30 ms·

> How many colleges are out there like Wheaton (?) or Hillsdale. Is the ration less than 1000:1? Yes. In fact, I even said so in the post you're replying to. I

> How many colleges are out there like Wheaton (?) or Hillsdale. Is the ration less than 1000:1? Yes. In fact, I even said so in the post you're replying to. In the very next paragraph, I state that "nearly all universities" are extremely welcoming of free speech. In other words, most places are great, and the vast majority of places that aren't great wrt free speech are cloisters of conservative christiandom, not liberal utopias. My point is, if you go through each universities and evaluate its attitude toward controversial speech acts on a case-by-case basis, you'd be hard pressed to make the argument that the data set, in aggregate, supports the "liberal censorship on college campuses" narrative. In other words, the only way to reach this conclusion is by living in a filter bubble where you a) ignore the vast majority of circumstances where universities -- especially non-public universities -- welcome controversial speech; and also b) ignore the fact that the most obvious examples of educational institutions which do not welcome controversial speech are all staunchly conservative. Stop and think for a second. How many actual concrete examples of censorship on college campuses can you think of? 10? 20? 100? There are literally millions of political speeches and politically charged courses every semester on college campuses. Taking millions of data points and filtering out 10 or 100 of them, and then generating a perpetual outrage machine out of your teeny tiny artisinally crafted sample set, is the definition of a delusional filter bubble. > Restrictions on speech at Hillsdale don't come from rules against "hate speech" 1. Why in god's name does it matter what you call it? A restriction on speech is a restriction on speech. Either you value free speech or you don't. 2. Here's one plausible definition of hate speech: "behavior that -- on the part of individuals or student organizations -- violates the bounds of common decency and civility... or that disrupts the climate of academic reflection and discourse proper to serious study." Guess which college categorizes this behavior as a valid reason for expulsion.

guildwriter 9y ago
I guess you could go through the case log of FIRE. https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ How many instances does Evergreen rate? How many instances of self censorship do you think such an atmosphere creates? Do you think actions like this only result in one person being afraid to speak up? Does it only matter if someone is willing to go to a journalist and make themselves a target? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/05/college-closed-for-third-day-concerned-about-threat-after-protests-over-race/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/0...
- throwawayjava 9y ago
  > I guess you could go through the case log of FIRE. As I stated above, >> You can probably build a case against my assessment if you spend all day scouring the past decade for counter-examples. In fact, that work was (literally) already done In that comment, I was referring to the FIRE database. So I already addressed the rest of your argument: >> But "cat everything | grep 'my view point'" does not a preponderance of evidence make. And in the post after that: > There are literally millions of political speeches and politically charged courses every semester on college campuses. Taking millions of data points and filtering out 10 or 100 of them, and then generating a perpetual outrage machine out of your teeny tiny artisinally crafted sample set, is the definition of a delusional filter bubble. I'm glad organizations like FIRE exist! I agree places like Evergreen have bad cultures. But the "liberal threat to free speech on college campuses" is 1) extraordinarily over-blown to the point of absurdity; and 2) places undo emphasis on liberal institutions when the most heinously anti-free-speech institutions are all conservative.
  - guildwriter 9y ago
    You still haven't explained what a "preponderance of evidence" looks like. You keep doing blanket refusals that the liberal threat to free speech is overblown.
    - throwawayjava 9y ago
      The claim at hand: "colleges are restricting conservative speech". I make two counter-points: 1. Writ large, Colleges remain some of the most liberal institutions when it comes to free speech. 2. The emphasis on "liberal" is misplaced since all the best exemplars are religious universities. (I think we agree on at least the second part of this claim). Regarding 1, I'm not sure what a "preponderance of evidence" looks like for this claim, but I'd eat a shoe if even 0.001% of controversial speech acts that happen on college campuses result in any action, let alone something that actually effects anyone's life in any material way. Combining FIRE's cases and disinvitations lists, I have something far south of 1000 total data points. People talk about controversial things a lot at colleges and universities.

guildwriter 9y ago

I guess you could go through the case log of FIRE. https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ https://www.thefire.org/category/cases/free-speech/ How many instances does Evergreen rate? How many instances of self censorship do you think such an atmosphere creates? Do you think actions like this only result in one person being afraid to speak up? Does it only matter if someone is willing to go to a journalist and make themselves a target? https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/05/college-closed-for-third-day-concerned-about-threat-after-protests-over-race/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/grade-point/wp/2017/06/0...

throwawayjava 9y ago
> I guess you could go through the case log of FIRE. As I stated above, >> You can probably build a case against my assessment if you spend all day scouring the past decade for counter-examples. In fact, that work was (literally) already done In that comment, I was referring to the FIRE database. So I already addressed the rest of your argument: >> But "cat everything | grep 'my view point'" does not a preponderance of evidence make. And in the post after that: > There are literally millions of political speeches and politically charged courses every semester on college campuses. Taking millions of data points and filtering out 10 or 100 of them, and then generating a perpetual outrage machine out of your teeny tiny artisinally crafted sample set, is the definition of a delusional filter bubble. I'm glad organizations like FIRE exist! I agree places like Evergreen have bad cultures. But the "liberal threat to free speech on college campuses" is 1) extraordinarily over-blown to the point of absurdity; and 2) places undo emphasis on liberal institutions when the most heinously anti-free-speech institutions are all conservative.
- guildwriter 9y ago
  You still haven't explained what a "preponderance of evidence" looks like. You keep doing blanket refusals that the liberal threat to free speech is overblown.
  - throwawayjava 9y ago
    The claim at hand: "colleges are restricting conservative speech". I make two counter-points: 1. Writ large, Colleges remain some of the most liberal institutions when it comes to free speech. 2. The emphasis on "liberal" is misplaced since all the best exemplars are religious universities. (I think we agree on at least the second part of this claim). Regarding 1, I'm not sure what a "preponderance of evidence" looks like for this claim, but I'd eat a shoe if even 0.001% of controversial speech acts that happen on college campuses result in any action, let alone something that actually effects anyone's life in any material way. Combining FIRE's cases and disinvitations lists, I have something far south of 1000 total data points. People talk about controversial things a lot at colleges and universities.