of racial disparities by improving “culture” are making false promises. If we ever put their theories to the test, they will (at tremendous cost) be proved wrong, and conservatives will be discredited.
…
In the light of race differences, certain core liberal values will have to be reexamined. We will probably have to rethink ideals like multiculturalism and a borderless world. Legislators should take into consideration how their policies will influence the racial makeup of society, and what effects this is likely to have.
…
Race realism is not utopianism. It is not the solution to the problem of political organization, which our species has been grappling with for a quarter-of-a-million years. The fact that race and race differences are real does not tell us what our ultimate values should be, or what kind of society we should strive for within the limits of what is possible.
You should read the article — everything he wrote was scholarly and based on statistics — and I would also recommend reading the 200+ comments at the bottom of that article, full of great scholarly debate.
Cofnas gave an interview today defending his position:
It’s wrong to eschew intellectual discourse in favor of ideological conformity under the pretext of ‘‘DEI’’. The proper way to reject his ideas is to prove them wrong. Until counterarguments are substantiated, the denial of a platform to articulate dissenting perspectives constitutes a grave injustice.
Instead of debating his ideas, Cambridge campus threw a hissy fit, launched a petition to terminate his employment which defamed him as a ‘‘eugenecist’’, and held a ‘‘Fire Cofnas rally’’ as depicted in this video posted by
:
Shortly after that rally, the Leverhulme Trust (which funds his postdoc) and Cambridge both launched investigations into his employment, while on April 5th Emmanuel College, where Cofnas holds an unpaid position, fired him. His main job is with the University, and they haven’t fired him from that yet, but they still might.
Emmanuel College justified its firing because Cofnas ‘‘rejected DEI policies’’.
The Committee first considered the meaning of the blog and concluded that it amounted to, or could reasonably be construed as amounting to, a rejection of Diversity, Equality, and Inclusion (DEI and EDI) policies… The Committee concluded that the core mission of the College was to achieve educational excellence and that diversity and inclusion were inseparable from that. The ideas promoted by the blog therefore represented a challenge to the College’s core values and mission.
Following his termination from Emmanual College on April 5th, on April 12th, the most famous philosopher in the world, Peter Singer (Singer has 41528 citations on Google Scholar), stood up for Cofnas by writing a full-throated blog post:
These sentences imply that at Emmanuel College, freedom of expression does not include the freedom to challenge its DEI policies, and that challenging them may be grounds for dismissal. That is an extraordinary statement for a tertiary institution to make. It is even more surprising given that the adoption of DEI policies is a relatively recent phenomenon.
Emmanuel College’s decision does not prevent Cofnas from continuing to hold his research fellowship in the Faculty of Philosophy. But that would cease to be the case if the university inquiry were to reach the same conclusion as the college.
The academic world will be watching what happens. Were the University of Cambridge to dismiss Cofnas, it would sound a warning to students and academics everywhere: when it comes to controversial topics, even the world’s most renowned universities can no longer be relied upon to stand by their commitment to defend freedom of thought and discussion.
— Peter Singer
Today, a group of philosophers published a letter in The Times defending Cofnas:
We were dismayed to learn that Dr Nathan Cofnas, a researcher at Cambridge University’s Faculty of Philosophy and a research associate at Emmanuel College, is to be expelled from the college and is the subject of investigations by the faculty and the Leverhulme Trust on the grounds that he made controversial comments about race and academic ability (“Cambridge in free-speech row over researcher’s ‘race realism’ blog”, Apr 19). Cambridge University’s initial response seems to us to have been completely correct. Professor Bhaskar Vira, pro-vice-chancellor for education, issued a statement that began: “Freedom of speech within the law is a right that sits at the heart of the University of Cambridge. We encourage our community to challenge ideas they disagree with and engage in rigorous debate.” Given this, we do not understand why the philosophy faculty is conducting an investigation. Members of the college or university who disagree with Dr Cofnas’s views could issue statements repudiating those views and explaining why they believe them to be mistaken.
We urge Emmanuel College to reverse its decision and the Faculty of Philosophy and the Leverhulme Trust to call off their investigations. There is nothing to investigate. This should not need to be said, but given the present climate we would like to add that signing this letter does not indicate endorsement of Dr Cofnas’s views.
Proving that Cofnas isn’t some alt-right crackpot, this letter was signed by:
Roger Crisp, Oxford University; Sir Partha Dasgupta, Cambridge University; Marie Daouda, Oxford University; Paul Elbourne, Oxford University; Jonathan Glover, KCL; Coleman Hughes, author; Matthew Kramer, Cambridge University; Brian Leiter, Chicago University; Jeff McMahan, Oxford University; Francesca Minerva, Milan University; Steven Pinker, Harvard University; Robert Plomin, KCL; Peter Singer, Princeton University; Amia Srinivasan, Oxford University
The purpose of my article today is to highlight their new letter and to disseminate it more broadly.
I further reached out to The Free Speech Union, who is defending Cofnas throughout the ongoing investigation, for an exclusive comment. This is their statement:
The Free Speech Union is proud to assist Nathan Cofnas in his current dispute with Emmanuel College and the University of Cambridge. The stellar and diverse list of academic philosophers who wrote to the Times today shows how important this dispute is to all scholars who seek the freedom of intellectual exploration, regardless of where they stand on the issues discussed by Dr Cofnas. Academics, and especially philosophers, explore ethically difficult matters. The premises they begin from may take them to conclusions that offend or even horrify others. Free institutions don’t tell academics how they should reason their way from a premise to a conclusion, nor should they say that certain questions are prohibited from the off. The only tolerable solution is for universities to step up to the challenge of pluralism, and insist that offended students and staff learn to live with difference of opinion – or, even better, engage with and improve the arguments of those they disagree with. The Free Speech Union hopes that Emmanuel and Cambridge come to realise that meeting that challenge is integral to their purpose and credibility as educational institutions.
Please consider joining/donating to The Free Speech Union:
And again, consider subscribing to Cofnas’ Substack:
The point of the post is not "do you agree with Nathan Cofnas". It's "should Nathan Cofnas be fired because people disagree with him".
The answer to both questions can be no!
An excellent and principled use of your own growing and highly-credible platform.
I do wonder why, with plenty of billionaires in the world who are not George Soros, there is no comparable but ethically principled use of money to achieve goals more conducive to the preservation of the Western Enlightenment. If Cambridge and Oxford have fallen, surely in this the interwebs age the funding of the careers of principled academics can be accomplished so that rotten institutions can just go rot.