More Notes Yet

by Cliopatria

Carnivalesque XIII is up at Alun Salt's Archaeoastronomy. He promises"fewer teeth, more bite" in this ancient/medieval edition of the festival in honor of Women's History Month.

David Beito, Ralph E. Luker, and Robert KC Johnson,"The AHA's Double Standard on Academic Freedom," Perspectives, March 2006, is the most recent in our series of articles that urge our fellow historians to oppose threats to academic freedom, both when they are external and internal to our communities.

Niall Ferguson,"Lame Ducks Can Still Bite Back," LA Times, 13 March, reflecting on Lawrence Summers and George W. Bush, reminds us that"duck" is both a noun and a verb.

comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:

Ralph E. Luker - 3/14/2006

Mr. Segal, The consequences of your logic will be that speech is less free in the classroom and in our academic communities than it is in society at large. That seems to me to have turned the world upside down. If a professor makes claims in the classroom that are mistaken, the appropriate action is -- not to _punish_ him or her -- but a) to show proof that the claims are incorrect or b) to challenge the professor to show evidence for the claims.

Jacob paul segal - 3/14/2006

Mr. Luker,

Of couse, the rules of a classroom are different than the rules of society. We assume that a student should not be insulted by his professors; anti-semitic comments are unacceptable in any classroom like racists comments. What I meant by my comment was the question your assumption that Hoppe was wrongly treated because his comments were homophobic and without basis. I am quite sure there is not a single serious study that offers evidence that gay people have short time horizons. And so, I suggest that that statements that Jews have an fondness for money equals the statement that gays have short time horizons. Both are replusive and legal, but neither has a place in a classroom.

Robert KC Johnson - 3/14/2006

I agree completely with Ralph.

Ralph E. Luker - 3/14/2006

Mr. Segal, I can't speak for either David Beito or KC Johnson -- only for myself. Your position, if I intuit it correctly, leads down the road to imprisoning David Irving for being a dreadful human being and a bad historian, to boot. It may be prudential for a teacher to consider how students may _feel_ about what she says, but punishing professors for how students _feel_ about what they say is a very bad idea.

Jacob paul segal - 3/14/2006

Your Perspective article contains the following sentence:

Just as troubling is the case of Hans-Hermann Hoppe, a professor of economics at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas (UNLV). In 2004, a student complained that Hoppe's assertion in lecture that homosexuals were more likely to have higher time preferences (that is, to favor current consumption over long-term savings and investment) constituted hate speech. In February 2005, UNLV Provost Raymond W. Alden III announced that he would reprimand Hoppe and suspend him without pay for a week for creating a "hostile learning environment." Alden characterized Hoppe's statements as improper because they "were not supported by peer reviewed academic literature" and were "opinions, theories without experimental/statistical support."5 The fallacies of such a standard are obvious, or at least should be obvious. What professor can claim (at least with a straight face) that he or she has not violated this peer-review rule in lecture, and not just once but many times.

Question: If a professor was reprimanded for stating that Jews care more about money for other groups would you three object? How might Jews in that classroom feel?

Barry DeCicco - 3/14/2006

I read that article - I knew that Harvard people didn't live in the world that we do, but Niall has reinforced that idea!