Posted on 02/21/2006 5:50:42 PM PST by jwalburg
A couple of months ago, I received a phone call from a former student.
"Hi, Art. This is Bill."
"Bill?"
"Yeah, Bill Kinderman!"
Now Bill clearly expected me to remember him, but for the life of me, I just couldn't put a face to the name - or even remember that I had once had a Bill Kinderman in one of my classes. And here he was, excited to talk to me and eagerly updating me on all the events of his life since we had last seen each other.
It was an awkward conversation, and my difficulties only increased when I finally figured out that Bill wasn't a former NSU student at all, but one of the students who had worked with me at UC Davis - 20 years ago! And I was supposed to remember him? Well I didn't at all - until it finally dawned on me that Bill was the student who had written The Paper.
Now I graded hundreds of student papers while I was in graduate school, the vast majority of them dreary and unoriginal rehashings of topics that the students themselves clearly didn't find all that interesting or important.
The Paper was different. Part I was the best and most persuasive presentation I had ever seen in support of what Biblical scholars call the documentary hypothesis. Bill just about had me convinced: The documentary hypothesis really was the best explanation of how the books of the Pentateuch were put together. But in Part II, Bill reversed direction completely. He tore the documentary hypothesis apart, showing exactly why this seemingly plausible theory simply wouldn't hold up under close scrutiny.
For years, I have used The Paper as an example of academic writing at its best, pointing out to my students that the most persuasive arguments come from those who best understand and most carefully consider the arguments and ideas of their opponents - and who always keep in mind the possibility that they themselves might be in the wrong.
This healthy skepticism about "received wisdom" is part of a long tradition in Western thinking about academic life. Figures like Milton, Locke and Mill insisted that, if all views were given a fair opportunity in the marketplace of ideas, the truth would eventually win out: The only thing that could stop the truth was its forcible suppression.
This is an idea that lies at the heart of liberal education, and universities are at their best when dominated by liberals of this type, i.e., those who are committed to the exploration of the full range of human ideas. Some of my recently retired colleagues were wonderful teachers precisely because they were so committed to this type of liberalism.
Unfortunately, much of the academic left in this country has ceased to be liberal, embracing (often unwittingly) a kind of bastard Marxism as its core philosophy. Dogmatic, intolerant and mean-spirited, doctrinaire leftists often make academic life miserable for conservative students - and for traditional liberals, for that matter. They and their like-minded students shout down campus speakers whose ideas they don't like. They publicly ridicule students who dare question their ideas, and they refuse to even consider hiring faculty members who don't toe the proper political line.
But is this a problem in South Dakota? South Dakota legislators would like to find out. House Bill 1222 asks the Board of Regents to conduct a study to assess the current state of intellectual diversity on its campuses and to take steps to make sure that South Dakota university students are exposed to a variety of political, ideological and other perspectives.
An unnecessary bureaucratic chore, say those who oppose this measure. We're not California. We don't have any problems with intellectual diversity.
Well, maybe not. When it comes to intellectual diversity, schools like Northern look really good compared to big-name schools elsewhere.
But intellectual intolerance is like Dutch elm disease: once it takes hold, it's all but impossible to eradicate. And it certainly won't hurt to make sure our universities provide a truly liberal education.
The views presented are those of the author and do not represent those of Northern State University.
Or sometimes unbalanced funding like at the U. of M. Twin Cities.
Good thing I read the article first or I'd have a totally misplaced knee-jerk outrage comment already posted!
Easy to do with a headline like this one, alright.
I wouldn't describe this as "liberalism", in any of its many definitions, good and bad. It's intellectual integrity plain and simple. Still, the current hive of leftists that now infest academia are definately liberals in the Robespierre and Red Emma Goldman tradition, not the John Locke and John Stuart Mill tradition.
I'll bet on DU the headline would be welcome, but the article would disturb.
It's usually at this point where they invite you to an Amway meeting.
Wonderful!
Should be required reading to anyone going to any University in any capacity...
Healthy self-examination. What a concept!
LOL!
In other words...State Universities must be more 'destroy America of our founders agenda driven'....
I've often thought this, which is why I usually use terms such as "socialist liberal left' or 'socialist liberal' or 'liberal left' rather than just 'liberal' as that is actually misleading and gives them far too much credit.
I suspect selective beatings in poorly lit parking lots might impact the authority of leftist thought. Of course, I tender that suggestion only in the interests of exploring the frontiers of human thought.
Good policy.
I see that the headline caught the eye of the VK-meister pretty quickly!
I was looking foward to some good entertainment.
"For years, I have used The Paper as an example of academic writing at its best..."
And he didn't even recognize the name of the person who wrote it?
Re, "I wouldn't describe this as "liberalism", in any of its many definitions." I think it works in the sense meant by liberal arts.
"In other words...State Universities must be more 'destroy America of our founders agenda driven'...."
Or, in other words, Joe, you could simply read the article instead of just the headline. LOL!
That always helps.
Paging David Horowitz.
You young whipper snappers don't realize how good you have it! Why... Back when I was in college, they were so liberal that I had to disguise myself as a one-legged lesbian with three illegitimate Latin kids just to get admitted!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.