The Heterodox Way

In order to best promote open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement, we

embrace a set of norms and values that we call “The HxA Way.” We encourage our members to

embody these in all of their professional interactions, and we insist on these norms and values

for those publishing on our platforms or participating in our events.

1. Make your case with evidence.

Link to that evidence whenever possible (for online publications, on social media), or

describe it when you can’t (such as in talks or conversations). Any specific statistics,

quotes, or novel facts should have ready citations from credible sources.

2. Be intellectually charitable.

Viewpoint diversity is not incompatible with moral or intellectual rigor — in fact it actually

enhances moral and intellectual agility. However, one should always try to engage with

the strongest form of a position one disagrees with (that is, “steel-man” opponents rather

than “straw-manning” them). One should be able to describe their interlocutor’s position

in a manner they would, themselves, agree with (see: “Ideological Turing Test”). Try to

acknowledge, when possible, the ways in which the actor or idea you are criticizing may

be right — be it in part or in full. Look for reasons why the beliefs others hold may be 

compelling, under the assumption that others are roughly as reasonable, informed, and

intelligent as oneself.

3. Be intellectually humble.

Take seriously the prospect that you may be wrong. Be genuinely open to changing your

mind about an issue if this is what is expected of interlocutors (although the purpose of

exchanges across difference need not always be to “convert” someone, as explained

here). Acknowledge the limitations to one’s own arguments and data as relevant.

4. Be constructive.

The objective of most intellectual exchanges should not be to “win,” but rather to have all

parties come away from an encounter with a deeper understanding of our social,

aesthetic, and natural worlds. Try to imagine ways of integrating strong parts of an

interlocutor’s positions into one’s own. Don’t just criticize, consider viable positive

alternatives. Try to work out new possibilities, or practical steps that could be taken to

address the problems under consideration. The corollary to this guidance is to avoid

sarcasm, contempt, hostility, and snark. Generally target ideas rather than people. Do

not attribute negative motives to people you disagree with as an attempt at dismissing or

discrediting their views. Avoid hyperbole when describing perceived problems or

(especially) one’s adversaries — for instance, do not analogize people to Stalin, Hitler/

the Nazis, Mao, the antagonists of 1984, etc.

5. Be yourself.

At Heterodox Academy, we believe that successfully changing unfortunate dynamics in

any complex system or institution will require people to stand up — to leverage, and

indeed stake, their social capital on holding the line, pushing back against adverse

trends and leading by example. This not only has an immediate and local impact, it also

helps spread awareness, provides models for others to follow and creates permission for

others to stand up as well. This is why Heterodox Academy does not allow for

anonymous membership; membership is a meaningful commitment precisely because it

is public.