Peter Salovey Biography
Peter Salovey is an American social psychologist and current President of Yale University. He previously served as Yale’s Provost, Dean of Yale Graduate School of Arts and Sciences, and Dean of Yale College. He is also one of the early pioneers and leading researchers in emotional intelligence.
As a freshman at Stanford, Salovey began listening to bluegrass music and learned to play banjo. In 1990, he founded the Professors of Bluegrass with Kelly Brownell, in which he plays bass. The band has a rotating membership of Yale faculty, students, and residents of New Haven and released its first album, “Pick or Perish,” in June 2013. He also serves as a trustee of the International Bluegrass Music Museum and on the advisory board of the Connecticut Folk Festival.
Peter Salovey Age
He was born on 21 February 1958 in Cambridge, Massachusetts, United States. He is 61 years old as of 2019
Peter Salovey Family
Salovey was born in 1958 in Cambridge, Massachusetts. He is the oldest child of Elaine Salovey, who was a registered nurse, and Ronald Salovey, who was a physical chemist and Professor of Chemical Engineering and Materials Science at the University of Southern California. His grandparents’ families originally came from Poland and Russia, his paternal grandfather by way of Jerusalem.The Saloveys are descendants of the Soloveichik (Soloveitchik) rabbinic family. Salovey’s brother, Todd, is the associate artistic director of the San Diego Repertory Theater and on the theater and dance faculty at the University of California, San Diego.
Peter Salovey Spouse
Salovey is married to Marta Elisa Moret. Marta Elisa Moret is a 1984 graduate of the Yale School of Public Health and the president of Urban Policy Strategies, LLC. They met as students at Yale and married in 1986 in Orange, Connecticut.
Peter Salovey Education
Salovey spent his early years in northern New Jersey and went to high school at Williamsville North High School in a suburb of Buffalo, New York before moving to suburban Los Angeles in 1975, when his father was appointed a professor at the University of Southern California. In 1976, he graduated co-valedictorian from Rolling Hills High School in Rolling Hills Estates, California, California. He attended Stanford University, where he received a B.A. in psychology and an M.A. in sociology with departmental honors and university distinction. While at Stanford, he served as a peer counselor with The Bridge Peer Counseling Center, a field about which he later co-authored a seminal textbook.
Peter Salovey Salary
Dec 11, 2017, Peter Salovey came in 40th position, with a salary of of $1.15 million.
Peter Salovey And John Mayer Emotional Intelligence
Emotional Intelligence, By John Mayer And Peter Salovey
There are many different definitions of what emotional intelligence is and exactly which components should be included to comprise it. In 1997, John Mayer and Peter Salovey confirmed that the most basic model of emotional intelligence is the “four branch model”. The most basic model of emotional intelligence is the “four branch model” described by John Mayer and Peter Salovey in 1997. The key concepts included in the four branch model are: “emotional intelligence is the ability to perceive emotions, to access and generate emotions so as to assist thought, to understand emotions and emotional meanings, and to reflectively regulate emotions so as to promote both better emotion and thought” The scientific definition of emotional intelligence, according to John Mayer, Peter Caruso and Peter Salovey is that “emotional intelligence refers to an ability to recognize the meanings of emotion and their relationships, and to reason and problem-solve on the basis of them. Emotional intelligence is involved in the capacity to perceive emotions, assimilate emotion-related feelings, understand the information of those emotions, and manage them (Mayer, Caruso, & Salovey, 2000).”
Peter Salovey Yale Video
Peter Salovey Pronunciation Video
Peter Salovey Speech
Free Speech, Personified
Peter Salovey, President, Yale University
Submitted to the New York Times; published November 26, 2017
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/26/opinion/free-speech-yale-civil-rights.html
In recent months, visitors with controversial views have found themselves disinvited from or
unable to speak on American college campuses. These struggles are often portrayed as new and
radical assaults on freedom of speech. But they are not new. For decades, conservatives and
liberals have argued over which speakers should be allowed to address university audiences.
In 1963, the Yale Political Union, one of the oldest collegiate debate societies in the United
States, invited the defiant segregationist governor of Alabama, George Wallace, to Yale. Just a
few weeks before his scheduled visit, Klansmen bombed the 16th Street Baptist Church in
Birmingham, Ala., killing four African-American schoolgirls and wounding 22 others.
Wallace—the personification of Southern hostility to integration—had famously stood on the
portico of the Alabama State Capitol and declared in his inaugural speech, “Segregation now,
segregation tomorrow, segregation forever!” Many blamed Wallace for inciting the violence.
The provost and acting president of Yale, Kingman Brewster Jr., advised the students to
withdraw their invitation. Mayor Richard C. Lee said Wallace was “officially unwelcome” in
New Haven.
Not everyone agreed. Pauli Murray, a lawyer and civil rights activist pursuing her doctorate of
jurisprudence at the law school, wrote to Brewster, urging him to send a clear message that
Wallace should be allowed to express his views at Yale.
“This controversy affects me in a dual sense, for I am both a lawyer committed to civil rights
including civil liberties and a Negro who has suffered from the evils of racial segregation,” she
wrote.
On the face of it, Murray was an unlikely advocate for Wallace. The granddaughter of an
enslaved woman and the descendant of a prominent slaveholder in North Carolina, she had
recently helped organize the historic March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, and she was
serving on President Kennedy’s Commission on the Status of Women at the behest of Eleanor
Roosevelt, her friend and mentor.
Murray hated what Wallace represented. Segregation, she had written years before, was “a
monster, dividing peoples, thwarting personalities, breeding civil wars.” Yet she told Brewster,
“The possibility of violence is not sufficient reason in law to prevent an individual from
exercising his constitutional right.” Her defense of free expression at a private institution went
beyond even what the First Amendment required, and she was less sensitive than we are today
about the fact that speech that could incite imminent violence is not protected. At stake, Murray
believed, were the rights of all Americans to speak freely—including her fellow civil rights
activists.
“This has been the principle behind the enforcement of the rights of the Little Rock Nine, James
Meredith and others to attend desegregated schools in the face of a hostile community and
threats of violence. It must operate equally in the case of Governor Wallace,” Murray wrote
Brewster.
In linking the fate of the civil rights movement to Wallace’s speech, she reminds us that the
Constitution makes for strange bedfellows. It applies to segregationists and integrationists, civil
rights activists and self-proclaimed racists. All Americans can lay claim to its protections, but
those, like Murray, who seek to change society and extend freedoms to the most marginalized
may need it most.
By the time she arrived at Yale, Murray was an experienced activist and a disciple of nonviolent
protest. Fifteen years before the Montgomery bus boycott, she and a friend refused to sit on
broken seats in the Jim Crow section of a Virginia bus, landing them both in jail. As a law
student at Howard University, she led some of the earliest sit-ins, successfully integrating
whites-only eating establishments in Washington.
Unsurprisingly, then, Murray had every intention of protesting Wallace should his visit take
place, but not his right to speak—and she would not prevent others from hearing him. “I would
be among the first to picket such a meeting,” she assured Brewster. But she urged him not to
“compromise the tradition of freedom of speech and academic inquiry” by barring Wallace from
campus.
Brewster did not take Murray’s advice, and the invitation was withdrawn at his request. Some
years later, he asked the eminent historian C. Vann Woodward to lead a committee to examine
free expression at Yale. The committee endorsed many of the arguments Murray had made to
Brewster—even though they never saw her letter—and its report continues to guide Yale’s
policies on freedom of expression.
“The right to think the unthinkable, discuss the unmentionable, and challenge the
unchallengeable,” as the Woodward Report states, is essential to fulfilling the university’s dual
missions of education and research. As a scholar who spent much of her life as both student and
teacher, Murray would surely have appreciated the inseparable relationship between free
expression and intellectual discovery.
“I intend to destroy segregation by positive and embracing methods,” Murray wrote in the
magazine Common Ground when she was 35 years old. “When my brothers try to draw a circle
to exclude me, I shall draw a larger circle to include them. Where they speak out for the
privileges of a puny group, I shall shout for the rights of all mankind.”
Pauli Murray drew that circle large enough to include even the hate-spewing governor of
Alabama, a man who denied everything she stood for and threatened the principles to which she
had dedicated her life.
After graduating from Yale, Murray continued her life of activism and public service. She
pioneered legislation and litigation strategies used to combat discrimination against minorities
and women, and she helped Betty Friedan found the National Organization for Women. At the
age of 67, she became the first African-American woman ordained as an Episcopal priest.
Last month, Yale proudly dedicated a new residential college named for Pauli Murray. Murray’s
prescient words—and her lifetime of action—speak forcefully to us about the essential freedoms
at the heart of all struggles for equality and dignity. As she taught us, our responsibility to protect
freedom of expression is all the more vital if we are to overcome the hatred and division that
have characterized our nation for far too long.