> Fra: "frank theriault" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > On 7/25/06, graywolf <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I will defend the guys right to get up on a soap box, or write on the > > Internet, but I do not think he should be given official sanction or tax > > payer dollars to do so. Are we required to support every crackpot who > > wishes to tell us about his hallucinations? > > It rankles me that people use the "not with my tax dollars" argument > to try to muzzle academics whose views don't coincide with theirs. > > I didn't realize that part of the deal with public funds going to > universities was to allow the public to set curriculum, or otherwise > tell profs what to say (or not to say). > > In fact, I thought that tax dollars going to post-secondary > institutions was all about recognizing that the particular values and > freedoms of academia were worth preserving and promoting, not so that > the government or the people could use that funding as a platform to > promote personal or popular agendas or censor unpopular thoughts. > > I guess I'm naive. > Then so am I.
Academia not only has to allow unpopular view, it depends upon it. All science is based on the ciritical discussion of any subject. If you throw out the discussions you may very well throw out thoughts and solutions that may turn out to be valuable. If the students in this case learns to be critical toward the professors views, and hopefully to any professors view, they have learned something very valuable, as science is based on a sceptical view on authorities. If the discussions about his methods make them more aware of the methods they use themselves it is also a good thing, because the scientific method (in any science) is more valuable than the recent findings and conclusions. DagT -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List PDML@pdml.net http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
