Ep61 “Pursuit for Academic Freedom” with Richard Saller

All Else Equal Podcast: Academic Freedom and Government Interference

Key Concepts:

• Academic Freedom: The freedom of faculty, students, and staff to exchange ideas and opinions without fear of retribution, censorship, or deportation.
• Government Interference: Government intervention in university affairs, particularly regarding research agendas and academic appointments.
• Diversity Statements: Statements required by some universities for hiring or pay raises, assessing commitment to diversity.
• Hypocrisy: The inconsistency between universities' stated commitment to academic freedom and their actual practices.
• Social Norms: The cultural expectations and behaviors that support or undermine academic freedom.
• Elitism: The perception that universities are out of touch with the rest of society and cater to a privileged few.
• Meritocracy: A system in which advancement is based on individual ability or achievement.
• Safe Space: A term used to describe environments where individuals feel protected from challenging or uncomfortable ideas.

The Core Issue: Hypocrisy in Defending Academic Freedom

The podcast begins by discussing a statement signed by 562 university presidents affirming their commitment to academic freedom and a hands-off approach from the government. The hosts, Jules Van Binsburgen and Jonathan Burke, express skepticism, pointing out the perceived hypocrisy of universities that have, in their view, restricted academic freedom in recent years.

• Example: University of California, Berkeley: The chancellor signed the statement despite the university's past requirement of diversity statements for hiring and pay raises, where expressing skepticism about the necessity of diversity was grounds for disqualification.
• Example: University of Pennsylvania: The university president signed the statement while the university continues its "persecution" of Amy Wax, a law professor, for expressing controversial opinions.

The hosts argue that these actions undermine the universities' credibility in defending academic freedom against government interference.

The Trump Administration's Position

The hosts contend that the universities' hypocrisy strengthens the Trump administration's position. The administration argues that universities are not truly open to all opinions and therefore require government intervention.

• Argument: The universities' definition of a "full range of opinions" has historically been limited to left-wing perspectives, excluding right-wing viewpoints.
• Analogy: Steven Pinker's joke about university campuses being the "left pole," where any direction you walk is more right-wing than where you are.

The hosts believe that universities need to acknowledge their past shortcomings and implement concrete measures to ensure genuine academic freedom before they can credibly resist government interference.

Potential Solutions: Social Norms and Cultural Change

The hosts propose that the solution lies in fostering social norms that value disagreement and discourage social ostracism.

• Proposal: Jonathan suggests a freshman week program at Stanford to model the behavior of considering all opinions.
• Argument: Policies alone are insufficient without a supportive culture.

They emphasize the importance of defending principles over winning short-term battles and creating a culture where playing devil's advocate is respected.

Interview with Richard Saller: A Historical Perspective

Richard Saller, former interim president of Stanford University and provost of the University of Chicago, joins the podcast to offer his perspective.

• Historical Context: Saller argues that universities have never been completely independent, citing the influence of federal funding since World War II and the McCarthy era.
• Federal Funding Dilemma: Universities face a dilemma: accept federal funding to maintain research programs or contract their ambitions. Saller believes in setting boundaries, such as refusing government intervention in academic appointments or curricula.
• Revolt Against Elitism: Saller attributes the criticism of universities to a broader "revolt against elitism" and expert knowledge.
• Tuition Misconceptions: Saller acknowledges the difficulty in communicating that the actual tuition paid by students is often a small fraction of the stated tuition.

The Social Justice Mission and Academic Freedom

Saller agrees with the hosts that the universities' embrace of a "social justice mission" has contributed to the perception that they are not meritocracies.

• John Levan's Inaugural Address: Saller was pleased that John Levan explicitly stated that the university's mission is not social justice.
• Amy Wax Example: Saller acknowledges the hypocrisy of universities claiming to uphold academic freedom while simultaneously persecuting individuals like Amy Wax for their speech.

Campus Culture and the Law

Saller emphasizes the importance of distinguishing between issues of law and issues of campus culture.

• Stanford's Approach: Stanford hired a First Amendment specialist to provide guidance on difficult cases.
• Challenges: Defining what constitutes harassment and shifting campus culture are ongoing challenges.
• Leonard Law: California's Leonard Law mandates that university campuses adhere to First Amendment freedom of speech.

University Presidents Coming Clean

Saller agrees that university presidents should acknowledge past mistakes and outline concrete steps to address the problem.

• Stanford's Approach: Stanford addressed discontented alumni by acknowledging past mistakes.
• Chicago Principles: The University of Chicago issued a statement about not taking positions on issues that don't directly affect the university's mission.

Faculty Responsibility and Resilience

The hosts and Saller emphasize the importance of faculty modeling intellectual humility and teaching students resilience.

• Faculty Responsibility: Faculty should model the behavior of admitting mistakes.
• Resilience: Students should be taught resilience rather than the expectation of "safe spaces."

Conclusion

The podcast concludes with a call for universities to acknowledge their past shortcomings, foster a culture of open inquiry, and defend academic freedom for all viewpoints. The guests agree that this is essential for universities to maintain their credibility and resist government interference.