Martketplace of Monotony
~Published in the Daily Illini on May 1st, 2006
Editor's Note: This is the second of a two-part series by columnist Billy Joe Mills on accusations of liberal professor bias on campus.
Imagine for a moment that 90 percent of University professors are conservative. They donate regularly to the Republican Party, they praise Bush and the Iraq war often in class, they set up public "debates" among themselves to promote conservative views on issues such as abortion, and they direct their research towards matters they wish to influence. How pathetic and lacking of diversity would this place be? How boring would it be? How uncomfortable would you be?
There is a great danger within today's universities. Conservative ideas are not given the opportunity to participate in academic debate, rather they are dismissed prima facie as illogical and not worthy of consideration. Just as we do not trust Bush's cabinet to regulate itself, neither should we trust academia to close its ears to the siren song of groupthink.
A fundamental ingredient in higher education is the free marketplace of ideas. Therein, differing ideas collide and conflict to fuse into a higher and more comprehensive version of truth. Nothing is more anti-intellectual than a public servant devoted to education who believes that both sides of an argument are not necessary.
Ironically, the liberal domination of academia threatens to lessen, not heighten, the influence of liberal thought in society. Many professors complain that the policy world ignores their prescriptions. By including conservatives in the campus debate the credibility of academia would be enhanced, thus giving it greater influence over the policy-making worlds of Springfield and Washington. Additionally, the thoughts coming from academia would be sharpened and refined through real debate.
The overwhelming liberal presence challenges me to summon a better argument. This domination threatens the academic vitality of liberal students more than conservatives. The danger is that liberal students are not presented the opportunity to hone their thoughts and substantiate their beliefs. Incestuous breeding creates an inferior genetic product.
There are some academics fighting valiantly and tirelessly for the cause I lay out, "At the heart of the educational benefits of diversity is that synergy between social and intellectual diversity as a medium for fostering a vibrant exchange of people and ideas. Let us commit ourselves individually to the idea that diversity will never be a second thought, but always at the core of the University of Illinois." This was spoken in November 2003 by former Chancellor Nancy Cantor who strongly supports diversity, just not the kind that challenges her prejudices and makes her feel uncomfortable. It is inconsistent to promote ethnic diversity because it enhances education, while also believing that the faculty's intellectual monotony does no damage to the sharpness of my education.
Political neutrality should not be legislated. This University should endorse an initiative to aggressively encourage, welcome and recruit conservative intellectuals. An op-ed invitation in the New York Times would be a good start. I call upon the elite of this University to voluntarily proclaim a new beginning. I ask that you open new pathways to those different than yourselves. I ask that you expand the ideals of the "progressive" to include the other half of America.
We are intellectually segregated. Conservative intellectuals reside in think tanks and at small Christian colleges, while liberal intellectuals dominate major universities. I hope the University of Illinois has the introspective courage to rejuvenate itself and to reaffirm its purpose.
Often during the tenure of an institution its mission becomes lost, obscured, or forgotten. Great universities were built upon an intriguing and rebellious idea. Education ought to occur in a plural and diverse community - a community of friendship which thrives in a state of tireless debate. Education is best advanced when invaded by intrusive and alarming thoughts.
Logic must exist under constant peril. The thoughts of our neighbors force us to devise more clever arguments. Such are the fertile conditions for mental inquiry and prosperity. Without these challenges ideas grow soft and stale and without competition they are assumed thoroughly true by their possessors. If a university strays from its original mission it endangers the intellectual vitality of all in the community, not just those who are excluded.
Billy Joe Mills is a senior in LAS. His column appears on Mondays. He can be reached at opinions@dailyillini.com.
Editor's Note: This is the second of a two-part series by columnist Billy Joe Mills on accusations of liberal professor bias on campus.
Imagine for a moment that 90 percent of University professors are conservative. They donate regularly to the Republican Party, they praise Bush and the Iraq war often in class, they set up public "debates" among themselves to promote conservative views on issues such as abortion, and they direct their research towards matters they wish to influence. How pathetic and lacking of diversity would this place be? How boring would it be? How uncomfortable would you be?
There is a great danger within today's universities. Conservative ideas are not given the opportunity to participate in academic debate, rather they are dismissed prima facie as illogical and not worthy of consideration. Just as we do not trust Bush's cabinet to regulate itself, neither should we trust academia to close its ears to the siren song of groupthink.
A fundamental ingredient in higher education is the free marketplace of ideas. Therein, differing ideas collide and conflict to fuse into a higher and more comprehensive version of truth. Nothing is more anti-intellectual than a public servant devoted to education who believes that both sides of an argument are not necessary.
Ironically, the liberal domination of academia threatens to lessen, not heighten, the influence of liberal thought in society. Many professors complain that the policy world ignores their prescriptions. By including conservatives in the campus debate the credibility of academia would be enhanced, thus giving it greater influence over the policy-making worlds of Springfield and Washington. Additionally, the thoughts coming from academia would be sharpened and refined through real debate.
The overwhelming liberal presence challenges me to summon a better argument. This domination threatens the academic vitality of liberal students more than conservatives. The danger is that liberal students are not presented the opportunity to hone their thoughts and substantiate their beliefs. Incestuous breeding creates an inferior genetic product.
There are some academics fighting valiantly and tirelessly for the cause I lay out, "At the heart of the educational benefits of diversity is that synergy between social and intellectual diversity as a medium for fostering a vibrant exchange of people and ideas. Let us commit ourselves individually to the idea that diversity will never be a second thought, but always at the core of the University of Illinois." This was spoken in November 2003 by former Chancellor Nancy Cantor who strongly supports diversity, just not the kind that challenges her prejudices and makes her feel uncomfortable. It is inconsistent to promote ethnic diversity because it enhances education, while also believing that the faculty's intellectual monotony does no damage to the sharpness of my education.
Political neutrality should not be legislated. This University should endorse an initiative to aggressively encourage, welcome and recruit conservative intellectuals. An op-ed invitation in the New York Times would be a good start. I call upon the elite of this University to voluntarily proclaim a new beginning. I ask that you open new pathways to those different than yourselves. I ask that you expand the ideals of the "progressive" to include the other half of America.
We are intellectually segregated. Conservative intellectuals reside in think tanks and at small Christian colleges, while liberal intellectuals dominate major universities. I hope the University of Illinois has the introspective courage to rejuvenate itself and to reaffirm its purpose.
Often during the tenure of an institution its mission becomes lost, obscured, or forgotten. Great universities were built upon an intriguing and rebellious idea. Education ought to occur in a plural and diverse community - a community of friendship which thrives in a state of tireless debate. Education is best advanced when invaded by intrusive and alarming thoughts.
Logic must exist under constant peril. The thoughts of our neighbors force us to devise more clever arguments. Such are the fertile conditions for mental inquiry and prosperity. Without these challenges ideas grow soft and stale and without competition they are assumed thoroughly true by their possessors. If a university strays from its original mission it endangers the intellectual vitality of all in the community, not just those who are excluded.
Billy Joe Mills is a senior in LAS. His column appears on Mondays. He can be reached at opinions@dailyillini.com.
posted by Billy Joe Mills at 1:25 AM
10 Comments:
Billy,
"This University should endorse an initiative to aggressively encourage, welcome and recruit conservative intellectuals."
Actually, I think the University should maintain its policy of recruiting on the basis of ability and quality of work and leave politics out of it. What does it matter whether a physicist is a democrat or a republican? As long as he or she is publishing, meeting teaching requirements, and bringing in grant money, what difference does it make? Politics simply do not enter into job searches, and that is the way it should be. This entire issue can be avoided all together if we just ignore politics and focus on recruiting the best and brightest.
Wally
Hey, Billy Joe, I thought you might find this interesting in its similarities to what I was talking about a month or so ago:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/12572371/
Tom
"I think the University should maintain its policy of recruiting on the basis of ability and quality of work and leave politics out of it. What does it matter whether a physicist is a democrat or a republican? "
It doesn't, physics is a pretty darn neutral major. A lot of the other "biased" majors may shift in that direction as they get more quantitative. Philosophy and economics seem to be going in such a direction. Even the most liberal in the former chart, anthropology, seems to be shifting a lot more towards science.
The problem majors are those such as women's studies or English, which are monolithic in their viewpoint and don't have the benefit of being somewhat quantitatively objective. It's not even about being "conservative," it's about being homogeneous to the point of irrelevance.
In those departments being a "New Formalist" rather than a slam poet, being a classicist in art, or endorsing unpopular theories (the cognitive science clash a la Steven Pinker, who is no conservative, with feminism comes to mind) often mean exclusion.
As you said, this lowers the status of liberals. When many people think of liberals in academia they do not think of the numerous reasonable and talented liberals that do exist, but of people of dubious talent like Ward Churchhill.
I don't know what the solution for those areas of study is. I cringe at the idea of some sort of conservative academia quota. It just doesn't seem terribly conservative.
I know that if I were interested in English as a major, it is unlikely I would have chosen this school. Hopefully state English/etc. departments will eventually degrade in quality enough that change will be demanded.
Melissa,
You're absolutely right about Steven Pinker, one of my personal favorites. He is met with great resistance and anger by much of academia. I remember that he actually debate Nancy Cantor here a couple years ago and just tore her apart.
To be clear, I did not suggest conservative quotas, merely a type of soft affirmative action. This, I hope, would make them feel more welcome here. I think conservative intellectuals might even flock here if U of I pioneered this sort of honest introspection.
Wally,
If this problem is indeed benign, as you suggest, then would you be saying the same things if my counter-factual hypothetical described at the beginning of the article? Where the professors are a 90-10% split in favor of conservatives? Doubtful. You would likely respond with the following:
Actually many of the arguments I have gotten, especially from academics themselves, is that conservatives simply are not interested in pursuing the truth. That conservatives don’t care about data, facts, or research. And if not that, we are simply not smart enough to handle academia.
This view is sad in many ways, I have tried to respond to it, often to no avail. But if someone needs to be convinced that conservatives and liberals are equally ignorant/intelligent then I’m not sure I will ever be able to persuade them. And what is most funny, is that I personally believe that the most ignorant people on both sides are those unwilling to see the merits and reasonableness of the opposition.
TC,
Thanks for that link. Great story, I missed the Biden op-ed, but will search for it now. I think that a loose federal system would be great, especially to begin with. Perhaps over time tensions will ease and the 3 regions will be drawn together for security, trade, etc. reasons.
Billy Joe, I want to go on record today, May 4th, 2006 as predicting the next president of the United States:
http://www.drudgereport.com/flashhb.htm
the Lizard Queen.
Tom
TC,
eewwww...she gives me the chills. I am comfortable with a lot of Democrats, but mostly the ones who are honest about themselves. People like Feingold or Bayh. I still look at the early poll numbers and see both McCain or Giuliani punishing her. While I appreciate your Jim Morrison reference, I sincerely hope you are wrong about this one. It will be interesting to find out though.
Billy Joe, a lot is going to depend on the '06 elections. I don't think that the current Republicans in the House are running away from the Bush administration fast enough to avoid the loss of enough seats to give the Democrats back the majority there. The Senate may be another matter.
The appointment of Tony Snow to the Press Secretary job was a very clever move. He's well liked in Washington by both the pols and the media, so he'll have more freedom to run the show the way he wants for a while. He's probably good for 5 approval points.
It's really funny--as far as politics go, Bush reminds me of Nixon more than about anyone else. However, the gas prices and the public reaction to them are now infusing quite a bit of Jimmy Carter into the mix.
And there in the wings? The Socialist answer to Ronald Reagan in a Margaret Thatcher outfit.
The Lizard Queen reference was not so much to Jim Morrison as it was to the head of the alien invasion in V (not as in Vendetta, but as in the mini-series from the early 1980s.
Good luck on finals.
Tom
Billy Joe, since you listen to polls more than I, I thought you'd find this interesting:
http://msnbc.msn.com/id/12643666/
Note especially the comparison, similar to mine, about Nixon and the fact that in the 1974 election, with similar polling numbers, the Republicans lost 48 seats in the House and 4 in the Senate.
I expect nothing less than a massacre in November followed by two years of impeachment talk.
Tom
http://community.livejournal.com/economics/253611.html
FYI
We are way too behind in academics in other countries to care about politics at this point. Political affirmative action? I'm against all affirmative action. We need to hire the best people. Period.
Post a Comment
<< Home