[Mendenhall] If colleges keep stifling free speech what institution will rise up in its stead?

[Mendenhall] If colleges keep stifling free speech what institution will rise up in its stead?

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Princeton professor Keith E. Whittington’s new book, ‘Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech,’ urges universities to recognize that promoting freedom of speech is integral to their educational mission.

[The Federalist] Keith E. Whittington, a professor of politics at Princeton University, calls his latest book, Speak Freely: Why Universities Must Defend Free Speech, a “reminder”—a term suggesting that we’ve forgotten something or that there’s something so important that we shouldn’t forget it. This something is the purpose of the modern university, which is, or should be, a refuge for open dialogue, rigorous debate, and the free exchange of ideas.

VIDEO: David Pakman interviews author Keith Whittington on how bad the university free speech problem really is.

Safe spaces, trigger  warnings, speaker disinvitations, speech zones, no-platforming, physical assaults against speakers—these are sure signs that some university cultures have become illiberal and intolerant, prioritizing indoctrination, orthodoxy, conformity, narrow-mindedness, censorship, and dogmatism over the unfettered pursuit of knowledge and wide dissemination of ideas.

Universities are not one-size-fits-all. The multiplicity among and between institutions of higher education in the United States, from community colleges to liberal-arts colleges to state flagship universities, makes generalizations about them impossible. Modern universities, however, are decidedly committed to research on the nineteenth-century German model. Whittington’s chief subject is this modern university, not religiously affiliated colleges guided by a core mission to spread and inspire doctrinal faith through formal education.

This is a very different model than, say, the distinctly Catholic university contemplated by Cardinal John Henry Newman in The Idea of a University that is predicated on the belief that scientific and philosophical knowledge is intimately tied to the revealed truths of the church. Whittington’s key focus appears to be on those institutions classified as doctoral research universities by the Carnegie Classification of Institutions of Higher Education. The gravest problem at such institutions is their coercive restrictions on speech.

Newly Relevant Free Speech Concerns

Whittington shows that the free-speech ideal has always been contested on campus, its concrete manifestations differing from school to school and context to context. The tension, moreover, between protecting provocative speech and providing for student safety isn’t new. University administrators have long struggled to balance the promise of robust speech with the need for security in light of potentially violent backlash to offensive, incendiary utterances.

This article continues at [The Federalist] Why Universities Must Embrace Free Speech—Or Else

Check Also
[Taylor] Regular public acknowlegement of native land claims makes matters worse, not better
[Taylor] Regular public acknowledgement of native land claims makes matters worse, not better
[National Post] Has Canada acquired a second, tuneless national anthem? Prior to public events of ...