Why academic freedom is not the same as free speech | Michael Bérubé | TEDxPSU
Вставка
- Опубліковано 7 чер 2024
- Berube’s talk distinguishes academic freedom from freedom of speech, while acknowledging that there are complex situations in which professors speak "extramurally" (that is, outside of class) in ways that are protected by the First Amendment but not always granted the protections of academic freedom.
Michael Bérubé is an Edwin Erle Sparks Professor of Literature at Pennsylvania State University. He is the author of twelve books to date, including Public Access: Literary Theory and American Cultural Politics (Verso, 1994); Life As We Know It: A Father, A Family, and an Exceptional Child (Pantheon, 1996; paper, Vintage, 1998); and What's Liberal About the Liberal Arts? Classroom Politics and "Bias" in Higher Education (W. W. Norton, 2006).
He has also published two edited collections, Higher Education Under Fire: Politics, Economics, and the Crisis of the Humanities (Routledge, 1995; with Cary Nelson) and The Aesthetics of Cultural Studies (Blackwell, 2005). Life as We Know It was a New York Times Notable Book of the Year for 1996 and was chosen as one of the best books of the year (on a list of seven) by Maureen Corrigan of National Public Radio. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
Am I free to say, "that I don't like the manner at which he speaks, although he's making sense and also shows a high level intellectuality ".
Hypotheticaly
As long as nobody gets hurt,
that doesn't want to be
and as long as you ain't stealing or polluting
Then whatever happens beyond that,
and whatever they believe
or whatever they think is not anybodies business but their own ..
All of life is just a suicide mission so who's route do you choose???
theirs way??? or your way ??
Who's remark is easier to bare????
yours or theirs???
who will have more mercy for you.???.
.. you or them???
... that's all gotta say about that this stuff is all just political theater aka manufactured drama
Lol censorship
English is not my 1st language but i understood the entire talk. What are u smoking?
@ryancooper1144 I love when people are confronted by a relatively grounded statement or argument
and they flinch up and reply with a cliché usually something along the lines of
"What are you on " "what did you smoke ?,"
Aka That doesn't not compute
because it breaks the way they were lead to belive things ought to be and crushes their narrow veiw of the world
That
vs. whatever argument they did not have to support their hypothesis with..
You know a person has given up when they resort to trying to insult your intelligence that is petty and niche and is not discreet try not to be so morbidly obtuse...
Pointy heads high intellect low wisdom
Michael and Jennifer's book is really good. I highly recommend it.
Thank you!
I like what he has to say. It makes complete sense. He is using his academic standing for a good purpose. I don't see anything wrong with his point. But I do think that professors tend to be so intelligent that these conspiracy theories tend to make sense to some of them. I believe in a couple of so-called conspiracy theories, such as that there is life somewhere else out there in the universe. Also, I think he talks like that because he was nervous, and he likely has a certain wave at which his lectures go, which I've always found so comforting to hear different professor's lecture cadence. Thank you.
Alien life is a conspiracy theory?
I always like to remember that COINTELPRO was first a conspiracy theory
The X makes him look like hes wearing a dracula costume in the Thumbnail 😝
He's so exasperated 😂. Blessed are the truth tellers.
I thought Dracula was giving a ted talk from the thumbnail 😂
😂
If you ever see him doing that let me know. I would definitely be interested in learning the secrets of immortality, how to get a castle, run your own kingdom, and go down in history with one of the most fearsome reputations in history.
Although I get that there should be certain limits to freedom of speech, I don’t know if I particularly agree with this concept of “competency.” Competency is such a subjective measure that really seems to be better defined (as it’s being used in this case) as the adherence to a homogenization of ideas and beliefs. If you don’t share a common prejudice, does that immediately qualify you as incompetent? Who then also gets to determine what is considered “competent” and not “conspiracy?” It may seem “obvious” to us but, relative to the cultural context, “obvious” may be more of a byproduct of a wide constellation of factors. Analogous to the genetic benefits of diversity, so too are there benefits in diverse thoughts and ideologies. Using phrenology as an example adds to my very point. This was a common prejudice believed at the time because the technology and culture naturally precipitated into that belief. It was only through challenging ideas and the advancement of technology that led us to ultimately reject that idea by large. Framing this conversation with pandering comments and gestures towards those that are considered “flat-earthers” and conspiracy theorists also seems to be antagonistic and not the best environment to facilitate further discussion and reformation of ideas. I’m sort of disappointed by this one. :P
The answer is that you shouldn't impose any limits to free speech.
You can't call something "free speech but..." Just call it controlled speech or restricted speech.
The reason youre unsettled on his concept of competency is that youre realizing that this "free speech," through additional restrictions, oversteps your comfort as it would many other peoples comfort.
When you're free to define more and more restrictions and lie about the term then you really arent being honest about what youre supporting. And it will keep cascading until those that define the word define it for their own purposes which include shutting down the opinion of others.
Free speech, the real definition, is literally free. The real problem people is the divisiveness that media and institutions have forced on people. The solution is more free speech and bridging the gaps of understanding. Everything else (restrictions on free speech itself) is a bandage to the lack of ability for people to communicate with each other.
Good job❤❤
I hope he explains academic freedom.
To be fair about covid, they did suspiciously change the definition of the word "vaccine ". That alone set off my reluctance. I grew up knowing I didn't have to worry about getting some diseases ( polio, smallpox, etc.) because I had a real vaccine, not just a shot.
You are wrong.
The covid vaccine saved millions of lives.
Not every vaccine is the same.
Covid is changing all the time like the flu.
Some years flue vaccine s are 80% effective other years maybe only 60%.
It does depend on how many people get the vaccine too.
This is fascinating and a really interesting perspective. I’ve been thinking about how evolution was accepted, but how even today it’s controversial? Interesting.
The perspective is wrong thats why lol.
Evolution is widely accepted but doesnt answer everything such as the abiogenesis of life along with other things.
basically this guy's entire point can be boiled down to an appeal to consensus-- it's a pretty good way to mitigate the damage disastrously misguided or malicious individuals can do, but it offers no hope against a corrupt consensus (like we have had with covid, climate change etc)
He looks like Dracula in the thumbnail
Dracula is speaking. Be quiet.
Is he nervous?
Not particularly! I've done one of these before, and I've given hundreds of public talks.
High treason
I love Joe Rogan and ivermectin does work
The right to be wrong and proliferate mis or dis information :/
Is he talking about Jordan Peterson?🤔
No.
3rd to comment
I kid. It doesn't show that way, tho
1st comment
2nd to comment
It doesn't show that way but you're right. My bad.
@@meganthearchitectbrown6912 whattt?
So, Mr. Berube wants to avoid arguing logically with people he disagrees with. Even worse, he does not want university students to learn to recognize how facts can be manipulated to tell stories that the student may (or may not) disagree with. Then he dares to call Mr. Stein a troll as if he were not the same.
Don't cry about it.
Who, precisely, do you think he wants to avoid logically arguing with?
@@TheatreofPhil, Mr. Berube is deploying the "Perfect Rhetorical Fortress," a set of delimiters used to establish the identities of people who can be written off rather than engage in meaningful debate.
@@LeeCarlson Like whom? Who do you think has a legitimate evidence-based position but that Michael is putting them out of academic bounds?
He said Taylor's Version😂😂😂😂
AND my Super Bowl prediction was pretty good