|
|
|
|
|
|
by 78124781
1423 days ago
|
|
|
What about reading black nationalists? I think there's plenty of value in reading the Black Panthers' and Nation of Islam's writings despite their often-abhorrent views. Same with the "Weather Underground" manifestos, the speeches of Osama Bin Ladin, the writings of Mao, etc. Keep in mind too that many on the right would view a lot of what the left says on various contemporary issues to be "false" and "misleading." Should a professor be allowed to say that all white students are inherently racist? That communism is the best system of government? And is there a difference between exposing students to these ideas vs. requiring students to parrot them back on assignments? The AAUP drew a pretty good line in terms of setting the limits on "free speech" that I think would address the kind of hypotheticals mentioned: "Teachers are entitled to freedom in the classroom in discussing their subject, but they should be careful not to introduce into their teaching controversial matter which has no relation to their subject...The intent of this statement is not to discourage what is “controversial.” Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire statement is designed to foster. The passage serves to underscore the need for teachers to avoid persistently intruding material which has no relation to their subject." |
|
|
> Should a professor be allowed to say that all white students are inherently racist?
That's an opinion. Very different from singling out a white student and saying they are a child rapist.
> Controversy is at the heart of the free academic inquiry which the entire statement is designed to foster.
I don't disagree with that statement. The problem is that lies are not controversial, they are lies.[1]
[1] MW defines controversy as "a discussion marked especially by the expression of opposing views".