25 year Anniversary of my "Professing" Career

It was 25 years ago this month that I defended my PhD thesis at the University of Bristol.  Then my academic career journey began with my first job in the Department of Philosophy at Aberdeen University in Scotland (a one year lectureship appointment).  

In my first year of teaching at Aberdeen I taught 4 courses:  a 1st year course "Philosophy, Politics and Society", a 3rd year course "Social and Political Philosophy", a fourth year research seminar on "Karl Marx" and and 3rd/4th year "Topics" seminar.  In my first year I taught approximately 130 students.  This year at Queen's University I am also teaching 4 courses, but for a much larger cohort:  approximately 675 students!  And back in 1999 the central question that consumed most of my intellectual energy was "How can Rawlsian justice be defended against the onslaught of criticisms from its critics?".  Today the central question that consumes most of my intellectual energy is "What constitutes "well-ordered" science in the 21st century?"  So a lot has changed over the quarter of a century of my academic career. 

In this post I will just note the various places I moved around to during my somewhat bohemian academic career- I have had the privilege of having great colleagues and thousands of students in 9 different universities from 5 different countries.  In two future posts I will write some substantive reflections on both research and teaching, casting an eye on what I see as key moments or insights that have helped me fuel my curiosity and enthusiasm for both teaching and research.  I can honestly say that my love for both teaching and research has never been higher than it is at this point.  I consider myself extremely fortunate to have the career that I have, I could not think of anything more rewarding than doing research and conversing with bright and open-minded students.  

Assuming my good health can persist to enable me to continue working into the more distant future, I see the "25 year mark" of my career as approximating the "mid-point" of my academic career.  I am really looking forward to the intellectual adventures and career opportunities the future holds, whatever they may be.

Over the past quarter of a century I have had the great opportunity to live and work at some great places, all of which have played formative roles in shaping my intellectual development and fueling my passion for research and teaching.  Here is a summary of where my career has taken me so far:

First job:  Lectureship at the University of Aberdeen (Philosophy Department)

Second job:  Lectureship at the University of Birmingham (Department of Political Science and International Relations) *This was a big move, as I switched from Philosophy to Political Science

Third job:  Lectureship at the University of Manchester (Department of Government)  I thought I might have remained here for the rest of my career (very strong theory group there) but there were familial considerations that meant I kept an eye out for jobs back in Canada.

Fourth job:  Assistant (then Associate) Professor at Waterloo University (Department of Political Science, cross-appointed with Philosophy) 

Fifth job:  One year research fellowship at Oxford University (Department of Politics and International Relations)  This was my first ever research leave, after 7 years of continuous full-time teaching at 4 different universities, so it was a very productive research year for me.  I did not have any teaching responsibilities with this position, but did organize and host a two-day conference on "Genetics and Justice" with some funding I received from the Wellcome Trust.  I also had the opportunity to extract the DNA from a strawberry and have a tour of the Sanger Institute at an educational course I attended that year. 

Sixth job:  Queen's National Scholar and Associate Professor (eventually Full) at Queen's University (Department of Political Studies, cross-appointed with Philosophy).  I have stayed here for the past 16 years.

Seventh job:  One semester as Visiting Professor at UCLA (Luskin School of Public Affairs) 

Eighth "placement":  One semester as Fulbright Research Chair in the Social Sciences at University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa (Department of Political Science)

Nineth job:  Visiting Professor at Bilkent University (Department of Philosophy) in Türkiye.

An amazing part of working in academia is that one has the opportunity to take sabbaticals, which I consider to have been critical in keeping my passion for learning and teaching burning over the past 25 years.  

In two separate future posts I will write up some reflections on both research and teaching at the 25 year mark.  

Cheers, 

Colin

Reading Group Meeting #1 (Second Look)

 

I will be running a summer/autumn reading group on the new book Look Again. 

We will meet once in August, September and October at Lake Ontario part to read through the book in 3 meetings. This is a book about how our daily routines can impact (for better and worse) are brains and wellbeing. Here the book summary from the publisher’s website:

Have you ever noticed that what is thrilling on Monday tends to become boring on Friday? Even exciting relationships, stimulating jobs, and breathtaking works of art lose their sparkle after a while. People stop noticing what is most wonderful in their own lives. They also stop noticing what is terrible. They get used to dirty air. They stay in abusive relationships. People grow to accept authoritarianism and take foolish risks. They become unconcerned by their own misconduct, blind to inequality, and are more liable to believe misinformation than ever before.

But what if we could find a way to see everything anew? What if you could regain sensitivity, not only to the great things in your life, but also to the terrible things you stopped noticing and so don’t try to change?

Now, neuroscience professor Tali Sharot and Harvard law professor (and presidential advisor) Cass R. Sunstein investigate why we stop noticing both the great and not-so-great things around us and how to “dishabituate” at the office, in the bedroom, at the store, on social media, and in the voting booth. This groundbreaking work, based on decades of research in the psychological and biological sciences, illuminates how we can reignite the sparks of joy, innovate, and recognize where improvements urgently need to be made. The key to this disruption—to seeing, feeling, and noticing again—is change. By temporarily changing your environment, changing the rules, changing the people you interact with—or even just stepping back and imagining change—you regain sensitivity, allowing you to more clearly identify the bad and more deeply appreciate the good.

The first meeting will take place in August, I am posting this early so you have time to order the book (there is no free copy online as it is a new book).

Here is an interview with Sunstein to help you determine if you have an interest in this topic:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fJlA8bvLT9Y

And a video by Tali Sharot:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vTLUEwbhUmM

For the first meeting we will read through the following sections of Part One of the book:

Introduction

Part One: Well-Being

1. Happiness: On Ice Cream, the Midlife Crisis, and Monogamy.

2. Variety: Why You Should Chop Up the Good but Swallow the Bad Whole

3. Social Media: How to Wake Up from a Technology Induced Comma

4. Resilience: A Crucial Ingredient for a Healthy Mind

Book Summary for Part 1

Introduction

The book begins by noting how we habituate to both good and bad experiences, it is part of human nature.  Studies show, for example, that about 43 hours into a tropical vacation people start to habituate and the enjoyment of the vacation starts to diminish.  When stimuli are repeated our response to it becomes dulled.  The book explores how this habituation might be overcome, in the office, bedroom/relationships, etc.  Also, we can habituate to bad experiences (heartache) and this can be a bad thing because it makes us less motivated to change.  The book will explore how we habituate to both the good and the bad, and how to dishabituate.

Note:  habituation is crucial to our survival, helps us adapt quickly to our environment. 

Question #1:  do you think you habituate quickly or slowly to pleasurable/painful experiences?

Chapter 1 Well Being

“Pleasure results from incomplete and intermittent satisfaction of desires” = many of the things that bring us joy in life can only be experienced occasionally, not constantly (otherwise, the joy diminishes through habituation).

Dishabituation:  stay away from the stimuli for a while, so its goodness surprises us again.  This applies to our fav foods, romantic partner, sunshine, work, etc.

Question #2:  What can we, realistically, do to dishabituate, at work, with friends and family and romantic partners?  Maybe you can alter your environment to some degree (e.g. hours of the day devoted to certain types of work, or how much free time you spend together or apart from your partner, etc.).  Some folks might simply keep changing jobs and partners to keep things “fresh and interesting’.  The authors note you might also try changing your thoughts (p. 21):  imagine life without your family or home, etc.

Why do we habituate?  It drives us to move forward to progress (growth!)

Midlife sameness: “when change halts- when you stop learning and progressing- depression kicks in”.

Question #3:  Any thoughts on midlife “sameness”, have you experienced it?  Any potential strategies you have found helpful?  The authors suggest experiences (rather than stuff) helps.  Like learning new skills, vacations, etc.

Habituation seems to be a foil in our romantic lives.  Oscar Wilde says “It is very romantic to be in love. But there is nothing romantic about a definite proposal… Then the excitement is all over.  The very essence of romance is uncertainty.”  Does this mean long-term relationships and romance are contradictory?  That our genuinely romantic connections must be short-lived?  The authors note the work of Ester Perel who addresses this in her Ted Talk

Explorers vs Exploiters

Explores like adventure and novelty, they can be comfy with a high degree of uncertainty.

Exploiters make choices with known benefits – the familiar.  They do not like uncertainty.

Question #4:  Are you more an explorer or exploiter?  You may be a different types in different domains:  when it comes to food and the realm of ideas I am an explorer, but I am more of an exploiter when it comes to my morning routines like exercise.  Sabbaticals help me experience my explore-nature by moving me to a new city / country to teach or research for a few months every so many years.  But for the most part I prefer to stay home with family and doing research/teaching. I may do day outings for a break but I have not done a real “travel vacation” (the closest thing that came to that was nearly 30 years ago for my honeymoon).  I have travelled, but it is always for some work related purpose vs “just for fun”.    How about yourself? 

Chapter Two: Variety

Chop up the good but swallow the bad whole

People often pursue happiness and purpose in life, but often overlook the importance of VARIATION.  Living a life with new experiences- new places, people, experiences, a diversity in what you see and how you feel (“psychologically rich life”)

Question #5:  How would you rank the importance of happiness, meaning and variety?  Have you pursued some of these ends more than others?  Any regrets or lessons learned on your journey so far?

Chapter Three:  Social Media

The authors argue that what really matters about screen time and our wellbeing is not the quantity of time online, but rather than quality of that time.  What kind of information are you consuming?  Is it all negative news stories, or airbrushed celebrity photos or curated FB pictures rather than posts about new scientific discoveries or substantive/novel ideas?

Chapter Four:  Resilience

Resilience is our ability to bounce back after adversity, and there is a large variation in people’s resilience.  The author’s note that rumination – chewing a thought over and over—can lead to depression.  The chapter discusses post-pandemic anxiety, angst experienced by some about returning to “normal life”.

Question #6:  What observations did you make about resilience during the pandemic?  For some people the prolonged isolation and uncertainty was easier than it was for others.  What kinds of factors do you think influenced this (e.g. people living alone vs with family members, or those working remotely or with school aged kids at home, etc.).  How did the experience of pandemic impact your own mental health and wellbeing? 

Cheers, 

Colin

Science and Public Policy

 

For the past 25 years I have been researching the social and ethical implications of the genetic revolution, which has profoundly impacted both the topics I have worked on, as well as the methodologies I employ in my research.  

The latter has been the most surprising part of the evolution of my thinking over the past quarter of a century.  It certainly was not something I intentionally sought to cultivate,  When I initially started down this path of research I thought I would simply be deploying something like a Rawlsian-like analysis to the genetic revolution.  But as I learned more about human biology (e.g. the complex interaction between genes and environment), the epistemic uncertainty that pervades all areas of science, new discoveries in the biology of aging, how politicized most areas of science are, and the plurality of complex considerations that arise in the context of policy decision-making to regulate biomedical innovation, I became interdisciplinary in my intellectual curiosity and understanding of these issues.  This compelled me to abandoned what I now see as fatally abstract, arm-chair oriented normative theorizing.   

The intersection of science and democracy and public policy decision-making is, IMHO, the most significant and fascinating topic scholars in the humanities and social sciences could address in the 21st century.  Sadly this remains a somewhat marginalized area of study in the humanities and social sciences.  If there were new specialized programs or courses or areas for new hires that universities should prioritize it would be in this area of study.  

Developments like climate change, the COVID-19 pandemic and Artificial Intelligence are attracting the attention of many scholars now.  I think this is, overall, an encouraging development, but it is not necessarily a positive development.  There is a risk that scholars outside of science are drawn to specific areas of scientific research deemed "hot topics" (as gene therapy was in the late 1990s, so it is a pitfall I myself fell into for the first 3-5 years of my research) because of what they are exposed to in the "mediated realities" of online and offline media rather than a comprehensive understanding of the science.   

One of the most important lessons I have learned, writing for, and publishing in, science and medicine journals over the past 20 years is that there is a significant degree of uncertainty and disagreement in all areas of science.  There are, like there is in philosophy and political theory, different "camps" and it takes time to come to understand why, and how, experts within the same field of study can come to hold opposing viewpoints on issues (e.g. what will life expectancy be 50 years into the future?, or what is the most effective way to ameliorate health disparities?).  When philosophers and political theorists engage with the policy implications of science they must go to great efforts to understand how the science is "framed" for public communication, and be aware that science communication is political communication.  

The proliferation of social media like Twitter has helped opened doors of interdisciplinary dialogue that were previously harder to open.  But it has also increased the risk that scholars in the humanities and social sciences will unwittingly become proponents of the politicization of science, with little understanding of the science they are addressing.  To guard against these risks scholars that are serious about engaging with science must take the time to become familiar with the science they are engaging with, with all its uncertainties, the different communicative frames it deploys and an awareness that there are agendas, limited research budgets, and careerist incentives behind the real (non-ideal) scientific enterprise. 

Cheers, 

Colin