« Sacrilegious? | Main | Intensity Monger... good band name »
March 14, 2005
Intellectual Diversity Debate
The following is an article I wrote for the conservative newspaper at St. Olaf, The Counterweight.
*****
I knew the debate was going to be fiery and spectacular as soon as the introduction referred to "the aftermath of the Nobel Peace Prize Forum." The Intellectual Diversity Committee, a subcommittee of SGA, held the forum in Viking Theater on March 2. Professors Gorton and Zorn discussed their views on professors incorporating their political views into their classes.
A Professor in the Mathematics department, Zorn only brought up his field a couple of times, much to my relief. At one point, I heard the words "equation" and "pi" in the same sentence, and I decided that I was at the wrong forum. Fortunately, Zorn soon returned to the topic of the debate, and I returned to my seat. Keeping it simple, Professor Zorn affirmed that diversity of opinion is indeed a good thing and that political indoctrination is, in fact, bad. However, he lamented the lack of concrete evidence to support students? claims of classroom bias. I could only wonder how he would respond if students began recording his classes with a video camera.
Professor Gorton offered the suggestion that, from a pedagogical perspective, a more complete understanding comes through exploring all academically sound sides of an issue or theory. Gorton is a Political Science professor so, by nature, the subjects he deals with have multiple sides. The only multilateral issue that Zorn would address would relate to geometry. In his classes, however, "pentagon" does not necessarily have anything to do with the building in Washington D.C.
Much of the discussion revolved around the issue of the disproportionately large number of liberals compared to conservatives in the field of academia. Zorn suggested the academy and liberalism both appeal to skeptics. I'm skeptical of this argument myself. Gorton proposed that conservatives may be more attracted to careers with corporations, while liberals may be skeptical about such businesses. Thus, a consensus was reached: liberals are skeptical.
Gorton also mentioned the idea that liberalism in academia may be perpetuating itself. His solution for conservatives unhappy with this phenomenon was for more conservatives to enter the academy. While several members of the audience nodded in agreement with this profound solution, images flashed through my mind of Daniel in the den of ravenous lions.
Cynic though I may be (although not liberal), I walked out of the debate with mostly positive feelings. Lo and behold, two sides of an issue were presented. Granted, it took two professors to accomplish this great feat, but it was achieved nonetheless.
Posted by Megan at March 14, 2005 01:27 PM