I recently read @JonHaidt and @glukianoff’s Coddling of The American Mind. Here is my short summary. /1
The book starts with the idea that humans are anti-fragile. This means that we are not brittle, nor indestructible, but organisms that need stressful stimuli to learn. /2
Our ability to learn is our treasure. Yet, we can lose it we adopt a culture of safetyism. Kids that are not exposed to peanuts, are more likely to develop peanut allergies. Similarly, people devoid of challenging experiences lack the emotional tools needed to deal with them. /3
The culture of safetyism is strong in the US and built on three fallacies. The idea feelings are always right. That the world is a fight between good & evil. That what doesn’t kill you makes you weaker. 4/
They then go into each fallacy. I found the discussion of the one on feelings the most interesting. 5/
The idea is that we have flipped our understanding of morals by inverting preferences in the intent vs harm matrix. They don’t say it exactly like this, but I find the matrix to be a good teaching aid. 6/
Two basic dimensions of moral judgments, and actual law, are harm and intent. You can use them to construct a 2x2 matrix. Top quadrant is harm with intent. Last quadrant, no harm, no intent. 7/ 
The problem are the off-diagonal elements. Historically, intent matters more than harm. If I try to poison you and fail, I am guilty of a crime. If you come to my house, eat peanuts and die of an allergic reaction, without me knowing of your allergy, I am not guilty. 8/
Yet, some segments of the population have inverted this judgment. The “new normal” is that if I can find something offensive in what you said, you have done wrong, even if you had no intent to offend anyone. 9/
This inversion of the matrix is a key pillar of to te culture of safetyism, and of a generalized lack of cross-cultural tolerance (a behavior or joke that in my culture is an act of love and bonding, could be interpreted as an aggression in this inverted matrix). 10/
Of course, this gives rise to less cultural and behavioral diversity, because everyone needs to work on the intersection of what is universally acceptable, instead of operating on a larger canvas of cultural behaviors. 11/
Another interesting chapter is the one on children. Children nowadays are less exposed to free play. Also, preschool education has become more academic, and less oriented towards emotional development. 12/
Free play, walking on rocks, negotiating rules for playing tag, solving conflicts among friends, are all valuable childhood experiences that are being removed by the culture of safetyism. 13/
More & more, we are asking parents and teachers to govern traditionally childhood activities to avoid discomfort, awkwardness, and risks. But by doing so, we may be eliminating important learning opportunities for children. And, remember, our ability to learn is our treasure. 14/
Overall the book doesn’t read as fluidly as Haidt’s Righteous Mind, which is a masterpiece in my opinion. It is also less scientifically insightful. But of course, this is a topic on which it is hard to have a candid voice given our fragile political environment. 15/
Still, it is a great book on an important topic. It has many nuggets and a solid structure. 5 ⭐️!
