The Role of College Educators Is To Teach Students How To Think

"There are always good arguments on both sides of any real issue."  
—Bertrand Russell

Here is the 1915 inaugural statement of principles by the American Association of University Professors (A.A.U.P.) on page 405 of Norman Finkelstein's I'll Burn That Bride When I Get To It!

The university teacher, in giving instruction upon controversial matters, while he is under no obligation to hide his own opinion, under a mountain of equivocal verbiage, should, if he is fit for the position, be a person of a fair and judicial mind; he should, in dealing with such subjects, set forth, justly without suppression, or innuendo, the diverget opinions of other investigators; he should cause his students to become familiar with the best published expressions of the great historic types of doctrine upon the questions at issue; and he should above all, remember that his business is not to provide his students with ready-made conclusions, but to train them to think for themselves, and to provide them access to those materials, which they need, if they are to think intelligently.

The teacher ought to be especially on his guard against taking unfair advantage of the students immaturity by indoctrinating him with the teachers own opinions before the student has had an opportunity fairly to relate to examine other opinions upon the matters in question, and before he has sufficient knowledge in ripeness of judgment, to be entitled to form any definitive opinion of his own. This is not the least service which a college or university may render those under its instruction, to habituate them to looking not only patiently but methodically on both sides, before adopting any conclusion upon controverted issues.

To which Finkelstein adds: "A lectern is not a soapbox, a classroom is not a political rally, a professor should not serve as a conveyor belt for a party line. His responsibility is to stimulate, not dictate."

What are the Pros and Cons of Today's Most Controversial Issues? Here's a Place to Start

Have you ever held a position on an issue and wondered why or how anyone could hold the contrary position? Or, have you ever held a position on an issue in which everyone seemed in opposition to your personal convictions?

Well, here's a great resource that might help you gain insights on how the other side thinks. Or, if seeking rhetorical firepower it could give you ammunition for what your gut has been telling you all along. (Read on.)

When not listening to audio books I occasionally would have National Public Radio (NPR) on during my lunch hour as I drove to and from wherever I was eating that day. For a period of time (and maybe still, I don't know) they would have a Friday debate on various issues with two people for and two people against a proposition on this or that contemporary issue. If I remember correctly, they would poll the audience before the debate and then again afterwards. The team that influenced the most audience members to the cross the divide would be declared winner.

What I liked about it was how it showed the listening audience that even the most controversial issues can have two sides. Whether capital punishment, concealed handguns, banning books or the relevance of the electoral college, all kinds of issues have smart people on opposite sides of the coin.

In their book The Coddling of the American Mind, Jonathan Haidt and Greg Lukianoff note the polarization that has been occurring in our contemporary culture, and how unhealthy it is on several levels. On many college campuses it seems that kids want to only hear one point of view on things, concluding that any view beyond my own is illegitimate, nonconstructive, invalid, not worth consideration and harmful. 

This last point is a major point of the book. In our efforts to raise the current generation in a "safe" way we have made them so fragile that they may have a hard time when they get into the real world of hard knocks.

This singleminded group-think is not just college kids. It has become pervasive in all age groups and demographics. As I have noted elsewhere, citing Eric Hoffer and Orwell, it makes the masses easier to manipulate when they can be induced to clump together in fear in an Us vs. Them stance. 

What the writers of Coddling note is that college used to be a place where students were taught How to think, not What to think. Today this fundamental idea is being challenged on many campuses. Hence the student riots and protests designed to keep certain speakers out these past few years.

I remember sitting in an adult Sunday school class in the 60s in which guests representing various alternative beliefs were invited so they could present their views and be questioned. I can't recall most other than the one from SDS, Students for a Democratic Society, an antiwar group which eventually spawned the Weathermen, a radical branch that used terrorist tactics including bombings. (In one 18 month period from 1971-72 there were five bombings a day around the country!)

The point here is that giving voice to other perspectives was all part of what students fought for in the Sixties Free Speech Movement. How strange it is to find students fighting for just the opposite, shutting down speakers whom they disagree with.

ALL THIS TO SAY that for open-minded people seeking to examine both sides of various issues, the pro and con of Health & Medicine, Education, Political Issues, Science & Technology and more, this is a site worth bookmarking: PROCON.ORG

I've not gone through every category here but the topics I reviewed seem to represent, in a fair and intelligent manner, both sides on many of our most controversial issues. 

It's an approach that I like because few of us, if any, can be experts in every category of every issue. Yet somehow we're continually prodded to "take a stand" on all these issues based on whatever media feed we pay attention to. Sometimes people will even pressure you. "How can can you not know what you think on this?" But the truth is, unless you have researched things a bit, how can you not remain on the sidelines? Issues are complex and multi-faceted.

I believe it is useful to listen to the other side. How can we practice discernment if we always wear earplugs? The ability to discern, to weigh things in the balance, to give them their proper weight, is all part of growing up.

Related Links
The Coddling of the American Mind and its associated website.
Bubble-Wrapped Americans: How the U.S. Became Obsessed with Physical and Emotional Safety

I Think, Therefore I Am… Or Am I? Nietzsche Strikes Again

The past couple weeks I’ve been accompanied by Nietzsche’s Beyond Good & Evil (audiobook) while commuting here and there. Nietzsche is probably one of the most maligned philosophers in history, pigeonholed as either a kook or as the author of the provocative “God is dead” proclamation.

The reality is that the feisty German was an astute observer with quite the sense of humor at times. He loved his mustache, for example, which he gleefully wore like a mask. He also got a kick out of kicking over sacred cows. At least that’s been my take.

In one place he takes aim at Descartes, who after a lengthy attempt to determine whether he existed or not concluded, “I think, therefore, I am.” The declaration, Nietzsche explains, rests on a questionable foundation. That is, do we really think? By way of illustration he notes how thoughts frequently pop into his head out of nowhere. Where do these thoughts come from? Is that really thinking?

It made me think of Martin Luther’s response to a person whose mind is being pestered by evil thoughts. Luther said, “You can’t stop a bird from landing on your head, but you can keep it from building a nest there.”

In other words, in that scenario our thoughts (often) come flitting in from elsewhere like birds or, more annoyingly, mosquitoes.

And yet, my brain is working as I work out how to construct this series of statements to make a point of sorts. To what degree am I thinking and to what degree are associations being assembled by my subconscious or unconscious, thus bypassing real thinking? I dunno. I suppose it’s something to think about.

* * * *
10 Nietzsche Epigrams and Interludes*

Some pointed, some pithy, some that make people apoplectic--Nietzsche was famous for his epigrams and aphorisms. 

73a
Many a peacock hides his peacock tail from all eyes--and calls that his pride.

97
What? A great man? I always see only the actor of his own ideal.

98
If we train our conscience, it kisses us while it hurts us.

106
In music the passions enjoy themselves.

120
Sensuality often hastens the growth of love so much that the roots remain weak and are easily torn up.

125
When we have to change our mind about a person, we hold the inconvenience he causes us very much against him.

141
The abdomen is the reason why man does not easily take himself for a god.

161
Poets treat their experiences shamelessly: they exploit them.

166
Even when the mouth lies, the way it looks still tells the truth.

170
Praise is more obtrusive than a reproach.

* * * *
Related Links
Notes from a Lecture on Nietzsche
Nietzsche's Concept of Eternal Recurrence

* Extracts from Beyond Good & Evil