The reasons for this are manifold-dwindling enrollments and revenues, students lacking basic skills needed to thrive in university settings, administrative bloat, and the campus culture wars. The Social Sciences and Humanities are in crisis across North America. The reaction to Peterson’s arrival will tell us much about whether Cambridge is on the side of the Enlightenment or the mob.Critical Political Theory and Radical Practice I want diversity of thought, not enforced conformity.” The authorities were forced to abandon the plan and vice-chancellor Stephen Toope, who recently announced that he will soon be leaving Cambridge, disowned it, saying at the time: “I … want to bolster the university’s reputation for inquiry and vigorous debate. This was evident in May, when Cambridge attempted to introduce a new system for anonymously reporting “micro-aggressions” which would have included “stereotyping” religion. Clearly some elements within the university want to control our speech. The rebels won easily and Peterson’s visit will test this new policy. A few academics, including myself, staged a rebellion, eventually forcing a vote of all dons to decide between this policy and a more liberal amendment saying that the authorities cannot block an invited speaker unless permitting them would be illegal. In March 2020, the university proposed a “free speech” policy which would allow the authorities to prohibit speakers who might threaten student “welfare.” “Welfare” being so vague, the censors could easily have used this policy to block speakers such as Peterson. Peterson’s belated visit is now a litmus test of whether recent changes at the alma mater of Hugh Latimer and John Milton are enough to protect this principle. This distinction has been understood since the Enlightenment by everyone who is not a fascist. The point is that there is a difference between agreeing with someone’s views and defending his right to express them. The point is not whether or not we agree (and I suspect I disagree with much of what Peterson says, particularly about the importance of religion). These propositions are all interesting and, true or not, deserve serious and often mind-expanding discussion. I know, or know of, academics who have argued that infanticide is not wrong, that matter does not exist, or that being born is a serious harm. Cicero’s complaint, that no view is so crazy that some philosopher has not defended it, is as true now as when he made it. Peterson’s views don’t seem unusual or extreme. We should be grateful to Dr James Orr from the Divinity Faculty for his courage and vision in extending it. #International jordan peterson freeThat he has now been re-invited goes some way to removing that stain on our institution and restoring our reputation as a free and open-minded academy. That argument is so bad that it must have been a pretext the truth, I fear, is that Cambridge simply surrendered to the mob. The university cited this “endorsement by association” as grounds for cancelling the whole visit. Peterson had once been photographed next to someone in what was described as an anti-Islamic T-shirt. Many young people would have learnt something, about him and about Exodus.Įxcept none of that happened. He would have lectured and given seminars his views would have been challenged and maybe refuted. Was that a good idea? Not being an Old Testament scholar I can hardly comment but some experts clearly thought so. In 2019, academics at Cambridge University’s Divinity Faculty invited Jordan Peterson to lecture on the book of Exodus. Jordan Peterson, the author of the best-selling 12 Rules for Life and the recently published Beyond Order: 12 More Rules for Life.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |