Hailing from London, Ontario, Zuidervaart is also a current resident fellow at the Center for the Study of Theory and Criticism at Western University. 

The lecture draws from the Trump administration’s efforts to dismantle core tenets of the higher education model by cutting federal funding for university-based research programs and entering into lawsuits against Harvard University and Columbia University, Zuidervaart said. He referenced many of the principles explained in his book, “Social Domains of Truth: Science, Politics, Art, and Religion.”

The ”reigning ideology” of the Trump administration dismisses academic expertise and the values of university-based education, including upholding truth, academic freedom and the societal principle of solidarity. 

“If they cannot bend independent universities to an authoritarian populist agenda, they'll seek to destroy them instead,” Zuidervaart said.  “Hence, the American Academy is under attack. The issues at stake, however, are older than the current political struggle.”

The issues at stake include the legitimacy of science and scientific truth. 

Scientific truth, as Zuidervaart defines it, refers to truths validated by evidence-based accuracy and reasonable argument through scholars collaborating on theory-based claims about objects they study. In his use of science, Zuidervaart refers to all academic disciplines, drawing from the 19th-century German term Wissenschaft.

The pursuit of scientific truths should not come at the expense of other truths, Zuidervaart argues. Academic institutions should not lose sight of the central task that gives science social legitimacy by understanding the ramifications of its research.

“In other words, the internal autonomy of science depends on its societal autonomy, just as the societal autonomy of science presupposes its internal autonomy,” he said. 

Citing examples from the COVID-19 pandemic, Zuidervaart referred to the mass disillusionment of sciences associated with providing vaccines and adequate care under pandemic conditions. It was a “highly politicized rejection.”

The reason for disillusionment is linked to the “continual pressure either to dismiss scientific findings because they challenge accepted beliefs or to reject ordinary beliefs because they are not scientific,” he said.  Treatments during the pandemic could not rely solely on scientific backing to gain societal appeal or vice versa — it required both. 

Currently, there’s a disconnect between the scientific truths of the university and societal desires. The American University relies on the hand that feeds it. 

Although universities hold “economic and political dimensions,” it is not their sole purpose, Zuidervaart said, despite relying on economic and political systems. The purpose should still be in pursuit of expanding upon scientific truths. 

“Universities are no less susceptible to structural problems and normative distortions of capitalism and the administrative state than are noncommercial and nongovernmental organizations in other fields such as health care and the arts,” the professor said. “As we have learned again since January 2025, universities are also exposed to direct manipulation by ideologically motivated political power players.” The  manipulation only contributes to the aforementioned disconnect.

This reliance “undermines the pursuit of scientific truth and thereby destroys the social legitimacy of science,” he continued. 

To combat the attacks against and delegitimization of universities, Zuidervaart advocated for university-based centers for public education and increased critical reflection on the “societal implication(s)” of scientific endeavors. 

The centers would have members of the public, alongside scholars and students, debate the direction of scientific advancements and influence research projects. 

“This would provide an alternative to simply having a research agenda set by the dominant sources of funding, “ Zuidervaart said. 

Similar to the university centers, the reflections would be “designed to respect the integrity of scientific work, but not to allow the autonomy of science to function as a smoke screen for systemic business as usual.”

Paraphrasing Captain Kirk from Star Trek, Zuidervaart said at the lecture's close, “The best defense is good offense. We should start offending right now."

Philosophy junior Lucy Keaton was reminded of her father’s professional career, which had been plagued by the “business model,” Zuidervaart decried when attending the lecture.

“It really was powerful to hear about a workable framework to get universities away from that model that is hurting their faculty so much, and in my opinion, is hurting their students so much,” Keaton said. 

Keaton had initially applied to MSU as a business major, operating under the mindset that university was a stepping stone for the long career life ahead of them — a symptom of the disease infecting American universities, according to Zuidervaart. 

As a student, Keaton felt “bitter” and a sense of “betrayal” after learning that MSU professor Adam Canueb had contributed to Project 2025, a 922-page plan for the conservative movement’s takeover of the federal government. The plan is now 47% complete, according to an online tracker. 

“[Canueb] used that defense that we talked about, which was academic freedom — the ability to explore these things without considering the actual ramifications that they have,” Keaton said. “His excuse … was that he was doing something academically and that he was only thinking about the economy.”

Many of Zuidervaart's proposed solutions could also mend the "adversarial" relationship between students and faculty, Keaton said. 

"Students are fighting the professors to get the good grades, and I really don't think that's how education should work at all," they added. "Education is an insane privilege, and it should be a joy, and it's on both us — the students, the faculty and also the administration as a whole, to try to ensure that we can foster that relationship."