Quote:
Originally posted by moon+Feb 9 2005, 03:49 PM--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (moon @ Feb 9 2005, 03:49 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>
Quote:
Originally posted by Bring_Back_Shantz@Feb 9 2005, 02:47 PM
<!--QuoteBegin-moon
|
Quote:
@Feb 9 2005, 03:22 PM
I don't want him fired just don't think that academic freedom should be used as justification for a professor to spout off views on which he has no proof.#
I find it very difficult to say that a janitor who cleans buildings deserves to die because the people that works in that building may or may not be supporting an economic system that he feels is wrong/damaging whatever.# And that therefore those involve in the economic deserve to die.
There are issues that are not 100% true or false and there needs to be leeway on what professors can teach and what they can't.
I don't feel that this situation warrants that leeway.# I think his view is too far out there to fit within the parameters of what is within reason.
|
Fine, I think any book that addresses philosophical or moral issues other than the bible are too far out there for profs to be exteded leeway. I think anyone who doesn't teach the Christian ideal of right/wrong should be fired. So long Greek Philosophy courses.
I know that is crossing the line, so if you would be so kind as to tell me where the line between what I've said and what you've said is I will never mention this topic ever again.
|
I have no problem if you think that. That is your right. Think what you like.
There is no definitive definition of what is the right amount of leeway to be given. I just am giving my view of what should academic freedom not what should be the view of the university or the AAC. [/b][/quote]
But that's the point I'm trying to make. How can you make an arbitrary decision about what is or isn't protected under acedemic freedom. This is a topic that is clearly in the profs field of study, so why should he be punnished for publishing it? I'm sure he has persuasive arguements (which unlike science where emperical evidence is needed, are good enough in this case), and thus isn't just making crap up. Why should he not be granted the same freedom as someone who is taking a less controversial stance?
__________________
THE SHANTZ WILL RISE AGAIN.
<-----Check the Badge bitches. You want some Awesome, you come to me!