Chapter 3 Chapter two

Friday 21 December "Night fell, and the fading sunset penetrated the trees outside the house, casting a large shadow, which made the room darker. At this time, Valerie Danzer was looking at materials in the room. The dark twilight and the bright room The chrome furniture contrasts sharply. The east and west walls of the living room are all a single white. But the wall next to it, from floor to ceiling, is lined with hundreds of books. The spines of the books are different colors. It is very coordinated with the portrait of Mark Rothko hanging opposite Danzig's chair. If visitors go from this room to other rooms, they will be surprised if they have walked into another house. The decoration style of each room is different. All the same. Bauhaus modern, rustic nostalgia, Victorian, Mediterranean, and Colonial—Danzig’s home has it all, so that those who live in it will not feel bored by the monotonous style.

"This doesn't work, it doesn't work at all," she muttered as she walked to turn on the floor lamp.Professor Danzer put the article she was working on aside.The author of that article was a young sociologist at Harvard University.She doesn't like to use Freud's theory to explain bureaucratic decision-making from the perspective of social psychology.She thought it was too superficial. "Anybody on the committee from sociology?" she was wondering.To find out, she opened the folder again.It contained Dean Clegg's memorandum, which included a list of job titles and the composition of the tenure evaluation committee.Of course, Danze himself was among them.She glanced at the committee list, and it occurred to her that Oliver Wu had been picked out of their department by Clegg.

"Maybe Professor Wu will support candidates in his department." Danzer was thinking.She knew that the candidates recommended to the professional title and tenure evaluation committee had been strictly vetted by the department.Every article, every book, every review, and often unpublished papers, has critiques from colleagues in the department—and not even just those critiques, but evaluations from authorities outside Harvard as well. Only candidates for promotion selected by departments divided by differences in personality, ideology, and methodology will not receive the unanimous support of senior faculty members in the same field.But usually, if a highly respected professor votes against a candidate, that candidate's name is pretty much crossed out.Danze didn't know Professor Wu personally.But she could guess from his reputation that if Professor Wu didn't like the job of a low-level faculty member, then that person had no chance of staying.

But Professor Wu's strategy to achieve this goal is somewhat Byzantine.A member of the title and tenure committee has a greater advantage than his colleagues in the department in deciding the fate of a low-ranking faculty member.When discussing in the department, Professor Wu will not play tricks.He wants to maintain a good relationship with the supporters of this candidate, even the candidate.Then he could exercise great influence in the Dean's committee with equanimity.Although his words carry a lot of weight, to be on the safe side, the meeting minutes and Professor Wu's influence on other committee members will be kept secret.

But Danzer ignored the attitude of her sociology colleagues on the matter, knowing that she would vote against the candidate.This is an unusual attempt.It will claim that the author has made extensive and false use of Freud's authority in his work.Danzig quickly wrote her comments, she wanted to drive the young scholar out of Cambridge. After watching it all day, Professor Danzig is a little tired.She decides to go through one more candidate's portfolio, then rests for dinner. "Let's choose the least one to see," she whispered, bending down to the floor.Each candidate's work and letters of recommendation are stacked on it.There is still a pile of such materials waiting for her to see.She quickly found the least amount of material.

"That's all. Is that enough to judge?" She put the folder on her lap, feeling a little skeptical.The psychologist understands that the number of pages is not the basis for judgment.Unfortunately!She sighed - so much material to look at before making a decision.However, the small amount of materials still surprised her, because the candidate was from the Department of Economics.That's one of the strongest departments at Harvard. The candidates they support should outperform candidates from less confident departments. "Dennis Gerson." To Danzi's surprise, there were people from other departments she knew among the candidates for promotion.It was Dennis Goshen--what an embarrassment to her!A smile played on her lips.She leaned back in her chair, remembering the nights they had spent together.Maybe she shouldn't have been in the deliberation in this particular case.But why is she avoiding suspicion?No one else on the title and tenure committee knew of her connection to Ghosn.It's impossible anyway.In an institution like Harvard, as a senior faculty member, you need to make a huge contribution to your discipline.This of course prevents you from socializing with other professionals.Although she has been teaching here for 15 years, there are no more than 10 non-psychology faculty members who have important social relations with Danze, and she can even count them with both hands.

It is even less likely that Danzer knew unhired professors from other departments.In the Ivy League (a general term for prestigious universities with high academic standards and social reputation in the eastern United States), social rank determines a person's status.Unemployed professors are untouchables in this hierarchy.Although not as serious as the "untouchable" in India, it would take a man like Mahatma Gandhi to unravel this social structure. Ghosn's folder contained photocopies of six short articles and a letter from the head of the economics department.The letter outlines what Gerson's senior staff colleagues have said about his work.At the end of the folder are three reply letters from economists who don't teach at Harvard.They were invited to evaluate the candidate's qualifications.

Out of habit, Valerie Denzel first read the letters from the three economists.These letters are invariably convincing.But Danzer didn't let the letters cloud his judgment.Borrowing from her own department, she knows she shouldn't judge by outside praise alone.Departments do not randomly hand in letters from these invited senior scholars.Instead, the letters turned in are carefully screened.What they handed in were responses consistent with the wishes of those who controlled the departments. Next, Denzel scanned the lengthy letter from the head of the economics department, Leonard Coster.The letter directly summarizes the views of each serving professor on Gerson, and specifically mentions the views of some experts in Gerson's field of expertise.These views are, without exception, positive and positive.

The cover of the first facsimile Danzig was going to see was crimson.It can be seen that this is a comment from one of the most important economic magazines in the United States.She looked first at the conclusion, then at the preceding equation. "Does Dennis really believe that people behave like this?" Valerie Danzer whispered.Up to now, she has read half of this relatively small pile of documents.Their patterns could not be more clear.In each case, Ghosn endorses a valuation of humanity.These assessments contradict what modern psychological research has learned about human nature.For psychologists, people are complex and driven by many conflicting motivations.It is ruthless logic that absurd motives can also determine a person's behavior.

On the other hand, all of Ghosn's work is premised on the assumption that people do everything with one goal in mind.And Danzig believes that this goal is the single-minded pursuit of happiness.This is where she disagrees with the young scholar's work. Valerie Danzer's own professional research concerns the psychological behavior of gifted children.She was a student of the Russian psychologist Vygorsky.She once wrote a book called "The Inspiration and Passion of Genius".This book has now become an authoritative work in this field.Every Monday, Wednesday and Friday for most of her career, she's seen some of the brightest minds picked from the Boston-Cambridge area.Her purpose, she explained to parents, was to give their children a world of books and ideas that they would not have had access to at school.She also aimed to observe the learning patterns and stimulus-response processes of gifted children as they advanced calculus, statistical reasoning, and musical principles.But she did not tell the parents about this purpose.

Danzer believed that by studying children, one could learn about the way adults think. She concluded early on that by studying the best and brightest of children, one could learn about the highest forms of adult behavior.After all, adults are grown-up children. The children in Danzi's clinical research are humble but full of confidence, pure but a little cunning, talented but naive, lively and a little headstrong, unmarked but susceptible.They may have been influenced by either Mozart or the Madison Avenue Choir.Although sensitive, they are also often confused. Denzel couldn't imagine how Godson's computer-like rationality could explain the thought process of these gifted children and who they would become in the future. Valerie was enraged.She walked over to the refrigerator to calm down. The eminent psychologist's sullenness didn't last long, though.This can be seen from her waistline.Have a snack before dinner.After thinking about it, she went straight to the kitchen.She came out with bread, mayonnaise, and sliced ​​turkey. ’ She quickly mixed these things together, then took a can of Coke, and quickly returned to the table to continue watching Goshen's work. "Economist," she snorted, "here it goes again. This sort of social scientist brings up Thorstein Veblen's quick calculation of the transition from pleasure to pain." She was thinking. Why is it that the ironic conclusions drawn by economics people are not enough to put an end to all the irony.After all, Veblen himself studied economics.She finished her sandwich and finished her Coke. Her own field of study in psychology branched off from its utilitarian roots long ago.No modern psychologist now believes that all that man does is to maximize his personal utility.According to Danzer, utility is the old collective term for happiness, joy, contentment, or some similar emotion.This term is contentless.Whatever you do, you're probably maximizing your utility. Do you kiss your husband or cheat on him?Do you pet your puppy or scold it?Do you buy a new Rolls Royce or drive an old Chevrolet?It doesn't matter!You choose what makes you happy the most.Why do we say it makes you happy the most?Because that is your choice.Why should you choose it?Because it makes you happy.For a psychologist like Denzer, this is a circular reasoning.It's just a theory repeated over and over again.Economists simply point out that what people do is what they do. Valerie.Danza was going to do what she was supposed to do.A note was pinned to Gerson's folder.The note was very short, just three words: No vote.As she put the pile of material back on the carpet with the folders of the other candidates, she murmured, "Mr. many things."