🧵“Philosopher [MIT prof Alex Byrne] Wraps Cooperation with Trump in Flag of Academic Freedom.”
That's the headline of UNC philosophy professor Justin Weinberg's June 26 post on his philosophy news site, Daily Nous (@DailyNousEditor). I'm posting comments here since Weinberg has chosen to not to open them on this particular post.
What's Byrne's sin? He served as one of nine co-authors on the recently released HHS report “Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria: Review of Evidence and Best Practices.” (Available on the HHS website.)
Weinberg clearly disagrees with Byrne (who, for the record, did not vote for Trump) about whether serving as a co-author of the report was the right thing to do.
I happen to have intimate knowledge of Byrne’s motives—I'll refer to him as “Alex” from here on—because I’m married to him. We talked extensively about his decision, and I came to fully understand and respect the choice he made, even if I might have made a different one.
Alex believed that his participation would help to ensure that the report was of the highest possible quality, and that it would be a useful resource for parents in particular who are looking for clear information about the costs and benefits of medical treatment of their children's gender dysphoria.
Overall Alex believes that medical practices (especially those involving children) should be based on strong evidence, produced and discussed in an open environment free of harassment and threats of reputational damage.
Especially after working on the report, he is convinced that the evidence supporting medicalization of gender dysphoric kids (AKA "gender affirming care") is weak.
After Alex’s name was leaked as a co-author, Weinberg wrote (in his May 6 post) that it would be “appalling” for a philosopher to participate in such a project. Doing would mean that the philosopher had “decided to help Trump” with his “selfish and authoritarian ambitions,” “cruelty” regarding “immigrants, government employees, the disabled, and the domestic and global poor,” and “transgender women and men.” So perhaps authors should have been limited to extreme right wingers?
After Alex confirmed his participation in a June 26 OpEd in @WaPo OpEd,
wapo.st/44oV5Pg
That's the headline of UNC philosophy professor Justin Weinberg's June 26 post on his philosophy news site, Daily Nous (@DailyNousEditor). I'm posting comments here since Weinberg has chosen to not to open them on this particular post.
What's Byrne's sin? He served as one of nine co-authors on the recently released HHS report “Treatment for Pediatric Gender Dysphoria: Review of Evidence and Best Practices.” (Available on the HHS website.)
Weinberg clearly disagrees with Byrne (who, for the record, did not vote for Trump) about whether serving as a co-author of the report was the right thing to do.
I happen to have intimate knowledge of Byrne’s motives—I'll refer to him as “Alex” from here on—because I’m married to him. We talked extensively about his decision, and I came to fully understand and respect the choice he made, even if I might have made a different one.
Alex believed that his participation would help to ensure that the report was of the highest possible quality, and that it would be a useful resource for parents in particular who are looking for clear information about the costs and benefits of medical treatment of their children's gender dysphoria.
Overall Alex believes that medical practices (especially those involving children) should be based on strong evidence, produced and discussed in an open environment free of harassment and threats of reputational damage.
Especially after working on the report, he is convinced that the evidence supporting medicalization of gender dysphoric kids (AKA "gender affirming care") is weak.
After Alex’s name was leaked as a co-author, Weinberg wrote (in his May 6 post) that it would be “appalling” for a philosopher to participate in such a project. Doing would mean that the philosopher had “decided to help Trump” with his “selfish and authoritarian ambitions,” “cruelty” regarding “immigrants, government employees, the disabled, and the domestic and global poor,” and “transgender women and men.” So perhaps authors should have been limited to extreme right wingers?
After Alex confirmed his participation in a June 26 OpEd in @WaPo OpEd,
wapo.st/44oV5Pg
Weinberg responded with his thoughts in a post that same day.
dailynous.com/2025/06/26/phi…
dailynous.com/2025/06/26/phi…
BTW here is what the @washingtonpost editorial board had to say about the HHS report:
"Clocking in at more than 400 pages, including appendixes, the HHS report is a careful, thorough and definitely skeptical tour through the subject, including the history of gender medicine, the evolution of pediatric interventions, the evidence for pediatric medical transition, and the ethical conundrums that researchers and practitioners face. Critics have been scathing about what they see as the report’s bias and shortcomings. But it makes a legitimate case for caution that policymakers need to wrestle with." wapo.st/449pZwg
"Clocking in at more than 400 pages, including appendixes, the HHS report is a careful, thorough and definitely skeptical tour through the subject, including the history of gender medicine, the evolution of pediatric interventions, the evidence for pediatric medical transition, and the ethical conundrums that researchers and practitioners face. Critics have been scathing about what they see as the report’s bias and shortcomings. But it makes a legitimate case for caution that policymakers need to wrestle with." wapo.st/449pZwg
Weinberg has said that he does not “use Daily Nous as a platform for humiliating people or hurling insults at them.” (From an interview with Weinberg (at whatisitliketobeaphilosopher.com/#/justin-w/), and that “disagreement is misunderstood and underappreciated, and readers are welcome to disagree with me.” (From his personal website, hisname [no spaces] dot org.)
Yet he did not open comments on the post that essentially accused Byrne of using academic freedom as a smokescreen for helping Trump advance selfish and cruel policies, thereby bringing further harm to the most vulnerable among us. This from the philosopher who advocates for respectful engagement, humility, and who “welcomes comments” on his views and posts.
In his June 26 post, Weinberg wrote that “To oppose joining with the powers that be in their push for a callous, dehumanizing, agenda is not thereby to oppose free and open inquiry.”
But Alex never claimed that academic freedom has been violated; rather he described a culture in academic philosophy and elsewhere in which good-faith dissenters are compared to Nazis, and in which philosophers, rather than engaging with arguments, express outrage and make public accusations about motives. This is not the way to create a culture of free and open inquiry. Ask @docstock or @aytchellesse.
On his personal website, Weinberg wrote that “during challenging times it can be useful to remind yourself of how you’d like to be.” These five “aspects of character” are especially important for “good philosophers” to have (we should all have them, of course):
"Humility – knowledge of the limits of one’s knowledge, including one’s knowledge of those limits
Curiosity – the propensity to be dissatisfied with one’s lack of understanding, but not discouraged by it
Charity – the disposition to first seek the wisdom in what others say
Courage – the strength to not mistake uncertainty for danger
Grace – gratitude to those who help save us from ourselves"
And these are indeed challenging times. So Justin—@DailyNousEditor—I (and @byrne_a, who is at a conference, but I'm sure would agree) welcome your engagement.
Yet he did not open comments on the post that essentially accused Byrne of using academic freedom as a smokescreen for helping Trump advance selfish and cruel policies, thereby bringing further harm to the most vulnerable among us. This from the philosopher who advocates for respectful engagement, humility, and who “welcomes comments” on his views and posts.
In his June 26 post, Weinberg wrote that “To oppose joining with the powers that be in their push for a callous, dehumanizing, agenda is not thereby to oppose free and open inquiry.”
But Alex never claimed that academic freedom has been violated; rather he described a culture in academic philosophy and elsewhere in which good-faith dissenters are compared to Nazis, and in which philosophers, rather than engaging with arguments, express outrage and make public accusations about motives. This is not the way to create a culture of free and open inquiry. Ask @docstock or @aytchellesse.
On his personal website, Weinberg wrote that “during challenging times it can be useful to remind yourself of how you’d like to be.” These five “aspects of character” are especially important for “good philosophers” to have (we should all have them, of course):
"Humility – knowledge of the limits of one’s knowledge, including one’s knowledge of those limits
Curiosity – the propensity to be dissatisfied with one’s lack of understanding, but not discouraged by it
Charity – the disposition to first seek the wisdom in what others say
Courage – the strength to not mistake uncertainty for danger
Grace – gratitude to those who help save us from ourselves"
And these are indeed challenging times. So Justin—@DailyNousEditor—I (and @byrne_a, who is at a conference, but I'm sure would agree) welcome your engagement.
I made a mistake! Justin Weinberg is a professor at USC not UNC. Sorry!
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
