3 ms·

- an expression of the view that an academic is clouding their judgement with their own politics How is that not an ad hominem attack? - or simply behaving un

by Udik 8y ago

- an expression of the view that an academic is clouding their judgement with their own politics How is that not an ad hominem attack? - or simply behaving unreasonably in a manner which has nothing to do with scientific enquiry or their subject matter. This can be implied by the discussion of the ideas; stating "you are behaving unreasonably" is, again, not an argument. Protests are manifestations of personal and emotional involvement- I don't see what these things have to do with scientific inquiry.

notahacker 8y ago
Out of curiosity, have you actually attended a university? Because I can assure you that a lot of things professors do and say (for better and for worse) have little or nothing to do with scientific enquiry, and that lectures and seminar programmes seldom have the fluidity to incorporate extended discussions on the merits of an academic's recent behaviour, treatment of students or allegedly overtly racist media comments. Especially not if they're a hard science programme. I don't think all protests have merit or are carried out in an acceptable manner, but I also don't think professors are such special snowflakes that all criticism of their actions is off limits unless specifically solicited in their classes, and I certainly don't think you can dress blanket censorship of unauthorised criticisms of them in the clothes of free speech.
- Udik 8y ago
  > I can assure you that a lot of things professors do and say (for better and for worse) have little or nothing to do with scientific enquiry We have been talking so far of censorship of ideas and of "academic context", which doesn't necessarily coincide with the university building. My point, from which I might have strayed a bit in the thread, is that protests are irrelevant to the academic discourse (again, not "what professors chat about during the day") and as such they should be considered exclusively disruptive, and certainly not a way of making any sort of point. Shouldn't university, in general, also teach students to present their cases and conclusions in a cogent manner, as opposed to picketing a hall and shouting? Then there is of course the case of bad behaviour or mistreatment of students: but what does it have to do with "controversial ideas" and public protests against them? It's a matter for disciplinary committe and investigations about actual individual facts, not about general statements and beliefs.

by Udik 8y ago

notahacker 8y ago

Out of curiosity, have you actually attended a university? Because I can assure you that a lot of things professors do and say (for better and for worse) have little or nothing to do with scientific enquiry, and that lectures and seminar programmes seldom have the fluidity to incorporate extended discussions on the merits of an academic's recent behaviour, treatment of students or allegedly overtly racist media comments. Especially not if they're a hard science programme. I don't think all protests have merit or are carried out in an acceptable manner, but I also don't think professors are such special snowflakes that all criticism of their actions is off limits unless specifically solicited in their classes, and I certainly don't think you can dress blanket censorship of unauthorised criticisms of them in the clothes of free speech.

Udik 8y ago
> I can assure you that a lot of things professors do and say (for better and for worse) have little or nothing to do with scientific enquiry We have been talking so far of censorship of ideas and of "academic context", which doesn't necessarily coincide with the university building. My point, from which I might have strayed a bit in the thread, is that protests are irrelevant to the academic discourse (again, not "what professors chat about during the day") and as such they should be considered exclusively disruptive, and certainly not a way of making any sort of point. Shouldn't university, in general, also teach students to present their cases and conclusions in a cogent manner, as opposed to picketing a hall and shouting? Then there is of course the case of bad behaviour or mistreatment of students: but what does it have to do with "controversial ideas" and public protests against them? It's a matter for disciplinary committe and investigations about actual individual facts, not about general statements and beliefs.