Editor’s Note: Provost Gilbert R. Whitaker Jr. has called for campuswide discussions of the shared values held important in an institution that embraces academic freedom, academic inquiry and the right to free speech. Following are excerpts of his presentation to the Senate Assembly in September, as well as comments by members of the University community (see pages 10–11) that we hope will serve to begin the dialogue. This topic also will be the focus of ‘Thoughtful Discussion of Political Correctness and Academic Values’ at this week’s Regents’ meeting, beginning at 1 p.m. Thursday (Oct. 21) in the Assembly Hall, Rackham Building.
At the September meeting of the Senate Assembly, Provost Gilbert R. Whitaker Jr. called for discussions of what should be shared values among all members of the University community. He also announced the suspension by President James J. Duderstadt of the portion of the Interim Policy on Discriminatory Harassment by Faculty and Staff in the University Environment that applies to the academic arena.
“At the outset,” he said, “I want to say that I believe that to date we have focused on the policy rather than on the underlying values. Developing community acceptance of our common values or understanding what the community believes to be our values is essential to effective policy formulation and implementation.
“Two values in particular underlie the discussion about the policy on discriminatory harassment,” he stated. “These are the value of free speech and the value of civility.
“I believe that in this University we need to attempt to build a stronger bulwark of shared values that includes respect for people and makes controversial ideas the subject of debate rather than personal identity. Civility and respect for people,” he continued, “are often lost when ideas or challenges to established ideas involve highly emotional subject matter, and when the debaters turn to personal characteristics rather than the substantive idea under discussion. …Knowlege grows through the presentation of better evidence, not by attacking the proponent of the idea we dislike,” he emphasized.
“Ideas should be freely expressed so that they can be tested in the marketplace of ideas. By testing in the marketplace,” he added, “I mean that they can be freely challenged by others and that the better ideas will survive the test. …To me, as an academic, this constant contest of ideas is the essence of what free speech in the University must mean.”
“Hate speech,’” Whitaker stated, “presents the greatest challenge to a fruitful collegial relationship with students in a classroom setting. …If students are to be treated as respected colleagues, civility and respect for human dignity are fundamental values that must be practiced as well as celebrated.
“Students are our colleagues in the quest for knowledge and improved understanding, and must therefore be regarded as very important partners in this quest. If civility and respect for human dignity become deeply understood as well as a shared value in our academic community, the issue of harassment should never or, at the very least, seldom arise,” the provost added.
“I know that there are those who believe without reservation that the positive good that free speech can accomplish outweighs any possible harm that individuals may suffer through the unwise application of free speech to the identity of individuals or groups. Others have some doubt about a community that doesn’t, at the very least, have some concerns about people exercising free speech rights—but exercising them wrongly. Indeed,” he stated, “I believe that academic freedom itself imposes some restrictions upon free speech. …Nowhere does the concept of academic freedom sanction the direct harassment of individuals.
“My own view on this very important matter is this: if we are to err in the delicate act of balancing free inquiry and respect for human dignity, the value of increased knowledge through free inquiry must be given priority. Just as lack of civility must not silence discussion, false claims of racism, sexism and so forth must not be allowed to silence legitimate discussion,” Whitaker stated.
