Last month, I declared that it is our job to teach. If law schools expect their students to tolerate (or even protect the rights of) those making low quality and/or offensive arguments – perhaps even made in bad faith – then they should teach their students how to do so. It is not enough simply to demand that they do so. They should explain why this matters and how to put up with such garbage.
Again, demanding proficiency with important skills is not what educators do. Instead, we teach. Or, at least, that’s what I think.
But perhaps I am wrong. Perhaps I misunderstand law schools. Perhaps I misunderstand universities.
And so, I am asking myself, what it is the purpose of a university? What should the priority of a university be?
To teach and educate students?
To protect free speech?
To create knowledge?
It matters how an institution might prioritize these different ideas because occasionally they may come in conflict.
Or, perhaps I am painting with too broad a brush? Perhaps we can ask:
What is the purpose and/or priorities of undergraduate institutions, among educating students, protecting free speech and creating knowledge?
What is the purpose and/or priorities of professional schools (e.g., medical, law, education schools), among educating students, protecting free speech and creating knowledge?
What is the purpose and/or priorities of graduate schools of arts & science (i.e., the folks who do PhD’s in traditional disciplines like history, philosophy, biology, psychology), among educating students, protecting free speech and creating knowledge?
Perhaps, being a K-12 educator, I mistake the purpose of these…what do we call them? “Institutions of higher learning?” Isn’t that the traditional name?
I am trying to approach this issue with intellectual integrity and intellectual humility. I highly value free speech — that’s a big reason why I have been a member of the ACLU for decades. I am trying to question my conclusions and re-examine my reasoning.
But I am having trouble seeing how free speech is more important than educating students. I totally see how these institutions should educate students about free speech. I totally see how free speech generally supports the various missions and priorities of such institutions. But these institutions should primarily focus on the dissemination of information, primarily through educating students.
Am I missing something?