Quote:
|
Originally Posted by alansmithee
Having conviction is one thing, but being closed to well-argued logical opposing views in a field that hasn't come to decicive conclusions about what you differ on is another thing. If I make a logical point, and there is nothing definite factually that opposes my point, I shouldn't be punished just because someone disagrees with me.
|
You shouldn't be punished, but it is very likely that you will be. How would this law effect that? Do you trust the law to make the often arbitrary decision as to what constitutes a logical, unopposed point?
Quote:
|
I agree, but it's hard to learn to think critically if only one side is ever presented. Then you aren't thinking, you are being told. And judging by what i've seen, there is a definate lack of exchange on campus.
|
I don't know about you, but i know when i my professors are trying to sell me something. I don't need balanced pedagogy, i need someone who puts things into my head for me to evaluate as i see fit. The people who think on their own do so already. The people who can't think on their own can always find someone who can to tell them what to think.
Everyone is allowed to voice their opinion. Why should those who disagree with a professor be granted special protections based solely on how they choose to behave?
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Lebell
Gents,
I counter that it WILL work, simply because it will serve as a very real reminder that academics are there to TEACH students how to think, not to make them little Republicans, Democrats, Communists or whatever..
While it would be great if all academics could separate their personal feelings regarding social issues from teaching, the fact is that some can't.
A school I'm very familiar with, CU, is a good example of such a place. I've had friends attend there that say it is better to keep your opinions to yourself in certain classes than risk retribution.
That is WRONG, plain and simple, and I would welcome legislation to remind academacians of the fact, especially ones like Ward Churchill.
|
While i agree that it is wrong, i don't see how the law would work. How would you even implement a law like this? Require government set standardized curriculum for all universities in the law's jurisdiction? Who decides what "objective" curricula consists of? How easily could the law be abused by disgruntled students?
All teaching is opinionated. You don't need teachers to teach facts, books can do that just fine.