The Meaning and Significance of Academic Freedom
| DOI | 10.1177/000271625530000111 |
| Published date | 01 July 1955 |
| Author | Robert M. Hutchins |
| Date | 01 July 1955 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
72
The
Meaning
and
Significance
of
Academic
Freedom
By
ROBERT
M.
HUTCHINS
HE
arguments
for
academic
free-
T dom
are
the
same
as
those
for
free-
dom
of
speech,
and
they
rest
on
the
same
foundation.
Here
are
the
familiar
words
of
John
Stuart
Mill:
If
all
mankind
minus
one
were
of
one
opinion,
and
only
one
person
were
of
the
contrary
opinion,
mankind
would
be
no
more
justified
in
silencing
that
one
person,
than
he,
if
he
had
the
power,
would
be
justified
in
silencing
mankind....
the
pe-
culiar
evil
of
silencing
the
expression
of
an
opinion
is,
that
it
is
robbing
the
hu-
man
race;
posterity
as
well
as
the
existing
generation;
those
who
dissent
from
the
opinion,
still
more
than
those
who
hold
it.
If
the
opinion
is
right,
they
are
deprived
of
the
opportunity
of
exchanging
error
for
truth:
if
wrong,
they
lose,
what
is
almost
as
great
a
benefit,
the
clearer
perception
and
livelier
impression
of
truth,
produced
by
its
collision
with
error.1
Man
is
a
learning
animal.
The
state
is
an
association
the
primary
aim
of
which
is
the
virtue
and
intelligence
of
the
people.
Men
learn
by
discussion,
through
the
clash
of
opinion.
The
best
and
most
progressive
society
is
that
in
which
expression
is
freest.
Mill
said,
&dquo;There
ought
to
exist
the
fullest
liberty
of
professing
and
discussing,
as
a
mat-
ter
of
ethical
conviction,
any
doctrine,
however
immoral
it
may
be
considered.&dquo;
The
civilization
we
seek
is
the
civiliza-
tion of
the
dialogue,
the
civilization
of
the
logos.
In
such
a
society
the
intelligent
man
and
the
good
citizen
are
identical.
The
educational
system
does
not
aim
at
in-
doctrination
in
accepted
values
but
at
the
improvement
of
society
through
the
production
of
the
intelligent
man
and
the
good
citizen.
Education
necessarily
involves the
critical
examination
of
con-
flicting
points
of
view;
it
cannot
flour-
ish
in
the
absence
of free
inquiry
and
discussion.
In
a
democracy
what
the
public
needs
to
know
about
the
teachers
in
the
edu-
cational
system
is
that
they
are
com-
petent.
The
competent
teacher
knows
the
subject
he
is
teaching
and
how
to
communicate
it
to
his
pupils.
Unlike
the
teacher
in
a
totalitarian
state,
he
is
not
supposed
to
purvey
the
prevailing
dogma.
He
is
supposed
to
encourage
his
students
to
use
their
own
intelligence
and
to
reach
their
own
conclusions.
The
definition
of
competence
does
not
shift
with
every
wind
of
prejudice,
re-
ligious, political,
racial,
or
economic.
If
competence
had
been
the
issue
at
Brown
University
during
the
free
silver
con-
troversy,
the
President
would
not
have
been
asked
to
resign
because
of
his
pre-
mature
distaste
for
the
Gold
Standard.
The
modern
note
was
struck
there.
What
was
requested
of
the
President
was
&dquo;not
a
renunciation
of
his
views,
but
a
forbearance
to
promulgate
them.&dquo;
And
the
reason
was
that
these
views
were
&dquo;injurious
to
the
pecuniary
inter-
ests
of
the
University.&dquo;
On
the
other
hand,
the
standard
of
competence
did
protect
a
professor
at
the
University
of
Chicago
who
was
a
leading
critic
of
Samuel
Insull
and
the
other
local
oli-
garchs
of
the
time.
He
was
doubtless
injurious
to
the
pecuniary
interests
of
the
university,
but
he
and
it
lived
through
it,
and
he
is
today
the
senior
Senator
from
Illinois.
1
On
Liberty,
"Great
Books
of
the
Western
World,"
edited
by
Robert
Maynard
Hutchins
(Chicago:
Encyclopaedia
Britannica,
Inc.,
1952),
Vol.
43,
pp.
274-75.
To continue reading
Request your trial