Question

In: Economics

Here is another article for you to discuss. It's a little challenging, so you'll need to...

Here is another article for you to discuss. It's a little challenging, so you'll need to read it carefully. Post your reactions to this thread. What do you think the author is arguing here? Does he make good arguments? Why or why not? And do you agree with him?

New York Times
July 23, 2006
Conspiracy Theories 101
By STANLEY FISH
Kevin Barrett, a lecturer at the University of Wisconsin at Madison, has now taken his place alongside Ward Churchill of the University of Colorado as a college teacher whose views on 9/11 have led politicians and ordinary citizens to demand that he be fired.
Mr. Barrett, who has a one-semester contract to teach a course titled “Islam: Religion and Culture,” acknowledged on a radio talk show that he has shared with students his strong conviction that the destruction of the World Trade Center was an inside job perpetrated by the American government. The predictable uproar ensued, and the equally predictable battle lines were drawn between those who disagree about what the doctrine of academic freedom does and does not allow.
Mr. Barrett’s critics argue that academic freedom has limits and should not be invoked to justify the dissemination of lies and fantasies. Mr. Barrett’s supporters (most of whom are not partisans of his conspiracy theory) insist that it is the very point of an academic institution to entertain all points of view, however unpopular. (This was the position taken by the university’s provost, Patrick Farrell, when he ruled on July 10 that Mr. Barrett would be retained: “We cannot allow political pressure from critics of unpopular ideas to inhibit the free exchange of ideas.”)
Both sides get it wrong. The problem is that each assumes that academic freedom is about protecting the content of a professor’s speech; one side thinks that no content should be ruled out in advance; while the other would draw the line at propositions (like the denial of the Holocaust or the flatness of the world) considered by almost everyone to be crazy or dangerous.
But in fact, academic freedom has nothing to do with content. It is not a subset of the general freedom of Americans to say anything they like (so long as it is not an incitement to violence or is treasonous or libelous). Rather, academic freedom is the freedom of academics to study anything they like; the freedom, that is, to subject any body of material, however unpromising it might seem, to academic interrogation and analysis.
Academic freedom means that if I think that there may be an intellectual payoff to be had by turning an academic lens on material others consider trivial — golf tees, gourmet coffee, lingerie ads, convenience stores, street names, whatever — I should get a chance to try. If I manage to demonstrate to my peers and students that studying this material yields insights into matters of general intellectual interest, there is a new topic under the academic sun and a new subject for classroom discussion.
In short, whether something is an appropriate object of academic study is a matter not of its content — a crackpot theory may have had a history of influence that well rewards scholarly scrutiny — but of its availability to serious analysis. This point was missed by the author of a comment posted to the blog of a University of Wisconsin law professor, Ann Althouse: “When is the University of Wisconsin hiring a professor of astrology?” The question is obviously sarcastic; its intention is to equate the 9/11-inside-job theory with believing in the predictive power of astrology, and to imply that since the university wouldn’t think of hiring someone to teach the one, it should have known better than to hire someone to teach the other.
But the truth is that it would not be at all outlandish for a university to hire someone to teach astrology — not to profess astrology and recommend it as the basis of decision-making (shades of Nancy Reagan), but to teach the history of its very long career. There is, after all, a good argument for saying that Shakespeare, Chaucer and Dante, among others, cannot be fully understood unless one understands astrology.
The distinction I am making — between studying astrology and proselytizing for it — is crucial and can be generalized; it shows us where the line between the responsible and irresponsible practice of academic freedom should always be drawn. Any idea can be brought into the classroom if the point is to inquire into its structure, history, influence and so forth. But no idea belongs in the classroom if the point of introducing it is to recruit your students for the political agenda it may be thought to imply.
And this is where we come back to Mr. Barrett, who, in addition to being a college lecturer, is a member of a group calling itself Scholars for 9/11 Truth, an organization with the decidedly political agenda of persuading Americans that the Bush administration “not only permitted 9/11 to happen but may even have orchestrated these events.”
Is the fact of this group’s growing presence on the Internet a reason for studying it in a course on 9/11? Sure. Is the instructor who discusses the group’s arguments thereby endorsing them? Not at all. It is perfectly possible to teach a viewpoint without embracing it and urging it. But the moment a professor does embrace and urge it, academic study has ceased and been replaced by partisan advocacy. And that is a moment no college administration should allow to occur.
Provost Farrell doesn’t quite see it that way, because he is too hung up on questions of content and balance. He thinks that the important thing is to assure a diversity of views in the classroom, and so he is reassured when Mr. Barrett promises to surround his “unconventional” ideas and “personal opinions” with readings “representing a variety of viewpoints.”
But the number of viewpoints Mr. Barrett presents to his students is not the measure of his responsibility. There is, in fact, no academic requirement to include more than one view of an academic issue, although it is usually pedagogically useful to do so. The true requirement is that no matter how many (or few) views are presented to the students, they should be offered as objects of analysis rather than as candidates for allegiance.
There is a world of difference, for example, between surveying the pro and con arguments about the Iraq war, a perfectly appropriate academic assignment, and pressing students to come down on your side. Of course the instructor who presides over such a survey is likely to be a partisan of one position or the other — after all, who doesn’t have an opinion on the Iraq war? — but it is part of a teacher’s job to set personal conviction aside for the hour or two when a class is in session and allow the techniques and protocols of academic research full sway.
This restraint should not be too difficult to exercise. After all, we require and expect it of judges, referees and reporters. And while its exercise may not always be total, it is both important and possible to make the effort.
Thus the question Provost Farrell should put to Mr. Barrett is not “Do you hold these views?” (he can hold any views he likes) or “Do you proclaim them in public?” (he has that right no less that the rest of us) or even “Do you surround them with the views of others?”
Rather, the question should be: “Do you separate yourself from your partisan identity when you are in the employ of the citizens of Wisconsin and teach subject matter — whatever it is — rather than urge political action?” If the answer is yes, allowing Mr. Barrett to remain in the classroom is warranted. If the answer is no, (or if a yes answer is followed by classroom behavior that contradicts it) he should be shown the door. Not because he would be teaching the “wrong” things, but because he would have abandoned teaching for indoctrination.
The advantage of this way of thinking about the issue is that it outflanks the sloganeering and posturing both sides indulge in: on the one hand, faculty members who shout “academic freedom” and mean by it an instructor’s right to say or advocate anything at all with impunity; on the other hand, state legislators who shout “not on our dime” and mean by it that they can tell academics what ideas they can and cannot bring into the classroom.
All you have to do is remember that academic freedom is just that: the freedom to do an academic job without external interference. It is not the freedom to do other jobs, jobs you are neither trained for nor paid to perform. While there should be no restrictions on what can be taught — no list of interdicted ideas or topics — there should be an absolute restriction on appropriating the scene of teaching for partisan political ideals. Teachers who use the classroom to indoctrinate make the enterprise of higher education vulnerable to its critics and shortchange students in the guise of showing them the true way.
Stanley Fish is a law professor at Florida International University.

Solutions

Expert Solution

The author is questioning basic definitions – what exactly does academic freedom entail? – and provides his own answer for it. The gist of it is that instead of spoonfeeding facts to blindly follow in a “because I say so” kind of fashion, it is the instructor’s duty to teach primarily how to think and decide for oneself rationally. And academic freedom - the instructor’s freedom to choose the content for discussion – should be used conscientiously with this objective in mind.

This answer is satisfactory. Publicly funded institutions like universities should continue to receive funding insofar as their output i.e. the human capital with which they equip the next generation is objectively beneficial to society. And while this benefit (a close relative of economic Value) is inherently subjective, perhaps the one quality of human beings ubiquitously encouraged as beneficial by mankind’s true well-wishers is analytical and critical thinking.

This is because average individuals collectively manifest humanity’s future in a swarm intelligence kind of way. By every deed and decision, it is the aggregate of individuals who are shaping our destiny. The better equipped the individual is to deal with information from all directions to guide their deeds and decisions, the better our hopes for a brighter tomorrow.

However, a relevant point missed by the author is that all knowledge holding something as true or false is axiomatic, with an invisible underbelly of hidden assumptions and “intuitive” associations. As such, some beliefs have seemingly ubiquitous credibility – so we accept it as objectively true (and forget they’re axioms) because so many qualified others also accept it to be true. To what degree this majoritarian collective-consensus mechanism for distinguishing between acceptable and unacceptable dogma is allowable in a serious epistemological pursuit remains up for debate. In the meanwhile people in the business of “doing” might argue this sacrifice of rigor is necessary accomplish anything non-trivial.

I do agree; but I also think radical alternative interpretations also have a place in the classroom, to emphasize the importance of constantly observing and reevaluating one’s frame of reference. It’s just not right coming from an over-zealous instructor who can’t isn’t adequately self-aware and detached from his beliefs himself.


Related Solutions

Here is the name of the article you need to use, you can copy and paste...
Here is the name of the article you need to use, you can copy and paste it and it will come right away: They Said Seattle’s Higher Base Pay Would Hurt Workers. Why Did They Flip? 1) Briefly summarize the main points of the article 2) Who benefitted from the minimum wage increase? Who was made worse off? 3)Explain how the researchers reconciled their old results with their new results. 4) How convinced are you that the researchers isolated the...
I need an article refection paper 1-2 pages, Here is the Article To Vaccinate or Not:...
I need an article refection paper 1-2 pages, Here is the Article To Vaccinate or Not: The Relative Impact of Attitudes toward Autism Spectrum Disorders and the Ability to Interpret Scientific Information on Vaccination Decisions Einar B. Thorsteinsson. Please I really need help with this. Thank you. Instructions: The 6 Essential Questions (who, what, where, when, why, how) An article summary with Critical Analysis The credibility of the authors Key points related to the research study (who, what, where, when,...
For this writing task, you'll need to respond to the following scenario: Who are you? You...
For this writing task, you'll need to respond to the following scenario: Who are you? You work as department head in the information technology (IT) department at First Federal Bank. Part of your job is to conduct an ongoing assessment of risk for the institution and to recommend proper controls. Banking systems should be able to quickly collect and edit information, summarize results, and promptly correct any errors. You have identified a possible threat to "timeliness" of information. You have...
i need a Summary of this article ? Los Angeles Times Newsroom, Challenging Tronc, Goes Public...
i need a Summary of this article ? Los Angeles Times Newsroom, Challenging Tronc, Goes Public With Union Push By SYDNEY EMBER OCT. 4, 2017 Newsroom employees at The Los Angeles Times are trying to form a union, setting up a potential clash with the newspaper’s parent company, Tronc. After months of organizing, the committee behind the push for a union drafted a one-page letter laying out its reasoning and left printouts on employees’ desks Tuesday night. The unsigned letter...
You'll notice that in the LearnAboutLanguages class there are a few todos. You need to implement...
You'll notice that in the LearnAboutLanguages class there are a few todos. You need to implement the three missing classes ( RussianSpeaker, JapaneseSpeaker and SwahiliSpeaker ). Then uncomment all the stuff marked "todo" and run the code! Submit 1. Your three new .java files 2. A screenshot of your correct code running on your computer. -- public class EnglishSpeaker implements LanguageSpeaker{    @Override    public String GetMyLanguage() {        return "English";    }    @Override    public String GetHi()...
I need a review/summary (1-2 pages) on this article. Here is the article Complementary and alternative...
I need a review/summary (1-2 pages) on this article. Here is the article Complementary and alternative medicine for the treatment of a major depressive disorder by Richard Nahas. ( ( Not sure what kind of information nedded. In the comment box, I can just see more info needed.) Thanks! Requirements: The below points need to be included. The credibility of the authors Key points related to the research study (who, what, where, when, why, how) A brief description of the...
I want another 600 word discussion on 3-methyl-3-pentanol, here is the attached example if you need...
I want another 600 word discussion on 3-methyl-3-pentanol, here is the attached example if you need an idea. I don't want it to be the same. "Discussion: In this experiment, the 3-methyl-3-pentanol solution was being used in the dehydration process. The alcohol was a five carbons aliphatic hydrocarbon which one of the hydrogen atoms, H was substituted by one hydroxyl group, OH-. Due to the low melting point, the pentanol appear in liquid form at room temperature. The dehydration process...
1. Can you understand the emotions of another person? Do you ever find your emotions challenging...
1. Can you understand the emotions of another person? Do you ever find your emotions challenging to understand? Give example. 2. Research suggests that happiness has many good consequences, but other research describrs the benefits of defensive pessimism. Do these lines of research contradict each other, or could they both be right? Explain your answer.
I need to find an easy peer-reviewed article related to pharmacology and discuss the article and...
I need to find an easy peer-reviewed article related to pharmacology and discuss the article and how it can or cannot impact your nursing practice. preferabley a free text article but any help would be appreciated
What’s up with trans-fat and why is it so bad for you. I need to discuss...
What’s up with trans-fat and why is it so bad for you. I need to discuss a brief overview of how trans fatty acids are formed. I also need to support my answer with evidence.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT