frank theriault wrote: > 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? > > 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.
Our job, as academics, is to teach NOT preach. It sounds to me as if this guy is doing the latter more than the former. Also, we have an obligation to review and present the facts fairly. It also does NOT sound as if he is doing that. I don't feel that my academic freedom would be infringed in the least if he got the boot. In part, my academic freedom means that I should not be compelled to espouse a particular view, in my area of expertise, for political or other reasons. For instance, if I think a particular development is going to do bad things to the nearby mangroves, I can say so and use my expert knowledge to support my view. The government should not be able to shut me up because it favours that particular project. Keith McG -- PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List [email protected] http://pdml.net/mailman/listinfo/pdml_pdml.net
