I NOW CALL UPON DR.
MARCIA MCNUTT TO DELIVER THE 146TH COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS OF BOSTON
UNIVERSITY.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
2019 GRADUATES, PROUD PARENTS, FAMILY, AND GUESTS.
DISTINGUISHED FACULTY AND MEMBERS OF THE PODIUM PARTY.
IT IS MY HONOR TO BE YOUR COMMENCEMENT SPEAKER.
I'M ESPECIALLY HUMBLED WHEN I HEAR OF THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OF
MY FELLOW HONOREES RECEIVING HONORARY DEGREES TODAY.
IT IS AN AMAZING GROUP OF PEOPLE AND I'M SO THRILLED TO BE
JOINING THE RANKS OF THOSE WHO CALL BOSTON UNIVERSITY, THEIR UNIVERSITY.
PLEASE JOIN ME IN A ROUND OF APPLAUSE FOR THE GRADUATES!
[APPLAUSE]
ALL OF YOU ARE SO FORTUNATE TO BE EARNING
YOUR DEGREES FROM SUCH A PRESTIGIOUS UNIVERSITY.
BOSTON UNIVERSITY WAS FOUNDED IN 1839, WHICH MAKES THIS ITS
180th ANNIVERSARY.
BY U.S. STANDARDS THAT MAKES B.U.
OLD, HISTORIC AND DISTINGUISHED.
UNIVERSITIES ARE AMONG THE LONGEST CONTINUOUSLY
OPERATING INSTITUTIONS IN ALL OF HUMAN HISTORY.
THE UNIVERSITY OF BOLOGNA WAS FOUNDED IN ITALY IN 1088, MAKING
IT 931 YEARS OLD.
OXFORD WAS FOUNDED JUST A FEW YEARS LATER.
SO, WHAT EXPLAINS THE ENDURING NATURE OF UNIVERSITIES?
I DON'T THINK IT'S NECESSARILY BECAUSE THEY ARE INNATELY NIMBLE
TO KEEP UP WITH THE TIMES.
I MEAN LOOK AT ALL OF US ON THE PODIUM, AND IN FACT, YOU GRADUATES
PARADING ABOUT IN COSTUMES STRAIGHT OUT
OF THE MIDDLE AGES!
RATHER, I SUSPECT THAT FOR 1,000 YEARS, HUMANKIND HAS VALUED THE
SORT OF CRITICAL THINKING THAT IS SPARKED AND NURTURED BY A
UNIVERSITY EDUCATION.
THIS SORT OF PREPARATION HAS NEVER GONE OUT OF STYLE.
IN FACT ADIA TURNER HAS ALREADY TOLD YOU ABOUT HOW YOU'VE ALL
GROWN IN YOUR CONFIDENCE HERE.
ADIA AND I SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT OUR PRESENTATIONS
TODAY, AND WE TOTALLY ARE ON THE SAME PAGE ABOUT THAT.
NOW, IT'S POSSIBLE, AND I ASK YOU TO TALK TO YOUR
PARENTS FOR CONFIRMATION-- THAT ONE DAY YOU WON'T REMEMBER SOME
OF THE MATERIAL YOU LEARNED DURING YOUR TIME HERE AT BU.
THAT DAY COULD COME AS SOON AS TOMORROW, DEPENDING ON HOW HARD
YOU PARTY TONIGHT!
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
BUT GRADUATES, FROM TODAY ON, YOUR LIFE WILL FOREVER BE
DIVIDED INTO TWO PERIODS.
THERE IS BC AND AD, WHERE BC IS BEFORE COLLEGE AND AD IS AFTER
YOUR DEGREE.
AND DURING THE BC PERIOD, MOST IMPORTANT DECISIONS WERE MADE
FOR YOU BY YOUR PARENTS.
AND AFTER DEGREE, YOU'RE ON YOUR OWN.
OKAY?
AND YOUR EDUCATION HERE HAS GIVEN YOU THE ABILITY TO MAKE
THOSE DECISIONS FOR YOURSELF.
NOW, COMPARED TO OUR MEDIEVAL ANCESTORS, THE ONES WHO CAME UP
WITH THESE LOVELY COSTUMES, IN MANY WAYS LIFE IS EASIER TODAY.
BUT IN OTHER WAYS, IT IS MORE CONFUSING.
WE ARE FACING A PERPLEXING ARRAY OF COMPLEX DECISIONS THAT AFFECT
PERSONAL HEALTH, SAFETY, WELLBEING,
BUT ALSO THE FUTURE VIABILITY OF OUR PLANETARY
LIFE-SUPPORT SYSTEMS SUCH AS CLEAN AIR,
FRESH WATER, BIODIVERSITY, RICH TOPSOIL, AND
A COMFORTABLE CLIMATE.
WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION AT OUR FINGERTIPS THAN EVER BEFORE,
BUT, IN TODAY'S WORLD, OF MISINFORMATION AND
DISINFORMATION, IT'S ALL BEING WEAPONIZED TO OBSCURE THE TRUTH.
SO HOW ARE YOU GOING TO EASILY DISTINGUISH WHAT AND WHO TO
TRUST SO THAT YOU'LL MAKE GOOD DECISIONS?
NOW, WHAT I'LL ARGUE TODAY IS THAT SCIENTISTS HAVE ESTABLISHED
RULES FOR SYSTEMATICALLY DECIDING WHAT TO TRUST,
AND THAT'S -- THOSE RULES HAVE
SERVED SOCIETY AND SCIENCE WELL, FOR MANY YEARS.
THE BASIS OF TRUST IN SCIENCE IS TRANSPARENCY, CONTROL OF BIAS,
AND THE ABILITY TO INDEPENDENTLY VERIFY RESULTS.
THESE RULES ARE SIMPLY EXPRESSED AS
DESCRIBE YOUR METHODS,
SHOW YOUR DATA,
DECLARE ANY RELATIONSHIPS THAT MIGHT BE
PERCEIVED TO HAVE BIASED YOUR VIEWS,
CONSIDER WHAT OTHER HYPOTHESES COULD POSSIBLY EXPLAIN YOUR
RESULTS,
SO CONSIDER ALTERNATIVES,
AND THEN FINALLY, SUBJECT YOUR FINDINGS TO CRITICISM FROM AN
INDEPENDENT VERIFICATION BY OTHERS.
WHILE I'VE DESCRIBED THESE RULES AS THE METHODS OF SCIENCE,
THEY DON'T JUST APPLY TO SCIENCE.
THIS SET OF PROCEDURES FOR DECIDING WHAT TO TRUST CAN BE APPLIED BROADLY TO PROPOSALS
OR FINDINGS BASED ON EVIDENCE FROM
MANY SOURCES.
SOCIOECONOMICS, MARKETING, SOCIAL NETWORKS, COMMUNICATIONS,
COMMERCE, TRANSPORTATION, OR ANY OTHER AREAS OF HUMAN
DECISION MAKING
WHERE EVIDENCE AND DATA ARE PARAMOUNT.
SO LET'S TRY THIS OUT.
LET'S SUPPOSE MY HYPOTHESES IS THAT ONLY 1 IN 10 OF YOU
GRADUATES WILL REMEMBER IN ONE WEEK'S TIME ANYTHING OF
SUBSTANCE FROM THIS COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS.
ALRIGHT.
NOW, LET'S SUPPOSE I GATHER SOME DATA AND I FIND THE STARTLING
RESULT THAT HALF OF YOU REMEMBER THAT THE COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS
WAS ABOUT WHO AND WHAT TO TRUST.
SHOULD YOU BELIEVE IT?
WELL, THE FIRST THING YOU SHOULD DO IS ASK: WHAT METHOD WAS USED
TO SURVEY ALL OF YOU GRADUATES IN ORDER TO COME UP WITH THAT
50% NUMBER?
SUPPOSE I ANSWER THAT MY METHOD WAS TO SEND OUT AN E-MAIL TO ALL
OF YOU, A WEEK LATER, WITH THE SUBJECT LINE: RESPOND WITH
INFORMATION ON THE CONTENT OF THE COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS.
THAT SHOULD BE YOUR FIRST WARNING THAT MY SURVEY WAS
FLAWED.
MOST OF YOU STUDENTS WOULD PROBABLY LOOK AT THAT E-MAIL AND
SAY, "WHAT COMMENCEMENT ADDRESS?"
DELETE, DELETE, DELETE.
SO ONLY A FEW OF YOU WHO EVEN RECALL THAT THERE WAS A
COMMENCEMENT SPEAKER, WOULD EVEN OPEN THE E-MAIL.
SO THE SURVEY WILL GET A VERY BIASED RESULT FROM THE FEW OF
YOU THAT SAY, "OH YEAH, SOMEONE SPOKE TO US."
AND THOSE FEW THAT THEN OPEN IT, SOME PROPORTION OF
THEM WILL REMEMBER THE TOPIC.
THOSE WHO FORGOT THE SPEECH WON'T EVEN RESPOND.
SO THIS IS CLEARLY RESULT THAT YOU SHOULD NOT TRUST.
A BETTER WAY TO COLLECT THIS DATA WOULD BE FOR ME TO RANDOMLY
CALL THE STUDENTS, AND ASK THEM ABOUT THE COMMENCEMENT SPEECH,
BUT OF COURSE THAT WOULD BE A LOT MORE WORK.
SO TO GET TRUST WORTHY RESULTS REQUIRES A LOT OF EXTRA WORK.
REMEMBER THAT.
NOW LET'S TAKE A MORE PERTINENT EXAMPLE.
WHO SHOULD YOU TRUST WHEN YOU GO TO VOTE AT THE POLLS?
A CANDIDATE WHOSE PLATFORM SOUNDS GOOD BECAUSE IT PROMISES
PROSPERITY FOR EVERYONE?
BUT SUPPOSE THAT CANDIDATE IS SECRETIVE ABOUT HIS OR HER OWN
BUSINESS DEALINGS?
LOOK AT THAT?
OR FUZZY ABOUT CAMPAIGNING FINANCING?
OR HAS FLIP-FLOPPED IN THE PAST ON ISSUES OF IMPORTANCE?
OR DO YOU SUPPORT A CANDIDATE WHOSE PLATFORM MIGHT NOT BE
QUITE SO ROSY, BUT HERE SHE IS TRANSPARENT, ABOUT HIS OR HER
OWN FINANCES,
DISCLOSES WHO HAS CONTRIBUTED TO HIS OR HER CAMPAIGN,
AND WHO HAS CONSISTENTLY WORKED FOR POLICIES IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST.
I PERSONALLY WOULD NOT TRUST SOMEONE WHO HAS THE POTENTIAL TO
BE BIASED BY SPECIAL INTERESTS,
WHO DOESN'T DISCLOSE PERSONAL FINANCES,
AND THEREFORE, MAY NOT BE WORKING IN THE PUBLIC
INTEREST.
NOW, YEAR AFTER YEAR, OPINION POLLS CONSISTENTLY SHOW THAT THE
PUBLIC RATES SCIENTISTS AMONG THE MOST ARE TRUSTED PROFESSION,
AND, WHAT A SURPRISE, POLITICIAN'S AMONG THE LEAST.
PERHAPS IF WE CHOSE OUR POLITICIANS, USING THE CRITERIA
OF TRUST, USED BY SCIENTISTS TO SCREEN THEIR FINDINGS,
WE WOULD HAVE A MORE FAVORABLE OUTCOME
WITH OUR ELECTED LEADERS.
NOW LET ME GIVE YOU A REAL WORLD EXAMPLE OF USING THE RULES OF
SCIENCE TO SOLVE THE DIFFERENCES OF OPINION TO GET TO A PLACE OF
TRUST.
NOW PRESIDENT BROWN ALREADY TOLD YOU ABOUT MY WORK ON THE DEEP
WATER HORIZON SPILL.
MOST OF YOU WERE MERE CHILDREN WHEN NINE YEARS AGO THE DEEP
WATER HORIZON RIG IN THE GULF MEXICO EXPLODED.
11 LIVES WERE LOST AND IT TRIGGERED AN UNCONTROLLABLE OIL
SPILL.
I WAS THE DIRECTOR OF THE U.S. GEOLOGICAL SURVEY AT THE TIME,
AND THE SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR DISPATCHED ME TO THE GULF OF
MEXICO TO.OVERSEE A TEAM OF U.S. GOVERNMENT SCIENTISTS AND
ENGINEERS
WORKING WITH B.P.
TO CONTAIN THE OIL AND PLUG THE WELL.
I HAD BEEN SENT TO THE FRONT LINES OF THIS CRISIS ON ACCOUNT
OF MY PRIOR EXPERIENCE WITH DEEP SEA INTERVENTION AND DEEP SEA
DRILLING.
BUT I WAS JOINED IN HOUSTON BY MANY OTHER TALENTED GOVERNMENT
LEADERS.
WE SPENT MONTHS IN HOUSTON, WITH OUR
SLEEVES ROLLED UP, EVALUATING THE VIABILITY OF OPTIONS TO STOP
THAT SPILL.
THE U.S. GOVERNMENT AND B.P.
DISAGREED ON MANY ISSUES,
BUT WE ALL AGREED THAT
STOPPING THE FLOWING WELL WAS THE HIGHEST PRIORITY.
ALTHOUGH THERE WAS NOT A LOT OF TRUST BETWEEN THE TWO PARTIES, WE ALL
AGREED THAT WE NEEDED TO RELY ON SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING TO
SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
AND IF AT ANY TIME THERE WAS A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION ON THE BEST
PATH FORWARD,
WE WOULD LET THE RULES OF SCIENCE GUIDE US
ON HOW TO RESOLVE OUR DIFFERENCES.
WE WOULD GATHER EVIDENCE,
WE WOULD SHARE OUR DATA,
AND WE WOULD INDEPENDENTLY CHECK EACH OTHER'S WORK UNTIL WE RESOLVED THE DISAGREEMENT.
BY RELYING ON THE SCIENTIFIC APPROACH, WE WERE ABLE TO STOP THE SPILL BY DEPLOYING NOVEL
TECHNOLOGIES.
NOW IMAGINE INSTEAD THAT THE DEEP WATER HORIZON OIL SPILL WERE TO
HAPPEN TODAY.
WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROACH IN THE POST-TRUTH ERA OF FAKE NEWS
AND DISTRUST OF EXPERTISE?
PERHAPS IN TODAY'S ENVIRONMENT U.S. POLITICIANS AND BP BUSINESS
LEADERS WOULD NOT TRUST SCIENTISTS TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.
AND SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING MIGHT NOT PREVAIL IN PLOTTING AN ACTION
IN SOMETHING AS IMPORTANT AS CAPPING THE WELL.
IN SUCH AN ENVIRONMENT, BUSINESS LEADERS AT BP MIGHT INSIST
THAT SINCE THEY WERE PAYING FOR THE WORK,
AND THEY ARE SHOULDERING THE LIABILITY,
THEY HAD THE RIGHT TO DICTATE THE
COURSE OF ACTION.
POLITICAL LEADERS MIGHT BALK AT GRANTING PERMISSION FOR WELL
CONTROL IF BP WAS CALLING THE SHOTS WITHOUT GOVERNMENT INPUT.
BP BUSINESS LEADERS AND US POLITICIANS WOULD HAVE NO COMMON SET OF RULES,
LIKE THE RULES OF SCIENCE,
FOR DECIDING HOW TO RESOLVE THEIR DIFFERENCES SHORT OF TYING UP THE MATTER
IN THE COURTS.
ALL THE WHILE, THE WELL CONTINUED TO SPILL OIL.
I'D LIKE TO THINK THAT SUCH A SCENARIO IS FAR-FETCHED,
BUT, NEVERTHELESS, THE OVERALL RECENT
TREND TO USE GUT INSTINCT
AND THE PREFERENCES OF SPECIAL
INTERESTS TO REPLACE SCIENCE AND EVIDENCE IS HAVING REAL-WORLD
CONSEQUENCES.
THERE IS NO BETTER EXAMPLE THAN THE DENIAL IN THE US OF THE
URGENT NEED FOR ACTION ON CLIMATE CHANGE.
(CHEERING AND APPLAUSE)
THIS PLACES THE US IN THE SINGULAR POSITION OF
BEING THE ONLY NATION ON EARTH TO OPT OUT OF THE PARIS ACCORD.
NOW, I DON'T WANT TO GIVE YOU THE IMPRESSION THAT SCIENCE AND
SCIENTISTS ARE PERFECT.
THEY ARE NOT.
THERE ARE BAD APPLES IN SCIENCE,
AND EVEN GOOD SCIENTISTS CAN MAKE MISTAKES.
BUT THE RULES OF SCIENCE HAVE SELF CORRECTING MECHANISMS BUILT
INTO THEM TO HELP FERRET OUT FRAUDULENT WORK AND TO CORRECT
HONEST MISTAKES.
THIS IS WHY WHEN THEY ARE FOUND THEY ARE FRONT-PAGE NEWS.
IT IS THE DUTY OF SCIENTISTS TO CALL OUT ANYONE WHO VIOLATES THE
PUBLIC TRUST.
SO NOW IN CLOSING WHETHER THE ISSUE IS HEALTH CARE, ECONOMICS,
EDUCATION OR IMMIGRATION, THANKS --
[ TRAIN SOUNDS ]
(APPLAUSE)
THANKS TO YOUR UNIVERSITY EDUCATION,
YOU HAVE BEEN INSTILLED WITH THE LARGER WORLD VIEW
TO SEE BEYOND JUST YOUR OWN LIVES,
AND THAT OF YOUR GENERATION.
YOUR CHOICES WILL HAVE PROFOUND AND LASTING IMPACTS ON OTHERS
NEAR AND FAR,
AND THE WORLD THAT YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR
GRANDCHILDREN ARE GOING TO INHERIT.
I CALL UPON TO YOU MAKE THOSE DECISIONS BASED ON THE TRUTH.
WHEN YOU SEE JUNK SCIENCE, CALL IT OUT.
WHEN YOU DON'T TRUST THE SOURCES, CALL THEM OUT.
WHEN YOUR FRIENDS SHARE MISINFORMATION ON FACEBOOK,
SET THEM STRAIGHT.
I DO THIS ALL THE TIME.
IN A NICE, RESPECTFUL, FACT-BASED NONJUDGMENTAL WAY,
BUT DON'T LET THEM GET AWAY WITH IT.
BECAUSE THE TRUTH DOES STILL MATTER.
NOW, THERE ARE SOME MOMENTS IN THIS LIFETIME WHEN WE WILL FEEL
LARGE AND IMPORTANT
SUCH AS THIS MOMENT FOR ALL OF YOU, IN RECEIVING YOUR DEGREES.
AND THERE ARE OTHER TIMES WHETHER WE FEEL VERY SMALL AND
INSIGNIFICANT.
FOR EXAMPLE, WHEN WE STAIR UP AT A CLEAR NIGHT'S SKY TO PONDER
THE VAST REGIONS OF SPACE AND TIME.
BUT NEVER FOR A MOMENT DOUBT THAT YOUR CHOICES MATTER.
TRUST WISELY MY FRIENDS AND HELP OTHERS DO THE SAME.
THE FUTURE DEPENDS ON YOUR CHOICES, AND JUST IMPORTANTLY,
HOW YOU MAKE THEM.
I'M COUNTING ON YOU 2019 GRADUATES,
TRUST WELL!
THANK YOU.
[APPLAUSE]