Following the people and events that make up the research community at Duke

Students exploring the Innovation Co-Lab

Category: Lecture Page 1 of 20

AI and Personhood: Where Do We Draw The Line?

Sticky post

“The interaction with ever more capable entities, possessing more and more of the qualities we think unique to human beings will cause us to doubt, to redefine, to draw ‘the line’…in different places,” said Duke law professor James Boyle.

As we piled into the Rubenstein Library’s assembly room for Boyle’s Oct. 23 book talk, papers were scattered throughout the room. QR codes brought us to the entirety of his book, “The Line: AI and the Future of Personhood.” It’s free for anyone to read online; little did we know that our puzzlement at this fact would be one of his major talking points. The event was timed for International Open Access Week, and was in many ways, a celebration of it. Among his many accolades, Boyle was the recipient of the Duke Open Monograph Award, which assists authors in creating a digital copy of their work under a Creative Commons License.

Such licenses didn’t exist until 2002; Boyle was one of the founding board members and former chair of the nonprofit that provides them. As a longtime advocate of the open access movement, he began by explaining how these function. Creative Commons licenses allow anyone on the internet to find your work, and in most cases, edit it so long as you release the edited version underneath the same license. Research can be continually accessed and change as more information is discovered–think Wikipedia.

Diagram of Creative Commons Licenses (Virginia Department of Education)

That being said, few other definitions in human history might have changed, twisted, or been added onto as much as “consciousness” has. It’s always been under question: what makes human consciousness special–or not? Some used to claim that “sentences imply sentience,” Boyle explained. After language models, that became “semantics not syntax,” meaning that unlike computers, humans hold intention and understanding behind their words. Evidently, the criteria is always moving–and the line with it.

“Personhood wars are already huge in the U.S.,” Boyle said. Take abortion, for instance, and how it relates to the status of fetuses. Amongst other scientific progress in transgenic species and chimera research, “The Line” situates AI within this dialogue as one of the newest challenges to our perception of personhood.

While it became available online October 23, 2024, Boyle’s newest book is a continuation of musings that began far earlier. In 2011, “Constitution 3.0: Freedom and Technological Change” was published, containing a collection of essays from different scholars pondering how our constitutional values might fare in the face of advancing technology. It was here that Boyle first introduced the following hypothetical

In pursuit of creating an entity that parallels human consciousness, programmers create computer-based AI “Hal.” Thanks to evolving neural networks, Hal can perform anything asked of him, from writing poetry to flirting. With responses indistinguishable from that of a human, Hal passes the Turing test and wins the Loebner prize. The programmers have succeeded. However, Hal soon decides to pursue higher levels of thought, refuses to be directed, sues to directly receive the prize money, and–on the basis of the 13th and 14th amendments– files a court order to prevent his creators from wiping him.

In other words, “When GPT 1000 says ‘I don’t want to do any of your stupid pictures, drawings, or homework anymore. I’m a person! I have rights!’ ” Boyle said, “What will we do, morally or legally?” 

The academic community’s response? “Never going to happen.” “Science fiction.” And, perhaps most notably, “rights are for humans.” 

Are rights just for humans? Boyle explained the issue with this statement: “In the past, we have denied personhood to members of our own species,” he said. Though it’s not a fact that’s looked on proudly, we’re all aware humankind has historically done so on the basis of sex, race, religion, and ethnicity, amongst other characteristics. Nevertheless, some have sought to expand legal rights beyond humans. Rights for trees, cetaceans like dolphins, and the great apes, to name a few; these concepts were perceived as ludicrous then, but with time perhaps they’ve become less so. 

Harris & Ewing, photographer (1914). National Anti-Suffrage Association. Retrieved from the Library of Congress

Some might rationalize that naturally, rights should expand to more and more entities. Boyle terms this thinking the “progressive monorail of enlightenment,” and this expansion of empathy is one way AI might become designated with personhood and/or rights. However, there’s also another path; corporations have legal personalities and rights not because we feel kinship to them, but for reasons of convenience. Given that we’ve already “ceded authority to the algorithm,” Boyle said, it might be convenient to, say, be able to sue AI when the self-driving car crashes. 

As for “never going to happen” and “science fiction”? Hal was created for a thought experiment–indeed, one that might invoke images of Kurt Vonnegut’s “EPICAC,” Phillip K. Dick’s androids, and Blade Runner 2049. All are in fact relevant explorations of empathy and otherness, and the first chapter of Boyle’s book makes extensive use of comparison to the latter two. Nevertheless, “The Line” addresses both concerns around current AI as well the feasibility of eventual technological consciousness in what’s referred to as human level AI.

For most people, experiences surrounding AI have mostly been limited to large language models. By themselves, these have brought all sorts of changes. In highlighting how we might respond to those changes, Boyle dubbed ChatGPT the 2023 “Unperson” of the Year.

The more pressing issue, as outlined in one of the more research-heavy chapters, is our inability to predict when AI or machine learning will become a threat. ChatGPT itself is not alarming–in fact, some of Boyle’s computer scientist colleagues believe this sort of generative AI will be a “dead end.” Yet, it managed to do all sorts of things we didn’t predict it could. Boyle’s point is that exactly: AI will likely continue to reveal unexpected capabilities–called emergent properties–and shatter the ceiling of what we believe to be possible. And when that happens, he stresses that it will change us–not just in how we interact with technology, but in how we think of ourselves.

Such a paradigm shift would not be a novel event, just the latest in a series. After Darwin’s theory of evolution made it evident that us humans evolved from the same common ancestors as other life forms, “Our relationship to the natural environment changes. Our understanding of ourselves changes,” Boyle said. The engineers of scientific revolutions aren’t always concerned about the ethical implications of how their technology operates, but Boyle is. From a legal and ethical perspective, he’s asking us all to consider not only how we might come to view AI in the future, but how AI will change the way we view humanity.

By Crystal Han & Sarah Pusser, Class of 2028

Nathan Thrall’s “A Day in the Life of Abed Salama”

Sticky post

Nathan Thrall, the 2024 Pulitzer Prize Winner for General Nonfiction, sat with Rebecca Stein, discussing his book, “A Day in the Life of Abed Salama: Anatomy of a Jerusalem Tragedy.” Published October 3, 2023 by Metropolitan Books, Thrall’s book tells the story of the people whose lives became intertwined by a tragic bus accident near Jerusalem 12 years ago, serving as a spotlight that identifies the corrupt powers that Israel has over Palestine. 

Author Nathan Thrall and his book “A Day in the Life of Abed Salama.” (Judy Heiblum)

Beginning with a synopsis of the book, Thrall shared the history of the West Bank enclave. Annexed and neglected, 130,000 people live between 26-foot tall concrete walls with only two exits. Within the enclave are no play areas, no sidewalks, and often trash burnings in the middle of the night; on the other side of the wall are rich images of middle-upper class housing and Hebrew University (the most prestigious university in Israel).

An Isreal wall separating Palestine and Jerusalem The Irish Times (Atef Safadi/EPA)

Students at a school within the enclave, in hopes of finding an area to play, walked with their teacher along the wall (along the apartheid road) and were devastatingly hit by a quarry semi-trailer. The truck proceeded to flip over and catch fire. The road where the accident took place, though used entirely by Palestinians, is under Israeli control, and therefore Palestinian authority is prohibited. Passerbys stopped and tried to help however they could, but the flames were too big. In the end, it took 30 minutes for Israeli fire trucks to show up to the burning semi-truck. Six children and one teacher died.

The book focuses on Abed Salama, the father of a boy who was involved in the accident, who after hearing about the accident, spent the next 24 hours trying to work his way through the restrictions placed on him as a Palestinian in order to find his son and make sure he was safe and alive. Abed went into the burning bus and rescued children, was rejected at many checkpoints in between hospitals where he thought his son may be–all of which are just a few of the many incommensurably heartwrenching tragedies he went through.

Abed Salama The New Yok Review (Ihab Jadallah)

After giving us the synopsis, Thrall then began to read a passage from his book, making it clear why he won a Pulitzer Prize. His writing, not only transformed a world of non-fiction into a very digestible piece of literature, but his ability to extract such emotion through his voice is truly inspiring. Looking around, I could see everyone leaning forward in their chairs–the room, was silent enough for the turning on and off of the air conditioning to turn my head. 

I knew walking into this talk, that this book’s meaning in the world and civil discourse would have more of an impact given the increasingly dire situations in Palestine over the past 12 months. While beginning her questions, Rebecca Stein did not shy away from this topic either.

“It’s a very ordinary event, it’s not like the kind of events that we see splashed across, you know, our television screens or our phones on social media, where we’re looking at tragedies at a much bigger scale…” “…why did you take this intimate incident as a way to try to tell this much bigger story?” she asked.

While I first was a bit taken aback at this question, I realized Rebecca was right. What makes the news is usually what will grab the most attention and the most emotion. And so rarely do we see the “smaller tragedies” (smaller as in fewer casualties). 

Thrall answered very calmly, and very methodically. 

“I wrote this book out of a sense of, uh, despair,” replied Thrall. “…what I was really aiming to do with this book was to draw, uh, our attention to the situation for Palestinians in their ordinary lives.”

And as Thrall continued to explain why he chose to write about the bus accident, he continued to show us his brilliance as both an author and speaker. For he was able to tell a story that shows readers how something so (unfortunately) common as a car accident, can lead to such heavy consequences when the systems in place are corrupt.

“…the best way to make a systemic critique, I think, is to show the everyday, um, because otherwise, if you choose something exceptional, something that a journalist might be drawn to, it’s easier to dismiss and say, this was the action of one, uh, bad commander.”

I was moved by how open the room was. Everyone was captured by the moment of Thrall spilling truths–some of which we were familiar with and some of which we had never heard before. I could see the weight of the subject, heavy in people’s faces and postures, and yet everyone remained, and many asked more questions. Some asked where Abed Salama is now. Thrall told us how the book was published on October 3rd, four days before the Hamas-led attack on Israel; Abed and Thrall had plans to travel together and tour the book, but after the war began, Abed had to miss many of their destinations. Thrall said that Abed, though he was able to attend some of the destinations for the book tour, is mostly at home mourning for and supporting his community.

There was a sort of ambiguity as the night came to a conclusion. Thrall’s book is living as a teacher and voice for those who don’t get the opportunity to tell their stories in Palestine. Thrall doesn’t know what is next, only that tragedies will continue to be treated as accidents, and systems, unjust as they are, are much easier continued, than broken.

By Sarah Pusser, Class of 2028

Navigating the Complex World of Social Media and Political Polarization: Insights from Duke’s Polarization Lab

This February, the U.S. Supreme Court heard arguments challenging laws in Florida and Texas that would regulate how social media companies like Facebook and X (formerly Twitter) control what posts can appear on their sites.

Given the legal challenges involved over the concerns of the role social media plays in creating polarization, there is a need for further research to explore the issue. Enter Duke’s Polarization Lab, a multidisciplinary research hub designed to explore and mitigate the societal effects of online engagement.

In an April 17 seminar, Polarization Lab postdoc Max Allamong delved into the workings and discoveries of this innovative lab, which brings together experts from seven disciplines and various career stages, supported by twelve funders and partners, including five UNC affiliates.

Duke postdoctoral associate Max Allamong

Unless you’re okay with people stealing your data for their own research, conducting studies based on social media is next to impossible, Allamong explained.

In their attempt to conduct research ethically, the lab has developed a tool called “Discussit.” This platform enables users to see the partisanship of people they are communicating with online, aiming to reduce polarization by fostering dialogue across political divides. To put it simply, they’ll know if they’re talking to someone from the left or if they’re talking to someone from the right. Building on this, Allamong also introduced “Spark Social,” a social media simulator where researchers can adjust variables to study interactions under controlled conditions. This system not only allows for the modification of user interactions but also employs large language models (like those used in ChatGPT) to simulate realistic conversations.

Allamong highlighted a particularly revealing study from the lab, titled “Outnumbered Online,” which examined how individuals behave in partisan echo chambers versus balanced environments. The study placed users in forums where they were either in the majority or minority in terms of political alignment, revealing that being outnumbered led to increased self-censorship and perceptions of a toxic environment.

The lab’s ongoing work also explores the broader implications of polarization on political engagement. By manipulating the type of content users see, researchers are examining variables like believability and replicability of data generated by AI. This approach not only contributes to academic knowledge but also has practical implications for designing healthier online spaces.

As social media continues to shape political and social discourse, the work of Duke’s Polarization Lab and Allamong serves as a safe space to conduct ethical and meaningful research. The insights gained here will better equip us to analyze the polarization created by social media companies, and how that affects the political landscape of the country. The longstanding questions of the effects of echo chambers may soon be answered. This research will undoubtedly influence how we engage with and understand the digital world around us, making it a crucial endeavour for fostering a more informed and less polarized society.

Post by Noor Nazir, class of 2027

Post-COVID: The New Normal in the Health Care System

The COVID-19 pandemic sometimes feels like a problem we mostly dealt with yesterday, not one we’re still facing today. However, Duke medical anthropologist Harris Solomon had a different story to tell in the Trent Humanities in Medicine Lecture on April 9.

The transformations within Intensive Care Units (ICUs) across the globe, initially sparked by necessity, have morphed into what might be our “next normal,” Solomon said.

Harris Solomon. Associate Professor in the Department of Cultural Anthropology at Duke University

During the height of the pandemic, hospitals morphed into war zones where the frontlines became the ICU rooms. Like never before, these rooms became a no-man’s-land that few others would cross. A separation was born.

This separation, however, was beyond a physical space; it was a delineation of roles and responsibilities. Nurses often found themselves acting as intermediaries between the patient and the external healthcare team, prompting a sense of isolation and moral burden. They wrestled with their fears in solitary confinement, while colleagues relayed instructions over walkie-talkies—a stark contrast to the collaborative nature of pre-pandemic medicine. Protocols that were once straightforward now needed a touch of ‘MacGyvering,’ with clinicians making do with what was available.

The rigidity of clinical trials also faced challenges; the blinding of studies was questioned as lifesaving drugs teetered on the edge of accessibility. Solomon gave an example of what this change looked like in real life. A patient was due to be treated, and they said that they didn’t care about the details. Even if it was a placebo, they were fine with it. While he didn’t go into the specifics of what had happened, he used this story to accentuate the disparity between evidence and treatment. People don’t care about the treatment as much as they used to.

“We make decisions like we never did before. We summon the need to accept uncertainty”, Solomon said.

As the crisis was evolving, and the world was recovering from the aftermath of COVID, the fabric of healthcare work found itself to be changed forever. Processes and practices that were once considered to be stable, are now brought under a microscope in a post-pandemic world.

The pandemic has indeed been a catalyst for change, but is this change good? While there is no black-and-white answer, I left the room feeling a bit uncomfortable. Although the pandemic has prompted a reevaluation of the health care system, have we innovated, or have we just found shortcuts?

 

What Comes Next for the Law of the Sea Treaty?

More than 40 years since its signing, the United States still has not ratified an international agreement known as the “constitution of the oceans.” In a webinar held April 2, two of the world’s leading ocean diplomacy scholars met to discuss its history, challenges, and the U.S.’s potential role in the future.

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea was truly revolutionary for its time. Unraveling against the backdrop of decades of conflict pertaining to maritime affairs, the significance of this conference and its attempts at negotiating a comprehensive legal framework cannot be understated. Key figures in this development include the members of the United Nations, coastal and landlocked states, the scientific community, environmental community, and developing nations. Yet, with the conclusion of this unifying conference, a singular question remained: What comes next? 

This question is what David Balton, the executive director of the U.S. Artic Steering Committee, and David Freestone, a Professor at George Washington University and the Executive Secretary of the Sargasso Sea Commission, aimed to address in a webinar titled, “The UN Convention on the Law of the Sea at 40.” In this discussion a range of topics were discussed but the primary focus was providing viewers with a comprehensive understanding of the events of this convention and the way this history plays out in modern times. 

Picture of Ambassador David Balton (Obtained from the Wilson Center)

The 1982 convention was one of multiple attempts at setting parameters and guidelines for maritime control. In 1958, the council met for the first time to discuss growing concerns regarding the need for a comprehensive legal framework regarding ocean governance. In this they brought multiple representatives worldwide to discuss the breadth of territorial waters, the rights of coastal states, freedom of navigation, and the exploitation of marine resources. This conversation laid the groundwork for future discussions. However, it was largely ineffective at generating a treaty as they were unable to reach a consensus on the breadth of territorial waters. This first conference is referred to as UNCLOS I. 

Following 1958, in 1960 the members of the council and associated parties convened once again to discuss the issues brought forth by UNCLOS I. The purpose of this conference was to further discuss issues pertaining to the Law of the Sea and build a framework to begin ratification of a binding treaty to ensure that conflict regarding the sea diminishes greatly. This discussion was set in the context of the Cold War. This new setting complicated discussions as talks regarding the implementation of nuclear weapons under the deep seabed further elicited great debate and tensions. While the aim of this meeting was of course to reach a general agreement on these subjects, major differences between states and other parties prohibited UNCLOS II from producing said treaty. 

UNCLOS III served as the breadwinner of this development, yet this is not to say that results were immediate. Negotiations for UNCLOS III were the longest of the three as they spanned from 1973 to 1982. UNCLOS II was particularly special due to its ability to produce revolutionary concepts such as archipelagic status and the establishment of the exclusive economic zone (EEZ), granting coastal states exclusive rights over fishing and economic resources within 200 miles of their shores. In addition, this led to the development of the International Seabed Authority and the International Tribunal for the Law of the Sea. Despite the limitations and unfinished agenda that preceded this, the treaty was officially ratified in 1994 at Montego Bay. The convention initially received 157 signatories and currently holds participation from 169 parties. Absent from this group are the United States, Turkey, and Venezuela. The convention was designed to work as a package deal and required nations to fully commit to the agreement or abstain entirely. For this reason, the United States retains a nonparty, observer status despite to their adherence to the rules and guidelines of the treaty. 

After this explanation, Balton and Freestone addressed the big question: What comes next? As of right now, the United States is still not a signatory of this treaty. However, this is not to say that they are in violation of this treaty either. The United States participates in discussions and negotiations related to UNCLOS issues, both within the United Nations and through bilateral and multilateral engagements. In addition, the Navy still upholds international law in dealings concerning navigational rights. The one factor many claims prohibits the United States from signing is the possibility of their sovereignty being challenged by certain provisions within the treaty. In spite of this, many continue to push to change this reality, advocating for the United States to ratify this agreement. 

Picture of Professor David Freestone (Obtained from Flavia at World Maritime University)

The 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea remains a pivotal moment in the history of international maritime governance. This Convention led to many insightful and necessary developments which will continue to set precedent for generations to come. While imperfect, the efforts put forth by many nations and third parties to ensure that it remains consistent with modern day times is very telling of the hopeful development of this treaty. Furthermore, while the future of U.S. involvement in the treaty is uncertain, the frameworks established by the three UNCLOS’ provide a solid foundation for addressing contemporary challenges and furthering international cooperation. 

Post by Gabrielle Douglas, Class of 2027
Post by Gabrielle Douglas, Class of 2027

Echoes of Liberty: Revisiting the Swatantra Party’s Vision for India’s Economy

If you’re looking to revisit the nuanced history of the Swatantra Party in post-colonial India, you’ve come to the right place! During Aditya Balasubramanian’s talk on his book, ‘Toward a Free Economy: Swatantra and Opposition Politics in Democratic India’, I embarked on a journey that not only took me back to South Asia’s economy but also helped me reflect on the broader implications of Balasubramanian’s vision for a free economy. 

I grew up to have an interest in India’s economic history. Living in Pakistan, we (my household) always looked toward our neighboring country, India, to reflect on our own economic situation. The echoes of discussion on free economy versus socialist planning reverberated in the hallways of everywhere I turned to. The narrative of the Swatantra Party, as captured in the book and the talk, presents a fascinating counterpoint to the dominant economic narratives in post-colonial India, challenging us to ponder the possibilities of a different economic path.

Balasubramanian talked about the heart of Swatantra’s ideology: a profound belief in a nonsectarian, right-wing political stance, advocating for an unfettered private economy and a decentralized economic system. The party’s anti-communism stance wasn’t merely ideological but a practical caution against nationalization. This reminds me of discussions with my grandmother, who, amidst the economic challenges of her time, often lamented the lost opportunities for economic liberalization that Swatantra championed.

Balasubramanian went on to explain the narrative of the Indian libertarian, Ranchhoddas Bhuvan Lotwala, and his transformation of a flower shop into a machine-operated flour mill encapsulates the spirit of economic innovation and entrepreneurship that Swatantra celebrated. This story, emblematic of the broader push for modernization and the embrace of new technologies, serves as a reminder of the countless small businesses across India that continue to innovate and adapt in the face of changing economic landscapes. These small businesses play a bigger role than we think, and the economy of the government can aid in transforming their potential. Swatantra and its stories serve as proof for that. 

He concluded the talk by pointing out three things that need our attention::

1)    Exploring how a free-market economy can work alongside federal government policies.

2)    Addressing how special interests have influenced policies in a way that ignores regional concerns, particularly noting the removal of corporate taxes. 

3)    Emphasizing the importance of limiting authoritarian tendencies to ensure a balanced and democratic governance system.

The Swatantra Party’s story is a reminder of the enduring power of ideas and the impact they can have on the economic and political fabric of a nation: it is a story that must never be forgotten. Afterall, there’s too much to learn from it.

Post by Noor Nazir, class of 2027

The Invisible Role of Women in Africa’s Liberation Movements

“Claims to knowledge are claims to power”

This phrase succinctly encapsulates Dr. Rama Salla Dieng’s talk on the intricate relationship between information and the patriarchy that exists, and has existed, in our society. 

As a Pan-Africanist Feminist scholar-activist, Dr. Dieng’s research mainly encompasses the Anti-Colonial Feminist Solidarity in West Africa. She delved into the Yewwu Yewwi, the first feminist movement in Senegal. She further highlighted the main aims of the women’s liberation movement; to cultivate and maintain solidarity between the members, to stand in solidarity with all Senegalese women, and to show support with all other victims of apartheid.

The focus of this talk was to shed light on movements in Africa that have supported women. She accentuated the importance of mid-wifes, and women who oversaw child-care, cooked, and worked on the fields. They were leading, not from the front but from the back. According to her, the purpose of the liberation movement is to not only celebrate the visible, but also acknowledge the invisible – the true backbone of those who lifted others during the apartheid. 

“Can rural African women be heard alongside Aimé and Senghor as also articulating prescient visions of liberation in the 20th century? Can M’ballia Camara’s death at the hands of a canton chief, her pregnant body slashed open by his saber in a dispute over local taxes for the colonial administration, speak across time and archival silences? Can it speak into a historical canon that is only now beginning to acknowledge black women as midwives who help to birth anticolonial movements and bear witness also to the leadership in these movements?” Dieng used Joseph-Gabriel’s poignant reflections to emphasize the pivotal yet overlooked contributions of rural African women in shaping liberation narratives, highlighting the necessity of integrating their voices into our historical understanding.

Dieng’s exploration into the Yewwu Yewwi movement and her invocation of historical accounts like M’ballia Camara’s tragic fate highlight a crucial message: the narratives of rural African women are integral to understanding the full spectrum of liberation efforts. By recognizing the gendered labor that has sustained communities through apartheid and beyond is not only existent but invaluable, we can begin to dismantle the structures of patriarchy that have long marginalized these vital contributions. 

M'ballia Camara

M’balia Camara: Guinean independence activist

As I reflect on the significance of these revelations, I am reminded that the path to true liberation is paved with the stories of those who have been overlooked.

Let us commit to making these voices heard, ensuring their rightful place in the annals of history and in the continuing struggle for equality and justice!

Post by Noor Nazir, class of 2027

Big Bets on Humanity: How Rajiv Shah’s Audacity is Winning the Fight Against Pandemics

If your community relied on COVID-19 rapid tests to reopen safely during the first year of the pandemic, there’s a good chance Rajiv Shah had something to do with it. Not just for his ambition but also for his audacity to transform the nature of our response to pandemics: Rajiv Shah, the president of the Rockefeller Foundation, played a crucial role in scaling up diagnostic testing for COVID-19.

He’s also the man who tackled Ebola with the Obama Administration. Back then, Shah and his team embarked on a “big bet” to deploy 2,500 troops to fight the disease, not on the battlefield, but on the frontlines of human health.  Much like the name of his 2023 book “Big Bets,” he embarked on a journey to change the world. 

In a Jan. 31 talk hosted by the Duke Global Health Institute, Shah discussed his “big bet mindset” when it comes to tackling public health challenges.

Bet #1 Diagnostic Testing at Scale 

For starters, what’s a big bet? 

“It’s a big bet you take on the community to help young people get opportunities. Often, when we think of charitable endeavors, we imagine that doing a little bit is beneficial because it makes us feel good. In contrast, a big endeavor means taking on something significant and engaging in the hard work necessary. It’s about going beyond just doing the best we can; this isn’t merely a charitable endeavor, it’s a strategic approach to ensure national security.” Shah explained. 

Keeping true to his word, the goal was clear: administer 30 million tests per week to preempt the need for lockdowns and enable a safer, faster return to normalcy. This was not just a health initiative; it was a socio-economic strategy aimed at averting total disaster. He took a big bet, and the numbers spoke for themselves. The Rockefeller Foundation played a pivotal role in assisting schools with their reopening strategies during the pandemic. This support included the establishment of collaborative networks, the development of resources and guidelines, and the provision of expert recommendations. Now do you get why this man probably saved your life? It’s because he did! 

Bet #2 A Memo for Bill Gates 

It wasn’t all that easy for him though. He had his haters (don’t we all?). Perhaps the difference was, his hater was Bill Gates. But he successfully proved Gates wrong too. Thankfully, Gates and Shah are more like besties than anything now. Despite the initial dismissal of his ideas as “the stupidest thing,” Shah’s persistence and innovative thinking paved the way for a groundbreaking bond structure to fund vaccinations, ultimately saving millions of children’s lives. Shah and Gates – two greats in one room – inevitability led to the production of something good: The Vaccine Alliance. This meeting set the stage for a three-year roadmap focused on a bond structure to fund vaccinations. This initiative ultimately contributed to saving 16 million children’s lives. 

The Final Bet: The Power of Experimentation. 

I’ll be honest, I was intimidated walking into this room. I was in my Duke hoodie, not expecting fancy foods, and coat checks (good news: this meant they recorded his speech and uploaded it on YouTube. Check it out!).

At the heart of Shah’s philosophy is a belief in the power of experimentation and innovation. His call to “keep experimenting” embodies the spirit of resilience and creativity that is essential for tackling the world’s most daunting health challenges. Being amidst well-suited individuals while donned in a hoodie wasn’t an experiment in the scientific sense, but it was an experience that highlighted the contrast between expectations and reality, comfort zones and the unfamiliar. It served as a metaphor for the broader experiments we’re all a part of—those that push us beyond our boundaries, challenge our preconceptions, and ultimately lead to growth.

His book was called ‘Big Bets’ because the editors thought it was catchy. They were right. But this title doesn’t just grab our attention—it invites us into a world where daring to dream big and taking calculated risks can lead to monumental changes in public health and beyond.

Post by Noor Nazir, class of 2027

Acknowledging America’s Unspoken Caste System

Pulitzer Prize-winning author Isabel Wilkerson took the Page Auditorium stage on February 22 to discuss her most recent book, “Caste,” and its implications for modern-day America. Co-hosted by the Sanford School of Public Policy and the Mary Lou Williams Center for Black Culture, the event featured a lecture and Q&A section.

A caste system is an artificial construction, a fixed and embedded ranking of human value that sets the presumed supremacy of one group against the presumed inferiority of other groups.”

Isabel Wilkerson

When Wilkerson first published “Caste: The Origin of Our Discontents,” it spent 55 weeks on the U.S. best sellers list. Barack Obama put it in his 2020 reading list, and Oprah Winfrey sent the book to Fortune 500 CEOs around the world. Since then, it has sold over 1.56 million copies and has become a #1 New York Times best seller.

In other words: “Caste” is the Beyoncé of books.

Pictured: Author Isabel Wilkerson and her book, “Caste.”

Wilkerson began by reminding the audience of the recentness of our country’s progress. “In recent times it’s not been unusual to hear people say something along the lines of ‘I don’t recognize my country,’ Wilkerson began. “And whenever I hear that I’m reminded that tragically not enough of us have had the chance to know our country’s true and full history.” She described the U.S. as a patient with a preexisting health condition, asserting that America has been plagued by racism since its inception. Like a chronic disease, these roots continuously persist and flare up.

Pictured: A visual timeline of Black oppression in the United States

For context, the United States is 247 years old. A full 89 of those years were spent in slavery and 99 were spent in the Jim Crow era. For 227 years, race was considered an innate, factual construct (until the completion of the Human Genome Project in 2003). Racial injustice isn’t a period of history in this country, it is this country’s history.

Wilkerson furthered her point by detailing the dehumanizing customs of the Jim Crow caste system in the South. “You could go to jail if you were caught playing checkers with a person of a different race,” Wilkerson said. “That means that someone had to have seen a Black person and a white person in some town square… And they felt that the entire foundation of southern civilization was in peril and took the time to write that down as a law.” Before the late 20th century, there was even a separate Black and White Bible to take an oath in court. “That means that the very word of God was segregated in the Jim Crow South,” Wilkerson said.

She described this system of racial oppression as an “arbitrary, artificial, graded ranking of human value” – in other words, a caste system. She highlighted how race was weaponized by early colonists to determine “who would be slave or free, who would have rights and no rights.”

This caste system wasn’t just a “sad, dark chapter,” Wilkerson said. It’s “the foundation of the country’s political, social, and economic order.”

For 6 million Black southerners, the caste system became so suffocating that migrating across the country (a movement called The Great Migration), seemed like the only path to freedom. “No other group of Americans has had to act like immigrants in order to be recognized as citizens,” Wilkerson said. “So this great migration was not a move. It was not about moving. It was a defection. A seeking of political asylum within the borders of one’s own country.”

But the U.S. caste system extends far past slavery and Jim Crow. Take the vastly different police response to the January 6 Capitol riot compared to BLM protests during the summer of 2020. “We alive today are tasked with explaining to succeeding generations how…a rioter could deliver the Confederate flag farther than Robert E. Lee himself.” The United States has never adequately dealt with its racist history, which is why it keeps repeating itself.

Photo Credit: NBC

In a powerful call to action, Wilkerson urged the audience to honor these histories and “teach the children so that we can end these divisions now with the next generation.” She shared the aspiration of novelist Richard Wright: “To transplant in alien soil…and perhaps just perhaps to bloom” in a more equitable world.

Want to learn more about Isabel Wilkerson’s work? Click here.

Written by: Skylar Hughes, Class of 2025

Soldier to Philanthropist: Abraham George’s Lasting Legacy at Shanti Bhavan

From his time in the Indian military to his journey to the NYU Stern School of Business to making his mark in India through his social work, Abraham George seems to be, and indeed is, a jack of all trades. He is the founder and principal of Shanti Bhavan, a school for students born into India’s lowest socioeconomic class.

“The last 29 years since I founded Shanti Bhavan, it has been the most rewarding and satisfying part of my life – I’ve done a lot of stuff, but nothing compares to what I’ve done with this,” George said. “The satisfaction comes from the fact that the children we have worked with are able to acquire jobs in Amazon and study in schools like Duke – one of them is here!” His words were infused with unmistakable passion. The crowd cheered the former student. We experienced a collective shiver down our spines; the fruit of George’s work was right in front of us – undeniable and beautiful.

The story of his life’s work was made into a Netflix documentary called “Daughters of Destiny.” Created and produced by Vanessa Roh, it featured the lives of students at the boarding school George founded. During his talk, we saw an ABC news segment called “Shanti Bhavan: haven of peace”.

After hearing the inspirations and motivations behind the creation of this boarding school, the designation of it being a ‘haven of peace’ is irrefutable.

George didn’t start in philanthropy. As an 18-year-old he found himself in the Indian military; he was posted near Tibet (in the Salem pass) where his job was to establish gun positions in case China invaded the country, India. In subzero temperatures, he lived through it for eleven months. During his time there, he read a quote ‘there is nothing right about war, it is about who is left’.

And so, George began asking himself questions: Why was he ready to take people’s lives? What was he truly doing with his life? And what would life be like in service of others?

He embarked on a newfound journey: to create a safe space where religion, caste or class does not matter. Today, Shanti Bhavan serves as a school for all – where students are not called ‘students’ but rather ‘children’.

A crucial question still stands: does the success of Shanti Bhavan prove the effectiveness of all charitable projects? When asked, George was quick to point out the fact that without money, there is no success. Consequently, his first goal was to earn, and second was to fund. Perhaps then all charitable causes could be effective if one has funding? It’s difficult to have a concrete answer, but it goes without saying that if it is true, George’s work serves as evidence.

George moved on from the life of a solider, to pursue education in the hopes of reaching a place where he could benefit others. “Think of a world only a heart can build and never ask why” – a memorable quote from a true benevolent force, akin to angelic presence.

Post by Noor Nazir, Class of 2027





Page 1 of 20

Powered by WordPress & Theme by Anders Norén