[Teaching_Composition] FW: [RFP] Professor Osama

[Thelin,William]

I thought some of you might be interested in this discussion forwarded
from the Rhetoricians for Peace listserv.  It parallels what we are
talking about to some extent.  I'm most interested in Tom Huckin's
definition of "liberal."  Would this be a definition that David Horowitz
and others would accept?  Or would Horowitz claim that the political
left in academia has betrayed these "liberal" values?

Bill

-----Original Message-----
From: rfp-bounces@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu
[mailto:rfp-bounces@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu] On Behalf Of Sapienza, Filipp
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 1:48 PM
To: Tom Huckin; Rhetoricians for Peace
Subject: Re: [RFP] Professor Osama

On that note, it might also be helpful that the role of a scholar and/or
any good teacher is to take a critical position on things. Minimally
that means three moves: (1) getting people to step outside of whatever
milieu they are in; and (2) examining it, turning it over and upside
down, testing, probing, and so forth; and (3) acting based on the new
knowledge and/or perspective (sometimes the new knowledge *is* the
changed perspective). 

Why should we be vilified for doing our job? We may be able to come up
with the right reasons and valid arguments, but we're dealing with
people who don't need to be right. Horowitz came to CU Denver a few
years ago. During his speech, someone (a professor at one of our
campuses) asked him to cite one specific validated case of liberal bias
on a college campus (that is, a case where a student was genuinely
graded down or mistreated based on not agreeing with the political views
of a professor). He couldn't. Instead of admitting his lack of evidence,
he called the professor asking the question (paraphrasing) a "snooty
intellectual." He was booed for this move, but it doesn't matter. 

Ward Churchill is not teaching because he exercised his first amendment
rights (I might add, he exercised them *out* of the context of his
teaching duties). David Horowitz, who cannot even come up with a basic
valid argument, is getting all kinds of accolades and positive press
spin. 

Truth doesn't matter in this situation. Connections to political power,
money, and one's willingness to prop up and support the ideological
positions that preserve institutional, established, and elite power
count for everything -- regardless of the ideology. We could be dealing
with a leftist tyranny and it would be the same situation (revisit
Soviet history). 

Filipp Sapienza

> -----Original Message-----
> From: rfp-bounces@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu [mailto:rfp-
> bounces@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu] On Behalf Of Tom Huckin
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 10:10 AM
> To: Rhetoricians for Peace
> Subject: Re: [RFP] Professor Osama
> 
> Well said, Stevens.
> 
> Reactionaries like David Horowitz bemoan the fact that most college
> professors in the humanities and social sciences are politically
liberal,
> and calls for more 'balance.'  But he's overlooking something that
seems
> to
> me quite basic, namely, that most of the very qualities that define
> liberalism are those that also define a good teacher:  openmindedness,
> tolerance, fairness, egalitarianism, willingness to challenge dogma
and
> orthodoxy, a commitment to reason over blind faith, etc.  If we
believe in
> these qualities in the classroom why should we not also believe in
them in
> the public sphere?  In short, it's no accident, I think, that college
> professors (in the 'softer' disciplines, at least) are overwhelmingly
> liberal in political orientation;  and I'm surprised that more people
> don't
> point this out.  The more liberals there are in academia, the better.
> Being
> liberal is something we should *openly take pride* in.
> 
> Tom
> 
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Stevens Amidon" <amidons@ipfw.edu>
> To: <rfp@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu>
> Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006 5:58 AM
> Subject: Re: [RFP] Professor Osama
> 
> 
> > I've always felt that those who argue for ideological balance in a
> > university misunderstand the function of the university in society.
> >
> > The same people who are so bothered by the idea that academics in
the
> > United States don't blindly accept the rhetoric of our government,
are
> > thrilled when academics in Iran and China do exactly the same thing.
> >
> > Ideally, the university should function as an agent for change and
> > experimentation in  society, a counter to a government that wishes
to
> > maintain the status quo. Balance is far less important than
diversity of
> > thought. If, in fact, the university becomes too ideologically
> homogenous,
> > I suspect new academic movements will arise to counter it. The
> university
> > system will take care of itself. Governmental intervention in
academic
> > life only destroys free thought, which is the lifeblood of the
> university.
> >
> > People forget that many of the early "neo-conservatives" were
academics.
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RFP mailing list
> > RFP@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu
> > https://lists.lsit.ucsb.edu/listinfo/rfp
> >
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RFP mailing list
> RFP@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu
> https://lists.lsit.ucsb.edu/listinfo/rfp
_______________________________________________
RFP mailing list
RFP@mail.lsit.ucsb.edu
https://lists.lsit.ucsb.edu/listinfo/rfp