Name-calling? Regardless of the child's "Sticks and stones will break my bones, but words will never hurt me," at least one American university faculty believes that "words" will hurt them, and because of that belief, they have used name-calling to hurt those with whom they disagree. Case in point:
Apparently, it’s okay to call people whatever name you want to call them as long as you are Left-leaning. And it’s apparently okay to censor the speech of any Right-leaning speaker. At least, that seems to be the attitude at Arizona State University, where 37 of 47 members of Barrett, the Honors College at ASU, wrote to the university’s Lewis Center for Personal Development because it invited certain conservative speakers to the campus.
Calling the speakers “purveyors of hate,” the faculty included in their letter of protest two prominent conservatives, Turning Point’s Charlie Kirk and Prager University’s Dennis Prager. In response to news services about the letter condemning the two speakers, an ASU spokesperson reportedly told Breitbart News that “As a public university, ASU is committed to free, robust and uninhibited sharing of ideas….”
Except for ideas that the 37 members of Barrett dislike.
It seems that the human brain can be as fixed as any conditioned animal brain. There’s little difference between Pavlov’s dog and almost any of us when it comes to conditioned thoughts. Couple that stubborn refusal to hear different points of view with any ideological movement, and one gets what we have today: University faculty trying to shut down the free exchange of ideas while claiming to be open to “robust and uninhibited sharing of ideas.”
And the undeveloped brains that the faculty members teach are little more than Pavlov’s dog. A single stimulus is all it takes for them to respond in the most predictable ways.
Although I have serious doubts about the claims of the Barrett faculty and about my own ability to tolerate some “robust” discussions about ideologies I have reasoned to be injurious when put into practice (such as socialism), I think I can do what the Left-leaning faculty of Barrett do, a little name calling.
I think the Honors faculty at ASU Barrett are purveyors of hypocrisy and that their hypocrisy with regard to intellectual exchanges can only lead underdeveloped minds into positions of hate and closed-mindedness. Those faculty members and students of Barrett don’t have to listen to the speakers they have pre-condemned; don’t have to agree with ideas rationally spoken; but surely they have some intellectual obligation to offer a rational response instead of childish ad hominem attacks. But they cannot respond rationally in open discussion if the University doesn’t even allow the exchange of ideas through censorship by banning.
Apparently, it’s okay to call people whatever name you want to call them as long as you are Left-leaning. And it’s apparently okay to censor the speech of any Right-leaning speaker. At least, that seems to be the attitude at Arizona State University, where 37 of 47 members of Barrett, the Honors College at ASU, wrote to the university’s Lewis Center for Personal Development because it invited certain conservative speakers to the campus.
Calling the speakers “purveyors of hate,” the faculty included in their letter of protest two prominent conservatives, Turning Point’s Charlie Kirk and Prager University’s Dennis Prager. In response to news services about the letter condemning the two speakers, an ASU spokesperson reportedly told Breitbart News that “As a public university, ASU is committed to free, robust and uninhibited sharing of ideas….”
Except for ideas that the 37 members of Barrett dislike.
It seems that the human brain can be as fixed as any conditioned animal brain. There’s little difference between Pavlov’s dog and almost any of us when it comes to conditioned thoughts. Couple that stubborn refusal to hear different points of view with any ideological movement, and one gets what we have today: University faculty trying to shut down the free exchange of ideas while claiming to be open to “robust and uninhibited sharing of ideas.”
And the undeveloped brains that the faculty members teach are little more than Pavlov’s dog. A single stimulus is all it takes for them to respond in the most predictable ways.
Although I have serious doubts about the claims of the Barrett faculty and about my own ability to tolerate some “robust” discussions about ideologies I have reasoned to be injurious when put into practice (such as socialism), I think I can do what the Left-leaning faculty of Barrett do, a little name calling.
I think the Honors faculty at ASU Barrett are purveyors of hypocrisy and that their hypocrisy with regard to intellectual exchanges can only lead underdeveloped minds into positions of hate and closed-mindedness. Those faculty members and students of Barrett don’t have to listen to the speakers they have pre-condemned; don’t have to agree with ideas rationally spoken; but surely they have some intellectual obligation to offer a rational response instead of childish ad hominem attacks. But they cannot respond rationally in open discussion if the University doesn’t even allow the exchange of ideas through censorship by banning.
RSS Feed