A blog about academic freedom and other issues in higher education, from John K. Wilson
Thursday, June 24, 2010
My Appearance on Fox News
I'm scheduled to appear today (Thursday) on Fox News Channel at 12:20pm to discuss the NAS report on summer reading programs.
2 comments:
Gerald
said...
To answer the conservative nags, you should do 3 things. First, acknowledge the clear liberal slant, not only with this issue but in selective academia generally. Second, state that this liberal slant reflects the makeup of the faculty and administration at selective colleges and universities. Third, challenge them on why more conservatives aren't receiving Ph.D.'s in literature, humanities etc. and seeking to become professors and administrators at these universities. Instead of asking liberal professors to suppress their beliefs, why not work to produce more conservative professors?
Many conservatives claim that universities discriminate against them in conferring degrees and in hiring. Yet not a shred of evidence that this is so exists, not a single lawsuit alleging such discrimination has been filed, let alone won. Also, if this were true, one would see a lot more conservatives in lesser selective schools, but they aren't there either. If anything, you are more likely to encounter a conservative professor or administrator at a selective university.
Now liberal bias does exist in the academy, but only because conservatives lack the desire to pursue careers in the academy. That is not the fault - or the problem - of liberals, but instead is something that conservatives themselves must acknowledge and fix.
I just saw you on Fox. One thing that jumped out at me was your parting comment, which I remember as saying that of course there would be a lot of books on summer reading lists that are perceived as liberal, because these lists are aimed at young people, so naturally there would be a lot of books that "reflect contemporary social concerns," or words to that effect.
Since we are talking about the point of view expressed and not subject matter, what this seems to mean is "these people are mostly liberals, and naturally they are going to read things they agree with -- what's wrong with that?" Didn't you basically give the other side everything they are saying, here? I mean, that's pretty much what they are saying -- that these are liberals reading stuff that is minimally threatening to their Weltanschauung.
2 comments:
To answer the conservative nags, you should do 3 things. First, acknowledge the clear liberal slant, not only with this issue but in selective academia generally. Second, state that this liberal slant reflects the makeup of the faculty and administration at selective colleges and universities. Third, challenge them on why more conservatives aren't receiving Ph.D.'s in literature, humanities etc. and seeking to become professors and administrators at these universities. Instead of asking liberal professors to suppress their beliefs, why not work to produce more conservative professors?
Many conservatives claim that universities discriminate against them in conferring degrees and in hiring. Yet not a shred of evidence that this is so exists, not a single lawsuit alleging such discrimination has been filed, let alone won. Also, if this were true, one would see a lot more conservatives in lesser selective schools, but they aren't there either. If anything, you are more likely to encounter a conservative professor or administrator at a selective university.
Now liberal bias does exist in the academy, but only because conservatives lack the desire to pursue careers in the academy. That is not the fault - or the problem - of liberals, but instead is something that conservatives themselves must acknowledge and fix.
I just saw you on Fox. One thing that jumped out at me was your parting comment, which I remember as saying that of course there would be a lot of books on summer reading lists that are perceived as liberal, because these lists are aimed at young people, so naturally there would be a lot of books that "reflect contemporary social concerns," or words to that effect.
Since we are talking about the point of view expressed and not subject matter, what this seems to mean is "these people are mostly liberals, and naturally they are going to read things they agree with -- what's wrong with that?" Didn't you basically give the other side everything they are saying, here? I mean, that's pretty much what they are saying -- that these are liberals reading stuff that is minimally threatening to their Weltanschauung.
Post a Comment