Jonathan Haidt on Gen Z Fragility, Social Media, and the Cult of Safety (YouTube Video Transcript)

(00:00:00) Your YouTube transcript will appear here (00:00:00) Hey there friends, John Pola here. So (00:00:03) this is a slightly different format than (00:00:05) our usual podcast episodes on Thursdays, (00:00:08) but I am excited to share this (00:00:10) conversation with Jonathan height (00:00:12) because he is one of the most important (00:00:14) thinkers, researchers and academics in (00:00:18) our country. His books, The Righteous (00:00:19) Mind, The Coddling of the American Mind, (00:00:21) and Anxious Generation are reads and (00:00:24) have played a really big role, an (00:00:27) outsized role in influencing the way I (00:00:29) understand what's going on in our (00:00:31) country and with our kids. And so, if (00:00:34) you like this stuff, if you want to get (00:00:36) more of it, of course, don't forget to (00:00:37) hit the like button and subscribe to the (00:00:39) channel. And now, without further ado, (00:00:41) here's my conversation with Jonathan (00:00:43) Height. (00:00:45) Why did you co-author The Coddling of (00:00:47) the American Mind? (00:00:48) >> In 2014, I was just gearing up to to (00:00:52) write a book on on the social psychology (00:00:54) of capitalism uh on what moral (00:00:57) psychology can can do to help us (00:00:58) understand um all the the political (00:01:01) debate over capitalism when my friend (00:01:03) Greg Luciano came to me uh in May and (00:01:06) said, "John, weird stuff is happening on (00:01:08) campus. (00:01:09) um students are are acting or or talking (00:01:12) in the very ways that I had learned to (00:01:14) stop talking when I uh learned cognitive (00:01:18) behavioral therapy for depression. This (00:01:19) is Greg talking to me. And I just begun (00:01:21) to see some of this myself. Uh the (00:01:23) reactions to to to words and speakers (00:01:26) and books as if they were dangerous or (00:01:28) violent. Um so I joined Greg in working (00:01:31) on this uh essay for The Atlantic. It (00:01:34) had very little to do with my research (00:01:35) originally. It wasn't about morality and (00:01:37) politics. But what we began to see in (00:01:40) 2014 is the the arrival of a kind of a (00:01:43) new moral matrix. That is a new a new (00:01:46) sort of moral world view in which in (00:01:49) which students are fragile, the world is (00:01:51) dangerous, words and and books and ideas (00:01:54) can be can be a kind of violence. So it (00:01:56) became very interesting to me to to (00:01:58) study um in terms of where did this come (00:02:02) from? um is this good for students or (00:02:04) bad for students? Uh so I've been (00:02:06) working with Greg Luciano on this since (00:02:08) 2014 (00:02:10) >> What does it mean to be an adult? So if (00:02:13) we want to step really really far back (00:02:15) on this question, let's go all the way (00:02:17) back to the beginning of mammals. Okay, (00:02:20) so mammals, it's this it's this (00:02:23) evolutionary innovation for how an adult (00:02:27) can invest a lot in in its offspring. (00:02:30) You know, in most of the animal kingdom, (00:02:32) the female lays the eggs. They're (00:02:34) fertilized outside the body. Often the (00:02:37) the kids are so cheap and unimportant (00:02:39) that sometimes the parents will even eat (00:02:41) them because they can't tell the (00:02:42) difference between their kids and other (00:02:43) kids. Mammals. Mamalia is this is this (00:02:47) uh innovation for keeping the child and (00:02:50) mother together for a long time so the (00:02:53) mother can invest nutrition in it for a (00:02:55) long time and train it for a long time. (00:02:58) And mammals have these big brains. Um, (00:03:01) but how do those brains get wired up? (00:03:03) It's not just waiting to get milk and (00:03:05) nutrition. The whole mammal life plan is (00:03:09) a long period of childhood, which is for (00:03:11) play. In play, we practice the skills (00:03:14) that we'll need as adults. Um, and so to (00:03:18) take the really big picture here, the (00:03:20) whole mammal plan is you have a kid, you (00:03:23) give it its nutrition. At first, the (00:03:25) kid's completely dependent on the (00:03:27) mother. In some species, the father as (00:03:29) well in our in our species certainly. (00:03:31) But the kid gradually works up the (00:03:33) skills, goes further from home and (00:03:35) usually within a year or two can (00:03:37) function as an independent adult and (00:03:39) then reproduce. Now obviously in humans (00:03:41) it's extended even further than that. Uh (00:03:44) but there's a really interesting (00:03:46) difference between humans and um and (00:03:48) chimpanzees and other apes, which is the (00:03:51) other apes, they grow and grow and grow (00:03:53) until they are of reproductive age and (00:03:56) then they reproduce. Humans though do (00:03:58) this funny thing. We grow and grow and (00:04:01) grow until about seven or eight and then (00:04:02) we actually slow down. We slow down our (00:04:05) growth and then we hit a growth spurt (00:04:07) around 11, 12, 13 somewhere in there. (00:04:10) And we don't really know what that slow (00:04:12) period is for, but a lot of (00:04:14) anthropologists and psychologists (00:04:16) speculate that it's for culture (00:04:17) learning. That is the period in which (00:04:20) you find street kids all over the world. (00:04:21) They start around age seven or eight (00:04:23) when they they can be independent. (00:04:24) They're out learning life skills like (00:04:26) how do you steal food? How do you find a (00:04:28) place to sleep? How do you run from the (00:04:30) police? These sorts of issues. And you (00:04:31) see this in the Little Rascals. You see (00:04:33) this in almost all the the great stories (00:04:36) about childhood. It's kids around eight, (00:04:38) nine, ten years old out on their own (00:04:40) having experiences (00:04:42) until the 1990s. We put a stop to it (00:04:45) then. You have to understand that there (00:04:47) was a gigantic crime wave that began in (00:04:49) the late 1960s and it ended somewhat (00:04:52) mysteriously in the early 1990s. And so, (00:04:55) uh, those of us who grew up in the 70s (00:04:57) and 80s, there was a lot of crime. Kids (00:04:59) in New York City often got mugged. I (00:05:02) just talked to somebody about this (00:05:02) yesterday. He said he got mugged seven (00:05:04) times when he was a kid. But nobody (00:05:06) would ever say, "Well, therefore, we (00:05:08) have to lock the kids up. We can't let (00:05:09) them out." It was just understood that (00:05:11) there were risks, but you went out and (00:05:13) you learned how to deal with them. Just (00:05:15) as the crime wave ends in the in the (00:05:17) early 1990s, Americans freak out about (00:05:21) child abduction. We got this idea, it (00:05:23) was a media panic, that if you take your (00:05:25) eyes off your kid, because there were (00:05:28) one or two cases like this, uh if you if (00:05:30) you if you take your eyes off your kid (00:05:32) in a department store, and this happened (00:05:33) in a Sears in Florida in the 19 early (00:05:35) 1980s, uh the kid could be abducted uh (00:05:38) and then murdered and you'll never see (00:05:40) your child again. Therefore, you have to (00:05:42) always be watching your kid. Now, this (00:05:44) was insane. This was never true. But (00:05:47) Americans panicked and uh started (00:05:49) locking up their kids. locking up just (00:05:51) meaning no more unsupervised play. Um I (00:05:54) can show that this is the case uh in (00:05:57) this way when I when I speak around the (00:05:59) country about this issue. I always do a (00:06:01) demonstration where I ask everybody to (00:06:02) think in what year were you let out? How (00:06:05) old were you? So if it was first grade (00:06:07) you should say six. If it was fifth (00:06:09) grade you should say 10. And I put up (00:06:11) all the different grades and everybody (00:06:13) think your number. And then I say, "If (00:06:15) you were born in 1982 or earlier, that (00:06:17) is your Gen X or or baby boom, what's (00:06:21) your year?" Call it out when I point to (00:06:22) you. And I just sweep my finger around (00:06:25) the room and you hear a chorus of 678. (00:06:28) That's it. It's always 67 and 8. And (00:06:30) then I say, "Okay, now if you're born in (00:06:32) 1995 or later, so this is basically Gen (00:06:36) Z, 1995 or '96 is the beginning of it. (00:06:39) Put your hand up. Okay, just you people. (00:06:42) When were you let out?" and you hear a (00:06:44) chorus of 10, 11, 12. Now, you still get (00:06:47) a few eights here and there, but it's (00:06:49) overwhelmingly 5th to 7th grade is when (00:06:53) we began letting kids out. In other (00:06:54) words, just as it got incredibly safe to (00:06:58) go outside, that's when we chose to lock (00:07:00) up our kids. You can also look at it (00:07:03) this way. When I was a kid, kids would (00:07:06) go out and play in the afternoons after (00:07:08) school or on weekends. And suppose there (00:07:10) was a kid who was in fourth grade, a (00:07:11) nine-year-old, who said, "I can't come (00:07:14) out. My parents think it's not safe." We (00:07:17) would all say,"What's the matter with (00:07:18) those parents? Like, should we be (00:07:20) reporting them for child abuse? This is (00:07:21) really weird." And now, if there's a (00:07:24) 9-year-old who's sent out to play, (00:07:26) everyone's going to be like, "What's (00:07:28) wrong with those parents? Should we (00:07:29) report them for child abuse?" So, (00:07:31) something really changed, and it had (00:07:34) nothing to do with actual levels of (00:07:35) danger in our world. We can't know what (00:07:39) caused what because so many things (00:07:41) happened in a row for Gen Z. So suppose (00:07:44) you were born in 1995. Uh so what (00:07:47) happens is already we're beginning to (00:07:50) crack down on kids going outside. So (00:07:52) already for the late millennials, but (00:07:53) especially for Gen Z, they don't get to (00:07:55) go outside and play unsupervised. That's (00:07:57) the first thing. They also um the oldest (00:08:01) Gen Z kids are about six years old when (00:08:03) 911 happens. Now, that doesn't affect (00:08:06) kids, but it does begin to add to sort (00:08:08) of the national paranoia. I don't know (00:08:10) that this had an influence, but it it (00:08:12) may be a piece of it. The Coline (00:08:14) shooting happens in in 1999, and it's (00:08:18) interpreted as a response to the kids (00:08:20) being bullied and excluded. And so (00:08:22) America imposes state by state, but uh (00:08:25) over the next few years between 2001 and (00:08:28) 2006 or 7, most states impose um um (00:08:32) anti-bullying programs and anti-bullying (00:08:34) training. Uh they're generally not very (00:08:36) effective programs, but one thing that (00:08:38) they do is they um they they they make (00:08:41) schools and adults responsible to stop (00:08:44) teasing and conflict on the playground. (00:08:47) Um they're often overinterpreted. Now, (00:08:50) here are the research. I don't want to (00:08:51) go too far in this because it's hard. (00:08:53) Greg Luciano and I looked for research (00:08:55) on whether bullying programs work or (00:08:57) backfire. We couldn't really get clarity (00:08:58) on that, but I want to just trace this (00:09:00) out as all of a piece. Rising fear of (00:09:03) abduction, 9/11 and paranoia, (00:09:06) anti-bullying policies. And so by the (00:09:08) time you get up to about 2006 or so, you (00:09:11) already have kids who have been deprived (00:09:14) of the normal experiences that would (00:09:15) allow them to get stronger and tougher (00:09:17) from playing and and having normal (00:09:19) conflict. That's just when social media (00:09:21) arrives. So in 2006, Facebook opens up (00:09:24) to the world. Anyone can have an (00:09:26) account. You have to be 13, but you can (00:09:28) lie at any age and get an account. In (00:09:30) those early years, social media is not (00:09:32) particularly toxic. It's just look at (00:09:34) me, here are my friends, here are the (00:09:35) bands that I like. uh between 2009 and (00:09:38) 2012 um that's when social media changes (00:09:41) and becomes much more um addictive and (00:09:45) much more evaluative. That is you get (00:09:47) the like button in 2009. Uh you get um (00:09:51) uh you get retweeting, you get sharing, (00:09:54) you it becomes much more viral and much (00:09:57) better at shaming people, much more much (00:09:59) better at cancelling people. So, Gen Z, (00:10:02) they're just hitting their teen years as (00:10:04) social media becomes much more toxic. (00:10:07) So, all we know for sure is that Gen Z (00:10:10) shows an enormous increase in (00:10:12) depression, anxiety, but because so many (00:10:14) things happen to them, we can't point to (00:10:16) any one and say, well, this is what (00:10:17) caused it. (00:10:18) >> Why should parents be worried about an (00:10:20) overscheduled childhood? (00:10:22) >> So, if we think about human children as (00:10:24) mammals who basically need lots and lots (00:10:26) of play, this is the main business of (00:10:28) childhood. is the main thing they're (00:10:30) supposed to do. They have homework, too. (00:10:33) And and you know, when I was a kid, you (00:10:35) had homework, but you also would play (00:10:36) every day. Well, as the homework goes (00:10:39) up, that crowds things out. Although, (00:10:41) actually, amount of homework hasn't (00:10:43) changed so much. It's not the homework (00:10:45) per se, which is the problem. It's all (00:10:48) the extracurricular activities that now (00:10:50) we began doing in order, especially (00:10:52) middle class and above. Uh, families are (00:10:55) concerned about getting the kid into (00:10:56) college. So there's just a lot more (00:10:58) stuff they have to do beyond school that (00:11:01) crowds out play. In more recent years, (00:11:03) as kids have gotten devices, they're so (00:11:06) connected, they have so much other stuff (00:11:08) coming in that also takes up a lot of (00:11:10) time. And one thing I've learned from (00:11:12) talking with a lot of middle school and (00:11:13) high school administrators in the re in (00:11:15) recent months is that the kids are also (00:11:17) hyperconnected to their teachers and to (00:11:20) each other for class projects. So the (00:11:23) total amount of incoming stuff that they (00:11:25) have to attend to, you know, a lot of us (00:11:28) adults who are, you know, busy (00:11:29) professionals, we feel like, I can't (00:11:31) take it anymore. I've got too much (00:11:32) email, too many texts. I can't live this (00:11:34) way. Well, guess what? That's now kind (00:11:37) of what it feels like to be a seventh or (00:11:38) eighth grader. So for all these reasons, (00:11:42) all these reasons, all these different (00:11:43) factors are coming in and just pushing (00:11:45) out time for play, (00:11:48) substituting electronic connections, (00:11:50) homework, after school activities, all (00:11:53) done with this overarching feeling of of (00:11:55) anxiety of will this be enough? Will I (00:11:59) keep up? Will I be in the top of of the (00:12:02) class? Will I get into a good college? (00:12:04) So, it's really tough to be a kid today. (00:12:07) Uh there are all these factors changing (00:12:08) childhood. But if you keep your eye on (00:12:11) play and you say this is the most (00:12:12) nutritious thing kids need to consume, (00:12:15) this is the thing they most need to (00:12:17) develop and this is the thing we're most (00:12:19) taking away from them. Are kids these (00:12:21) days really different than previous (00:12:23) generations? One thing that is (00:12:25) consistent across thousands of years of (00:12:27) history is that each generation looks at (00:12:30) the one or two behind it and says (00:12:33) they're weak, they're over emotional, (00:12:36) they're lazy, whatever it is. Um uh part (00:12:39) of this is that there are real (00:12:40) differences between generation and uh (00:12:43) losses loom larger than gains. Whatever (00:12:45) they're doing, we don't value and the (00:12:47) things that we did that they don't do, (00:12:49) we do value. That's a piece of it. (00:12:51) Another piece is just the developmental (00:12:53) piece. Um, older people have a dim view (00:12:56) of younger people whose brains aren't (00:12:58) fully developed with self-control, let's (00:12:59) say, just for example. So, you have (00:13:03) normal intergenerational (00:13:04) misunderstandings. And you see this in (00:13:06) in writings from ancient Greece and (00:13:08) ancient Rome. Maybe that's all that it (00:13:10) is today. Maybe it's just parents today (00:13:12) or the older generation today is saying (00:13:15) why, you know, why can't they be like we (00:13:16) were perfect in every way. But then you (00:13:19) look at the mental health stats. uh you (00:13:21) look at rates of depression and anxiety (00:13:25) which uh were fairly stable until around (00:13:28) 2011 2012 teen mental health the the (00:13:32) lines for depression anxiety were pretty (00:13:33) flat uh and then suddenly in 2012 plus (00:13:36) or minus a year the boys go up and the (00:13:40) girls go way up. It's it's the kind of (00:13:42) hockey stick pattern like you know as (00:13:44) people have seen with global carbon (00:13:46) dioxide or whatever you know whatever (00:13:48) stat you want to get people worried (00:13:49) about. You show a a graph like this. (00:13:52) Well, that's what happened to depression (00:13:55) uh and anxiety for girls. Some experts (00:13:58) have said, "Oh, come on. It's just (00:14:01) changes in self-report. Uh it's just Gen (00:14:03) Z is so comfortable talking about mental (00:14:05) health. This is a good thing. Nothing to (00:14:08) be worried about." Um, but that is not (00:14:12) true and you can see that it's not true (00:14:14) when you look at behaviors. So, if it (00:14:16) was just self-report depression, that's (00:14:19) a reasonable hypothesis. But if you look (00:14:21) at self harm, it's the exact same thing. (00:14:25) Um if you there are several studies in (00:14:26) the US and the UK uh and Canada (00:14:30) uh where they they plot the number of (00:14:34) teen girls out of a 100,000 in the (00:14:36) population that are admitted to (00:14:38) hospitals every year because they cut (00:14:40) themselves. It's called non self-injury. (00:14:43) It's related to anxiety. And the lines (00:14:46) were pretty stable until about 2009 (00:14:48) 2010. Then they start rising very very (00:14:51) fast. Interestingly, this was a study to (00:14:54) publish in 2015. The the oldest teen (00:14:57) girls rise about 70%. It's a gigantic (00:14:59) increase. Uh but the youngest teen girls (00:15:02) start very low. They are up 189%. Nearly (00:15:07) triple nearly triple just since about (00:15:09) 2010. So something big is happening (00:15:12) especially to younger teen girls. The (00:15:14) boys data is perfectly flat. Boys are (00:15:16) not self harm anymore. But there's also (00:15:18) a line on that graph in this 2015 study (00:15:21) for young women in their 20s and that (00:15:23) line is actually pretty flat. Now those (00:15:25) are millennials in 2015 those young (00:15:29) women were still uh millennials. It (00:15:31) wasn't Gen Z yet. So I think this is (00:15:34) very revealing that it's not that all (00:15:37) women started selfharming. It's that Gen (00:15:40) Z started self harming and that it's the (00:15:43) middle school girls especially whose (00:15:44) lives changed. We also see the same (00:15:47) patterns in (00:15:49) um is down around the world overall. (00:15:53) It's up in the United States for almost (00:15:55) all age groups, both sexes, (00:15:58) typically something like 10 to 30% for (00:16:01) different age groups except for young (00:16:03) women. Uh there it's up a lot more, more (00:16:06) than 100%. For the pre-teen girls, it's (00:16:08) actually up 150%. So, um something big (00:16:12) is happening. It's not just, oh, why (00:16:15) can't they be like we were? No, it's (00:16:16) that their mental health has fallen off (00:16:18) a cliff and it is showing up in self (00:16:21) harm. It's showing up in s. So, this is (00:16:24) not just a crossgenerational (00:16:26) misunderstanding. (00:16:27) >> Does social media really hurt kids (00:16:29) mental health? (00:16:30) >> So, since I've been studying and writing (00:16:32) about this, the normal processes of of (00:16:34) of academic life kick in, which is (00:16:36) great. People say, "No, you know, you're (00:16:38) wrong. Here's why." Um, and so, uh, to (00:16:41) to to try to get a handle on on what all (00:16:44) the data is, I mean, there are lots of (00:16:45) studies, and some of them are (00:16:46) contradictory. So, I created two Google (00:16:49) documents. They're sort they're open (00:16:50) source Google documents. Um, uh, one is (00:16:53) just every study I can find on what's (00:16:56) happening to teen mental health in the (00:16:57) United States, in the UK. Um, and the (00:17:00) other one is what is the evidence that (00:17:02) social media is a contributor? And for (00:17:04) both Google documents, I tweeted about (00:17:06) them and invited researchers to comment (00:17:08) on them. They're open source. Anyone can (00:17:10) come. I'll give them permission to edit (00:17:11) it and they can add add their add their (00:17:13) their ideas. (00:17:15) Um, and what's happened, it's been (00:17:17) really interesting. Um, for the lit (00:17:19) review on what's happening to teen (00:17:21) mental health, there's no dispute. (00:17:23) Nobody has said no, you're wrong. Um, (00:17:25) and each year, I've been doing this for (00:17:27) a year and a half now. All the new (00:17:28) studies generally show things continue (00:17:31) to get worse. Um, I've also added in uh (00:17:34) similar documents for Australia, New (00:17:36) Zealand. Uh I'm working on one for (00:17:38) Spain. We have Canada. Uh they're all (00:17:40) showing similar patterns. Sometimes it's (00:17:42) delayed and sometimes not as sharp, but (00:17:45) this is not just the United States. It (00:17:47) certainly is all the English-sp (00:17:48) speakaking countries. So that's the (00:17:50) story on mental health. It's bad and (00:17:52) it's always worse for girls than boys. (00:17:56) The other document is what's the (00:17:58) evidence that um social media is is a (00:18:01) cause. And here there is much more (00:18:03) debate. Um, however, what I found is (00:18:07) that the articles saying it's no (00:18:09) problem, they almost always focus on (00:18:12) screen time or digital device use. And (00:18:15) so there are a lot of correlational (00:18:17) studies. And if you look at how much (00:18:19) time a kid spends looking at screens, (00:18:21) including, you know, his laptop, (00:18:23) Netflix, video games, everything, and (00:18:26) you correlate that with mental health, (00:18:28) sometimes you find a relationship, (00:18:30) sometimes you don't. But it's very (00:18:31) small. So just looking at screens (00:18:34) doesn't seem to be the big problem. But (00:18:36) even in those studies when you can zoom (00:18:38) in on social media, the effect size, the (00:18:41) correlation with bad mental health (00:18:43) outcomes is always much bigger. And then (00:18:46) if you can just look at girls as opposed (00:18:48) to boys, the effect size is even bigger (00:18:50) for girls and often quite small for (00:18:52) boys. (00:18:53) So I think what we're seeing is that in (00:18:55) the correlational studies, light use of (00:18:58) social media does not seem to be (00:19:00) associated with depression and anxiety, (00:19:02) but heavy use of social media for teen (00:19:06) girls is very consistently associated (00:19:09) with a rise, a big rise, usually more (00:19:11) than a doubling of depression and (00:19:13) anxiety. That's the correlational data. (00:19:16) Of course, correlation doesn't show (00:19:17) causation. Maybe depressed kids are the (00:19:20) ones who go to social media and spend (00:19:22) all their time there. So for that we (00:19:24) looked at experiments uh and we found um (00:19:27) 10 experiments so far uh 10 true (00:19:29) experiments where they used random (00:19:31) assignment. They didn't all use teens so (00:19:33) they're differently important here. And (00:19:35) so if you have correlational evidence (00:19:37) and you have experimental evidence it's (00:19:39) not 100% consistent but it's a pretty (00:19:42) good story. (00:19:44) It seems to me that the evidence is now (00:19:46) saying yes, there is a causal effect. Uh (00:19:50) it doesn't explain most of the variance. (00:19:51) It's not the only thing happening. Um (00:19:54) but if you have something that (00:19:56) correlates 0.15 or 02 with depression (00:19:59) and anxiety, are you going to let your (00:20:01) kids do it just because it's not 100% (00:20:03) certain that it's harmful? I wouldn't. (00:20:06) >> Depression and anxiety among our kids is (00:20:09) bad. But do the problems go even deeper? (00:20:12) So, I've been I've been focused in my (00:20:14) research on depression and anxiety as (00:20:17) the outcomes because that's where we (00:20:19) have good data. Those are they're (00:20:21) they're you know clinically defined. (00:20:23) There's a ton of data from a lot of (00:20:25) countries. So, I'm focused on that. But (00:20:27) the stories that I hear from parents and (00:20:29) teachers aren't just about anxiety and (00:20:32) depression. (00:20:33) They're mostly about a kind of a (00:20:34) fragility and incompetence. And so, in (00:20:37) fact, just two days ago, I I gave a talk (00:20:39) back at my old middle school. I grew up (00:20:41) in Scarsdale, New York. And the uh the (00:20:43) the principal had read the coddling the (00:20:45) American mind. She invited me back to to (00:20:47) to give a talk. I I spoke with the (00:20:49) entire faculty of the school. Um and and (00:20:52) the teachers were telling me things (00:20:53) like, you know, we have sixth graders (00:20:55) coming in. They've never used a hammer. (00:20:57) They have no idea how to use a hammer. (00:20:59) Um they've never used a stove. They've (00:21:01) never, you know, lit lit a stove in the (00:21:04) home home economics class. So, we have (00:21:07) kids who have been grossly overprotected (00:21:09) from anything that could remotely harm (00:21:10) them. But it's not just that they don't (00:21:13) know how to use those tools. It's that (00:21:16) they haven't had the thousands of rounds (00:21:18) of feedback from life where you do (00:21:21) something, maybe you hit your thumb. (00:21:23) Well, then you learn how to not hit your (00:21:24) thumb. Maybe you burn your finger. Well, (00:21:26) you learn how to not burn your finger. (00:21:28) There's a kind of a um um a fragility, (00:21:32) an incompetence is what they is is what (00:21:34) they talked about. Uh because these kids (00:21:38) have just been cocooned, protected. Um (00:21:41) they haven't had the interaction with (00:21:42) life that toughens you, makes you (00:21:45) willing to accept risk, small risks at (00:21:47) first, larger risks as you get older. Uh (00:21:50) and you have to start somewhere. You (00:21:51) have to develop the ability to judge (00:21:53) risk for yourself. That should be a (00:21:56) lifelong process at least from early (00:21:58) elementary school. Um, but for many of (00:22:00) our kids, it's that's not starting until (00:22:02) much later in life. And they uh seem (00:22:07) paralyzed by risk or or anxious by small (00:22:10) risks. (00:22:12) >> Do fragile kids become failed adults? (00:22:16) So, you know, most of us want our kids (00:22:18) to be a force in the world. We want them (00:22:20) to have an effect on the world. We want (00:22:22) them to be leaders. We want them to (00:22:24) stand up to injustice. We want them to (00:22:26) fix things, build things, innovate, take (00:22:28) risks. (00:22:29) You know, we don't just want our kids to (00:22:31) get a corporate job and do the same (00:22:33) thing for their whole lives and not take (00:22:35) any chances. But if they don't have (00:22:37) practice taking risks and taking (00:22:39) chances, if they don't develop the (00:22:41) confidence that they can go into the (00:22:42) unknown and come back, then they're not (00:22:45) going to lead bold, innovative, or (00:22:48) perhaps even important lives. So I think (00:22:50) the implications even for our economy (00:22:53) are enormous. I teach in a business (00:22:55) school. I I came here to NYU Stern in in (00:22:57) 2011 and I've developed an enormous (00:23:00) respect for entrepreneurs for for the (00:23:03) way that business people think, for the (00:23:05) way they're always thinking. Hey, if if (00:23:09) we put this with this and we fund it (00:23:11) this way, we can create this great new (00:23:13) thing. And then they try it and then (00:23:15) they fail most of the time. Most (00:23:17) businesses fail, but they do it again. (00:23:19) Um, I've developed tremendous respect (00:23:22) for the way this way of thinking and (00:23:24) what it does for our world. But if we (00:23:26) have a generation growing up in which (00:23:28) they'll be much less likely to do that (00:23:31) and there is possibly a very concerning (00:23:34) sex difference, if it's the girls who (00:23:36) are much more anxious than the boys, (00:23:38) then there's at least the possibility (00:23:40) that we're going to see gender gaps (00:23:43) close for the next few years as as (00:23:45) there's a lot of opportunity opening up (00:23:47) for women, older women, Gen X and (00:23:49) millennial women. But as Gen Z enters (00:23:52) the work world, which they're just (00:23:53) beginning to do, we might even see that (00:23:56) those with anxiety disorders are going (00:23:58) to be less likely to start businesses, (00:24:01) less likely to take risks. They're going (00:24:02) to play it safe, and that could end up (00:24:05) increasing the gender divide sometime, (00:24:07) let's say, in the 2030s. How can people (00:24:09) achieve happiness? (00:24:11) >> There's a movement in psychology called (00:24:12) positive psychology. It looks at the (00:24:14) sources and conditions for human (00:24:16) flourishing. I've been involved with it (00:24:17) since the beginning in around 1999. Um, (00:24:20) and uh, the research I've done and the (00:24:23) the and the things I've written point to (00:24:25) a a fairly simple conclusion. Happiness (00:24:28) doesn't come from getting what you want. (00:24:30) That's very short-lived. Um, happiness (00:24:34) does come more from within. That's a (00:24:36) better hypothesis. But even that's not (00:24:38) quite right. The best way to say it is (00:24:40) that happiness comes from between. That (00:24:43) is happiness comes from getting the (00:24:45) right kind of relationship or (00:24:47) embeddedness between yourself and other (00:24:49) people between yourself and your work or (00:24:52) something productive (00:24:54) and between yourself and something (00:24:56) larger than yourself. We all need to (00:24:58) feel feel connected integrated part of (00:25:02) something. (00:25:03) Modern life has made that harder to (00:25:06) achieve. Um, western societies are often (00:25:09) at risk of of of a sense of depression, (00:25:12) isolation, alienation. People have been (00:25:14) writing about this since the late 19th (00:25:15) century. But if you keep your eye on on (00:25:17) this idea that happiness comes from (00:25:19) between and then you look at the lives (00:25:22) of of kids today, um, I think you can (00:25:24) see where some of the trouble lies. (00:25:26) There are a few psychological ideas that (00:25:28) might be helpful in understanding what's (00:25:29) happening here. One is the idea that the (00:25:32) that the mind is divided into parts that (00:25:34) sometimes conflict. This is an idea that (00:25:36) it's it's occurred to to thinkers in (00:25:38) every every ancient society. Um and so a (00:25:41) metaphor that I've used in my writing uh (00:25:43) is that the mind is divided like a rider (00:25:46) and an elephant where the rider is our (00:25:48) conscious reasoning and the elephant is (00:25:51) everything else that's happening all the (00:25:53) automatic and intuitive processes. So if (00:25:55) you look at it this way you see that (00:25:58) school or education is is aimed at the (00:26:01) writer. We teach kids facts. We teach (00:26:03) them to write. We teach them to analyze. (00:26:06) But most of development is the elephant. (00:26:09) Most of development or maturity is (00:26:11) developing the automatic thought (00:26:13) processes, the virtues, the social (00:26:16) skills that will make you successful in (00:26:18) life. So a good education, it affects (00:26:21) both the rider and the elephant and the (00:26:23) integration of the two so that they work (00:26:25) well together. We all know people who (00:26:27) are neurotic, who seem at war with (00:26:30) themselves, who are self-contradictory. (00:26:33) So if you think about the rider and the (00:26:34) elephant, it's very helpful for thinking (00:26:36) about child development. So now you can (00:26:38) see that in school it's mostly about the (00:26:41) rider, but in play it's mostly about the (00:26:43) elephant. Kids learn conflict resolution (00:26:45) skills, they learn non-verbal skills, (00:26:47) they learn to read each other, they (00:26:49) learn teamwork. Um, this is why play is (00:26:53) so important and why when we shifted (00:26:56) from from kids having a lot of free play (00:26:58) time in afternoons and weekends to it (00:27:00) all being about training for getting (00:27:03) into college and learning and cramming (00:27:06) and learning Chinese and and various (00:27:09) other skills. Um, I think we've created (00:27:12) unbalanced kids who are having a hard (00:27:14) time flourishing. So if we think about (00:27:16) it in terms of the rider and the (00:27:17) elephant, teenagers coming to college (00:27:19) now are very smart. I mean they have (00:27:21) higher IQs than in the past. They work (00:27:24) hard. They know a lot. But they're often (00:27:27) having a failure to thrive. They're (00:27:29) easily discouraged. They're easily (00:27:30) discouraged by a bad grade, by negative (00:27:33) feedback, by social rejection. they they (00:27:36) they have failed to develop the sort of (00:27:37) the normal toughness or independence (00:27:40) that will take them into new situations (00:27:42) that will take them to a semester abroad (00:27:44) that will lead them to take chances (00:27:46) socially uh or or trying new things. So (00:27:50) one thing I can say with confidence from (00:27:51) having traveled around the country and (00:27:53) other countries too is that all schools (00:27:56) are seeing a rise in depression, anxiety (00:27:59) and fragility. Wherever I go, I hear (00:28:02) people saying Gen Z kids, it's it's like (00:28:05) they crumble. If they face criticism, (00:28:08) you put them in a new situation. They're (00:28:09) not sure what to do. Now that Gen Z is (00:28:12) entering the corporate world, I'm (00:28:14) hearing from business people things (00:28:15) like, it's like a light bulb burns out (00:28:17) and they don't change the light bulb. (00:28:19) They have to tell someone and get (00:28:21) permission to change it. Of course, this (00:28:23) is not their fault. This is the way we (00:28:25) raised them. We we told them always tell (00:28:28) an adult. We treated them as though they (00:28:30) were incompetent and fragile and in a (00:28:32) sense we might have made them that way. (00:28:34) >> What are three examples of bad ideas? (00:28:37) >> I'm a professor. I'm an academic. I (00:28:39) think ideas matter. Uh we live in worlds (00:28:42) of ideas. Uh ideas that float around us. (00:28:45) Ideas we get from others. They shape how (00:28:47) we interpret what comes in. So here are (00:28:50) three really, really bad ideas. What (00:28:53) doesn't kill you makes you weaker. (00:28:56) Always trust your feelings. and life is (00:28:59) a battle between good people and evil (00:29:01) people. (00:29:03) If these are the ideas that young people (00:29:04) are exposed to, they're going to fear (00:29:08) new situations, (00:29:10) trust the the panic or or or negative (00:29:12) feelings that arise in them, and see (00:29:15) life as a zero sum battle between (00:29:17) groups. This is pretty much a recipe for (00:29:20) anxiety and failure. uh this is a recipe (00:29:22) for uh uh for fearing new things, for (00:29:26) not being able to cooperate with others. (00:29:29) Um and somehow or other we've (00:29:32) communicated these ideas to members of (00:29:34) Gen Z in particular. (00:29:36) >> Why is anti-fragility so important? (00:29:39) >> So, as I've been traveling around (00:29:40) talking with parents and educators, I (00:29:42) found that the most important concept, (00:29:44) the concept that they most need, the (00:29:46) concept that makes everything else make (00:29:47) sense is the concept of anti-fragility. (00:29:51) That means the opposite of fragile. If (00:29:53) something is fragile, it breaks and so (00:29:55) you protect it. So a wine glass is (00:29:57) fragile. We don't give it to a toddler (00:30:00) because a toddler is going to play with (00:30:01) it and break it. Instead, we give them a (00:30:03) plastic cup because plastic is (00:30:06) resilient. If the kid drops a plastic (00:30:08) cup, it doesn't break, but it doesn't (00:30:10) get better. (00:30:12) Antifragile refers to systems that have (00:30:15) to get dropped, have to get stressed, (00:30:17) have to get thrown on the ground, and in (00:30:19) that way, they get stronger. Now, that (00:30:21) might sound kind of weird, but just (00:30:23) think about the immune system. That's (00:30:25) the best example. The immune system is (00:30:26) this amazing open-ended system. It's (00:30:29) this incredible product of evolution (00:30:31) that prepares our bodies to fight off (00:30:34) all kinds of parasites, bacteria, (00:30:37) viruses that are new that evolution (00:30:40) didn't prepare us for. So evolution gave (00:30:42) us this amazing learning system. But in (00:30:44) order to learn, it has to have lots of (00:30:46) experience. So kids have to be exposed (00:30:50) to dirt and germs. And in so doing, the (00:30:53) immune system tunes up and then it (00:30:55) becomes strong. That's how vaccines (00:30:56) work. We expose a kid to a little bit of (00:31:00) a virus or a bacterium um sometimes live (00:31:03) although often killed. And the immune (00:31:05) system learns, okay, that's how we deal (00:31:07) with that. And uh this is the (00:31:10) explanation for why peanut allergies are (00:31:12) rising because the immune system has to (00:31:14) be exposed to all kinds of foods to (00:31:16) learn what's dangerous, what's not. And (00:31:18) peanuts have all kinds of proteins that (00:31:20) in some people trigger an allergic (00:31:21) response. Well, we started protecting (00:31:24) our kids from peanuts in the 1990s. We (00:31:27) started banning peanuts in schools, (00:31:29) telling pregnant women, "Don't eat (00:31:30) peanuts. It could give your kid an (00:31:32) allergy." And lo and behold, the more we (00:31:35) did that, the higher rates of peanut (00:31:37) allergy went. Peanut allergies, uh, the (00:31:40) rates have doubled or tripled, but only (00:31:42) in countries that told women to avoid (00:31:45) peanuts while they're pregnant or (00:31:47) lactating. And so, a few years ago, a (00:31:49) study was done where they took women who (00:31:52) had recently given birth to a child who (00:31:54) was at a risk of of an immune disorder. (00:31:56) Half of them were told, "Follow standard (00:31:58) advice. Don't eat peanuts. It'll come (00:31:59) out in your milk. Avoid peanuts." The (00:32:02) other half were told, "Here, here's a (00:32:04) snack food that your three-month-old can (00:32:07) eat that has some peanut dust on it. (00:32:09) Give it to your kid three times a week." (00:32:12) Well, guess what? The mothers who (00:32:14) followed standard advice, 17% of their (00:32:17) kids at the age of five had a peanut (00:32:20) allergy and they would have it for the (00:32:21) rest of their lives. For the rest of (00:32:23) their lives, food's going to be (00:32:24) difficult, dangerous, anxietyprovoking. (00:32:26) I might die. (00:32:28) For the kids who were exposed to this (00:32:30) this snack food, they were exposed to (00:32:32) little bits of peanut dust, 3% only 3% (00:32:36) of them had a peanut allergy. In other (00:32:38) words, the immune system is (00:32:40) anti-fragile. And if we protect kids (00:32:43) from possible dangers, we make it (00:32:46) weaker. We break it. But if you use the (00:32:50) system as it was designed and you expose (00:32:52) the kid to to a variety of foods and (00:32:55) dirt and germs, the system gets (00:32:57) stronger. And so this, I think, is the (00:33:00) best analogy. It's the it's the most (00:33:02) important psychological idea for (00:33:04) understanding what kids need to grow. We (00:33:07) all want to protect our kids. We don't (00:33:09) want them to be teased at school, for (00:33:11) example. But if your kid is never teased (00:33:14) until they're 18, they're going to find (00:33:17) any criticism intolerable as an adult. (00:33:21) Teasing turns out to be a normal part of (00:33:23) childhood. And if you protect kids from (00:33:24) it, you're not helping them. (00:33:26) >> Is it really true that sticks and stones (00:33:28) may break our bones, but words will (00:33:30) never hurt us. (00:33:31) >> So, as one example of how how things (00:33:33) have changed for kids, take the phrase, (00:33:35) "Sticks and stones will break my bones, (00:33:37) but names will never harm me." (00:33:40) Most of us who are over a certain age (00:33:42) grew up with that. Now, if you think (00:33:43) about it closely, of course, it's not (00:33:45) true. Of course, we get hurt by words. (00:33:48) But don't take it literally. Look how it (00:33:50) was used. Kids would use it when (00:33:52) somebody's insulting you and you would (00:33:54) use it. You would just say, "Sticks and (00:33:56) stones will break my bones, but names (00:33:57) will never harm me. I don't care what (00:33:58) you say." Yeah, it might still hurt, but (00:34:00) you learn to use that to say, "I don't (00:34:02) care about you." And in this way, you (00:34:04) develop some toughness. You can push (00:34:06) people away. Uh, and in the process you (00:34:09) learn how to deal with things yourself (00:34:11) with words, not with not with violence. (00:34:13) I've asked kids today whether they've (00:34:14) heard that, and many have never heard (00:34:16) it. In fact, in some cases, it is said (00:34:19) to be a microaggression. That is, you're (00:34:21) not supposed to say it because if you (00:34:23) say that, you are denying the pain that (00:34:26) words have caused to other kids. I think (00:34:29) some some teachers, educators, some (00:34:31) well-meaning adults, I think are more of (00:34:34) the impression that sticks and stones (00:34:36) may break your bones, but those will (00:34:37) heal. Words, on the other hand, will (00:34:41) traumatize you for life. What is safety? (00:34:44) There's a paradox of prosperity, uh, (00:34:47) which is the more comfortable our lives (00:34:49) get, uh, the more we can't tolerate, um, (00:34:54) um, discomfort. The safer our lives get, (00:34:58) the more we feel threatened by smaller (00:35:00) and smaller risks. (00:35:02) We've seen an enormous shift in how (00:35:04) Americans think about safety and danger. (00:35:07) In part, this is progress. It's a good (00:35:09) thing that our lives are safer, and we (00:35:11) focus on small risks that we didn't (00:35:12) think about before. Of course, that's a (00:35:14) good thing, especially when we're (00:35:15) talking about life-threatening risks. (00:35:17) I'm a big fan of seat belts, banning (00:35:20) smoking indoors, and banning lead from (00:35:23) everything we can. But when we make (00:35:24) safety a value or a virtue which it is (00:35:29) and then we carry it to extremes as (00:35:31) Aristotle said any virtue carried to (00:35:34) extremes becomes a vice. So if you raise (00:35:37) your kids to believe safety comes first (00:35:41) safety is everything better that you (00:35:43) miss out on any amount of experience (00:35:45) than that you take any risk. When we (00:35:48) begin to worship safety, now we are (00:35:51) depriving antifragile kids of the kinds (00:35:54) of small risks that they need to get (00:35:56) stronger. It's as though we said, "Let's (00:36:00) wrap our kids in a bubble because we (00:36:01) don't want them exposed to dirt, germs, (00:36:03) or peanut dust." You're not helping (00:36:05) them. You're harming their development. (00:36:07) Another really important psychological (00:36:08) idea is the idea of the attachment (00:36:11) system that that mammals develop a (00:36:15) system that keeps them in proximity with (00:36:17) their caretaker but only until they feel (00:36:20) safe enough to now go out and explore. (00:36:22) The whole point of having the safety is (00:36:24) to give the child the confidence to go (00:36:27) away from the safe base and explore (00:36:29) where they take risks. They learn to to (00:36:31) calibrate risks and if something's bad, (00:36:33) they come running back. But they don't (00:36:34) do their learning at the secure base. (00:36:36) they do all their learning away from it. (00:36:40) Something seems to be going wrong with a (00:36:42) lot of parents uh attachment systems (00:36:46) because they're so focused on safety, (00:36:48) they don't want to give the kid the (00:36:49) chance to actually go do the learning. (00:36:52) When you think that the world is full of (00:36:54) dangers, when you tell your kid, if you (00:36:57) walk to school, you might be you might (00:37:00) be kidnapped. If a person comes up to (00:37:02) you and asks you what time it is, run (00:37:03) away. Stranger danger. If you tell kids (00:37:06) that the world is dangerous, they should (00:37:08) not engage with it, well, what was the (00:37:09) point of them going out into the world? (00:37:11) So, safety is the the the cult of (00:37:15) safety. It's it's using safety as a (00:37:17) framework to say safety comes first. (00:37:20) Safety is what matters. It trumps (00:37:21) everything else. Everything is (00:37:23) dangerous. I will keep you safe. This is (00:37:25) a terrible way to raise kids. Of course, (00:37:27) there are times in the world when that's (00:37:28) true, when it really is incredibly (00:37:30) dangerous. (00:37:32) But most kids growing up in modern (00:37:34) western societies don't live in such a (00:37:36) world. And for us to treat them as (00:37:38) though they are fragile and in danger (00:37:41) means we will surround them with (00:37:43) restrictions and protections that ensure (00:37:45) that they will not grow and develop. (00:37:47) >> What is the locust of control? (00:37:50) >> There's a really interesting human (00:37:51) motive called effectance. We we want to (00:37:54) have an effect on the world. And you can (00:37:56) see this in babies and toddlers. When (00:37:58) they discover that they can move their (00:37:59) arm and make a bell ring, they're (00:38:01) thrilled. We all love this feeling of (00:38:03) effect. We want to be a force on the (00:38:04) world. And in a healthy environment, (00:38:07) gradually you become ever more a force (00:38:09) on the world. You get a sense that I can (00:38:12) control what happens out there. That (00:38:14) means I have an internal locus of (00:38:16) control. I can make things happen. (00:38:19) But if you deprive kids of the chance to (00:38:21) affect their world, if you if you make (00:38:24) things happen for them, if you do (00:38:25) everything for them, then they have an (00:38:27) external locus of control. Things happen (00:38:29) around me. I have no control over them. (00:38:32) This is associated with depression um (00:38:35) and weakness in general. We certainly (00:38:38) want our kids to have an external locus (00:38:40) of control. The best way to do that is (00:38:43) to put them in situations where they (00:38:45) have the chance to control. Now, they (00:38:47) will often fail, but that's part of the (00:38:48) learning. They fine-tune. How do I make (00:38:51) it come out the way I want? Oh, that (00:38:52) didn't work. What can I do? Let me try (00:38:54) it again. That's the way you develop an (00:38:56) internal locus of control. What is the (00:38:58) danger in helicopter parenting? (00:39:00) >> So I think previous generations of (00:39:02) parents had the motto either explicitly (00:39:05) or implicitly that their job was to work (00:39:07) themselves out of a job that they were (00:39:10) trying to prepare their kids to do (00:39:12) things for themselves so that when the (00:39:14) parents step back when the kids go out (00:39:16) they're fully functioning adults. But in (00:39:18) the last couple of decades, we've (00:39:20) developed a model of parenting in (00:39:22) America. I think we invented it and then (00:39:23) we are now exporting it to other (00:39:24) countries. Sometimes called snowplow (00:39:27) parenting or concierge parenting or most (00:39:30) commonly helicopter parenting. That the (00:39:32) parent is always there, always there (00:39:35) looking out, protecting. Oh, you forgot (00:39:38) your lunch. I'll bring it to school. (00:39:40) Because we wouldn't want the kid to be (00:39:43) hungry. We have to bring the kid food. (00:39:46) Now, of course, if the kid doesn't have (00:39:48) the lunch, the kid's going to have to (00:39:49) figure out, well, um, can I have a bite (00:39:53) of your sandwich, and I'll give you some (00:39:54) of mine tomorrow? Kids can actually (00:39:56) figure these things out, but we want to (00:39:58) make sure they don't have to. We want to (00:40:00) be there to fix the mistakes. This is, (00:40:02) of course, a mistake. Helicopter (00:40:04) parenting may be driven by the desire to (00:40:07) help the kids succeed, but it follows a (00:40:10) perverse psychological logic that (00:40:12) actually makes it less likely that the (00:40:14) kid will succeed. If a parent really (00:40:16) wants their kid to have an external (00:40:17) locus of control, to feel that they (00:40:19) can't affect anything, to feel that (00:40:20) they're not a force in the world, be (00:40:22) there for them always. Helicopter, (00:40:24) hover, fix their problems, cut their (00:40:27) meat for them, do their homework for (00:40:28) them. That's a really good way to create (00:40:30) a passive, weak child who will think (00:40:36) that things happen to him or her. If you (00:40:39) want your kid to have an internal locus (00:40:41) of control, you want to provide a secure (00:40:43) home base, a home, a stable relationship (00:40:46) that they can always come back to, (00:40:48) especially if things go bad. But the (00:40:50) whole point of that is to send them out (00:40:52) into the world where they can try (00:40:54) things, master things, and become (00:40:55) independent. (00:40:56) >> Should we always trust our feelings? So (00:40:59) I would say that the greatest (00:41:00) psychological truth of all time, the the (00:41:02) the most widespread one you find it in (00:41:04) every wisdom tradition is is this. (00:41:07) Buddha said um we are what we think all (00:41:10) that we are arises with our thoughts. (00:41:13) Epictitus said it is not things that (00:41:15) disturb us but our interpretation of (00:41:17) their significance. Uh Shakespeare said (00:41:20) there's nothing good or bad but thinking (00:41:22) makes it so. (00:41:24) and sages from around the world and (00:41:26) across the millennia have basically (00:41:28) counseledled. Don't freak out about (00:41:31) every little thing. Put it in (00:41:33) perspective. Do the internal work. Learn (00:41:36) how to reappraise things. So you find (00:41:39) examples of of of people walking other (00:41:42) people through reappraisal. You find it (00:41:44) in in Plato. You find it in Botheus. You (00:41:47) find it in Buddhism. (00:41:49) This is wisdom. This is a basic skill (00:41:51) for how you survive in a world in which (00:41:53) people are duplicitous, people are (00:41:55) selfish, people are dishonest. And so (00:41:58) this is an important life skill. This is (00:42:00) the basis of cognitive behavioral (00:42:02) therapy. It's basically this ancient (00:42:04) insight brought into modern life where (00:42:07) you learn a series of distortions, a (00:42:10) series of common mistakes people make (00:42:11) like catastrophizing, overgeneralizing, (00:42:14) mind readading. So if this is ancient (00:42:15) wisdom, the opposite of ancient wisdom (00:42:18) would be always believe your feelings. (00:42:21) What you feel is true. Don't question (00:42:23) it. If it feels bad, then you have been (00:42:26) attacked. (00:42:28) This is a really bad thing to teach (00:42:30) kids. They're going to live for the rest (00:42:32) of their lives with real human beings (00:42:34) who sometimes will criticize them, (00:42:36) sometimes will insult them. Uh and we (00:42:39) all have to learn how to live with the (00:42:41) the arrows of outrageous fortune. (00:42:43) Teaching kids to look within, find their (00:42:46) feelings, and see them as true always is (00:42:49) a disservice to them. It basically makes (00:42:51) them less wise, less capable, less (00:42:54) thick-skinned. Now, where would kids (00:42:57) learn to always trust their feelings? In (00:42:59) many societies, there's a debate between (00:43:01) those who say, "Toughen up. Get over it. (00:43:04) Ignore it." Uh, I was just in New (00:43:06) Zealand where they tell kids, "Take a (00:43:08) concrete pill. Toughen up, kid." Um, (00:43:10) versus those who say, "What's the (00:43:12) matter? Tell me your no really tell me (00:43:14) your feelings and and you try to go into (00:43:16) detail and you try to find the deep (00:43:17) feelings and you valorize them. Of (00:43:19) course you feel that way. There's a time (00:43:21) for each of those. But if you shift too (00:43:23) far to one, you might if you if you (00:43:26) shift too far if you shift too far (00:43:27) towards toughness, you might be telling (00:43:29) kids, especially boys, you know, ignore (00:43:32) your feelings. And and that's a mistake. (00:43:34) But it's also a mistake to go too far (00:43:36) the other way and to say you should (00:43:38) never suffer. Nobody should ever make (00:43:40) you feel bad. we're going to try to (00:43:41) change things that you don't feel bad. (00:43:43) Did someone make you feel bad? We'll act (00:43:45) on it. Um, that feels compassionate, but (00:43:50) in the long run, it makes the child less (00:43:52) equipped to deal with normal normal (00:43:55) exclusion, normal insults, normal (00:43:57) teasing, and normal failure. (00:43:58) >> What is your advice to parents? (00:44:00) >> I understand how hard it is to raise a (00:44:02) kid today. My kids are 10 and 13. They (00:44:05) have to apply for competitive schools. (00:44:07) So many other kids are doing so much. (00:44:09) Are they going to fall behind? It's (00:44:11) really hard to raise a kid today. But I (00:44:13) think it's really important for parents (00:44:15) to think about the long term. What's (00:44:18) your goal here? Is your goal to just get (00:44:20) your kid over the next hurdle or is your (00:44:22) goal to make it so that your kid can get (00:44:24) over hurdles herself for the rest of her (00:44:27) life? And once you think about it long (00:44:29) term and once you understand (00:44:32) anti-fragility (00:44:34) now (00:44:36) you can do the hard thing which is to (00:44:38) say I want to I want to help you. I can (00:44:41) fix that but I won't. I won't. And (00:44:44) sometimes you have to just turn your (00:44:46) turn away. Close your eyes. (00:44:48) >> Obviously not if it's a life-threatening (00:44:50) emergency but something like cooking. My (00:44:54) daughter is learning to cook and (00:44:56) sometimes I have to just move away. I (00:44:59) understand that she might have to (00:45:00) actually burn her fingers on the stove. (00:45:01) I can't be there always watching her (00:45:04) hand because I realize that if she burns (00:45:06) her fingers, she learns and then she (00:45:08) won't do it again. That's really hard to (00:45:11) do and it doesn't feel compassionate, (00:45:13) but in the long run it is the most (00:45:15) compassionate thing you can do. (00:45:16) >> How concerned should parents be with (00:45:18) traditional measurements of childhood (00:45:20) success? In America in particular, we (00:45:22) have high levels of inequality and (00:45:23) they've been rising faster than in other (00:45:25) European countries. And this does put (00:45:27) more pressure on middle-class parents to (00:45:29) get their kid um uh over the next hurdle (00:45:33) into the next level of the video game as (00:45:35) it were. Well, there's actually some (00:45:37) reassuring data coming out of the few (00:45:39) studies that have looked does getting (00:45:41) into the top college actually make your (00:45:44) kid more successful? And the answer (00:45:46) seems to be (00:45:48) kids who go to the top colleges are more (00:45:50) successful. But that's because those top (00:45:53) colleges simply selected the kids who (00:45:56) got high test scores and things like (00:45:57) that. The top college doesn't make them (00:46:00) more successful. Ultimately, the kid who (00:46:03) learns how to learn, the kid who learns (00:46:05) a lot in college, the kid who's (00:46:07) intrinsically motivated, wants to learn (00:46:09) things and do things, that's the kid (00:46:11) who's going to be successful. So if you (00:46:13) focus your kid's whole childhood on (00:46:16) exttrinsic motivations, you've got to (00:46:18) learn this because there's a test on it. (00:46:20) You've got to do this terrible thing (00:46:21) that you hate 10 hours a week to get (00:46:24) into Stanford. That's a recipe for a kid (00:46:26) who might actually get into Stanford and (00:46:28) will flounder there. Is that what you (00:46:30) want? (00:46:32) I know it's hard to accept and I have to (00:46:34) work on this for myself, too. But your (00:46:36) kid is better off having a good (00:46:38) childhood, developing basic social (00:46:41) skills, curiosity about life, and going (00:46:43) to a college that is a little below what (00:46:46) they could have done if they spent their (00:46:47) entire childhood test prepping. Because (00:46:50) in that slightly lower college, they're (00:46:53) more likely to thrive, be top of the (00:46:55) class, innovate, take risks, try new (00:46:58) things. They'll grow a lot more. So, I (00:47:01) think all of us Americans need to chill (00:47:04) out here and say, "What do we really (00:47:07) want? Do we want the line on the CV, or (00:47:10) do we want our kid to learn, grow, have (00:47:13) fun, and develop her own interests?" (00:47:15) Could problems with American kids lead (00:47:17) to bigger problems for America as a (00:47:20) whole? (00:47:21) >> So, I've been studying political (00:47:22) civility and polarization since the (00:47:24) early 2000s. I'm very alarmed. We have a (00:47:27) lot of problems in this country. Here's (00:47:30) a new one. The kids born after 1995 (00:47:33) have been so overprotected. They're so (00:47:35) much more fragile that they may not be (00:47:38) able to handle this mess of a country (00:47:40) that we're bequeathing to them. I think (00:47:42) it's a matter of actually national (00:47:45) importance that we stop doing what we're (00:47:48) doing that we stop messing up kids by (00:47:50) overprotecting them. So even though a (00:47:52) lot of the long-term trends for our (00:47:54) country and for child rearing are bad, (00:47:57) I'm actually optimistic that they're (00:47:59) going to change because we didn't know (00:48:01) about the rise of depression, anxiety, (00:48:04) and until a few years ago. It takes a (00:48:06) while before the data really comes in (00:48:07) and becomes public knowledge. Now we (00:48:10) know just since about 2018, 2019. Now we (00:48:13) know (00:48:15) we didn't understand that we were making (00:48:17) our kids so fragile, but now there's (00:48:20) increasing awareness that we're doing (00:48:22) that. The phrase freerange kids or (00:48:24) freerange parenting is catching on. (00:48:27) We're seeing the beginning of (00:48:28) communities that are trying to do this (00:48:30) themselves. So I actually think that (00:48:33) just in the last year or two, we are (00:48:35) beginning to see some push back. We are (00:48:37) beginning to see parents and some school (00:48:39) districts beginning to say, "Let's try (00:48:42) something different. We've got to do (00:48:43) something about rising depression, (00:48:45) anxiety. Here's a good idea. Let's try (00:48:48) giving kids more independence." Now, (00:48:50) it's hard because school districts are (00:48:51) afraid of lawsuits, but I'm hearing a (00:48:54) lot more receptivity to it. So I think (00:48:57) we will see the beginnings of a kind of (00:48:59) a of a a counterrevolution or a movement (00:49:02) uh towards free range parenting um (00:49:05) towards giving kids the kind of (00:49:06) independence that actually makes them (00:49:08) strong and happy. (00:49:10) >> Where is America headed if we don't (00:49:12) change course? (00:49:13) >> When Alexis Dtoqueville traveled around (00:49:15) America in the early 1830s, he observed (00:49:18) something that he was that he was amazed (00:49:21) by. He observed that Americans when (00:49:24) there's a problem to be solved, they (00:49:25) just get together and figure out how to (00:49:27) solve it. Sort of the Ben Franklin (00:49:29) spirit. And he noted he noted in (00:49:31) democracy in America that in France, (00:49:34) people would just wait for the king or (00:49:35) the government to do it. And in Britain, (00:49:38) they would wait for the nobles or the (00:49:39) royalty to do it. The common people (00:49:41) don't have an internal locus of control. (00:49:43) The common people don't feel that they (00:49:44) can solve problems. But in America, they (00:49:47) do. Well, that might be changing. When (00:49:50) we raise kids with this level of overp (00:49:52) protection, when we tell them, "Tell an (00:49:54) adult, don't solve this yourself." Um, (00:49:56) when we raise kids who who are afraid to (00:49:59) take risks, afraid to put themselves out (00:50:01) there, we are raising kids who are (00:50:03) losing that distinctive American can do (00:50:06) spirit, the spirit of democracy to those (00:50:09) book was called democracy in America. (00:50:12) We may be raising kids who will be more (00:50:14) receptive to a strong man, to someone (00:50:16) who says only I can fix it, to someone (00:50:19) who says the cause of your problems is (00:50:21) something else and I will take care of (00:50:22) it. So I am concerned that democracy is (00:50:26) fragile. The founding fathers knew that. (00:50:28) They warned about that. And I am (00:50:30) concerned that the way we're raising (00:50:32) kids is not really preparing them for (00:50:35) democracy. For those of us who grew up (00:50:37) in the 20th century, there was a common (00:50:38) phrase that we'd say on the playground. (00:50:40) It's a free country. You can't tell me (00:50:42) what to do. But kids today have such (00:50:44) regulated lives. There are so many (00:50:46) rules. (00:50:48) I think we've created a generation of (00:50:50) kids that are accustomed to being told (00:50:52) what to do. On playgrounds now, there (00:50:54) are signs telling them, "Here's how you (00:50:56) play boxball. Here are the rules. Here's (00:50:59) how you play tag. Here are the rules." (00:51:02) Kids are coached. There are so often (00:51:04) adults telling them what to do. This is (00:51:07) not conducive to the spirit of liberty. (00:51:09) The spirit of liberty is one in which (00:51:13) kids learn how to make rules for (00:51:14) themselves, enforce them for themselves, (00:51:16) make their own choices, and then take (00:51:18) responsibility for their actions. I do (00:51:20) think that overp protection, helicopter (00:51:23) parenting, having too many lawyers, too (00:51:26) much of a liability mindset, parents (00:51:28) freaking out about safety. This is not (00:51:31) preparing kids to run their own lives, (00:51:35) um to value living in a free country.