« How to send me running into the waiting arms of the Discovery Institute, part III | Main | This is how crazy it has been lately. »

December 02, 2005

Update on the Kansas University "ID/mythology" course

Ding-dong, the course is gone. Well done to Evil Dr. P.

But mad props to the Kansas U Faculty Senate, who have broken out with this truly novel and remarkable admonishment for their faculty:

The Faculty Senate at Kansas on Thursday afternoon adopted a resolution affirming the right of professors to teach and do research on controversial subjects, but also noting their responsibility to speak in respectful, civil ways.

“Our values are that we’re not going to flinch from examining controversial issues. That’s part of what you do,” said Joe Heppert, a chemistry professor who is chair of the Faculty Senate Executive Committee.

“But we also wanted to recognize that along with freedom comes responsibility to recognize that the way we speak, the attitudes we express, can result in the public reaching certain conclusions about ourselves as scholars and as an institution,” Heppert said. “We have the responsibility, even when we speak privately, to do so with respect for the attitudes of others.”

So it's an academic virtue, when you want to teach on something going on in society right now, to be careful with your words and respectful of all opinions that will be in the room - because God forbid you make anyone believe that you've made up your mind about who is right and who is wrong before you actually start to study something as important in society today as the evolution/ID question? That you make anyone believe that you're - gasp - closed-minded?

"Open-minded Atheists and Agnostics." That's a laugh.

(Follow that link, and the offending (and offensive) e-mail is at the bottom of the page. It should be a textbook example of how an academic does NOT introduce a college course to the population.)

Posted by Chuck at December 2, 2005 08:27 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.chuck-pearson.org/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/138

Comments

Heh, that was nothing against you on my Xanga...I was talking about the Madame Cremers Pearson (French prof.). You're fine.

Posted by: Mack F. at December 2, 2005 10:45 AM

"'Open-minded Atheists and Agnostics.' That's a laugh."

Which part is a laugh? The name of the club or the fact that some one calls themself open-minded and send an email like the one that was sent? Cause i kinda like the name of the club esp. if its split up (open-minded atheists) and (agnostics) cause then it makes a bit more sense. whee. hope all is going well with preparing for finals or whatever else is going on right now. :)

Posted by: Nancy at December 3, 2005 10:14 AM

It was the juxtaposition of the club name and the e-mail trail sent out by the advisor of the club, not the club name itself.

Although the principle of open-minded atheism itself still confounds me. I mean, I do not pretend to be truly "open-minded" in this regard - I have decided, in favor of Christianity (and in favor of a more conservative form of Christianity in particular) and I've wrestled with the implications of that decision for the better part of the last 15 years. If I'm going to change my mind, there's going to have to be a TON of deconstructing that goes down. Same is true, I'm sure, of someone who rationally decides that God can't possibly exist and then builds much of their lifestyle around that.

No good answers, here.

Posted by: Dr Chuck Pearson at December 5, 2005 10:48 AM

Is it necessarily true that an atheist (or a Christian, or anyone else who has chosen a life of faith, whether it be believing or not) HAS to be closed-minded? Can one not have chosen a particular religious conviction for oneself while still maintaining that one's choice is not necessarily right for all people, but rather right for oneself only, and if others happen to agree with one's chosen path, then so be it, but others are just as entitled to their chosen paths as well? Is that not open-mindedness? I'm not saying that this particular example (the e-mailer) is a good one of such a person who is both a decided religious follower and an accepting and open thinker, but I don't think that the two necessarily contradict one another.

Posted by: Catie at December 6, 2005 11:13 AM