Some interesting (and amusing) observations from legal philosopher Les Green (Oxford).
I have one small disgreement, I think, with Green. He writes:
Consider whether, when Hastings Rashdall retired from New College, Oxford, they should have gone looking for a replacement to defend his articulate, philosophical form of racism, or whether they should have kept Rashdall on an occasional basis, to ensure that students of the ‘lower races’ would have some controversial views to take on. (It was 1910—philosophical racism was still a thing.) If such a case could be made, it would have appeal to something like intellectual diversity or pluralism. (‘We need someone to stand up for racism around here!’) But it couldn’t be advanced on grounds of academic freedom: that protects those who have an academic role, it doesn’t tell us who should have an academic role in the first place. If there is an objection to not replacing (or re-hiring) racists or sexists or homophobes, it is not an objection from academic freedom.
I agree that the university has no obligation to find a permanent member of staff to defend philosophical racism or anti-gay bigotry, but I do believe it is improper to deny Rashdall or Finnis appointment to post-retirement teaching that they would otherwise be invited to do on the basis of their published work. Academic freedom ought to apply even to those who have no regular post at the university, other than that of temporary or sessional appointment. I'm not sure Professor Green disagrees with that point.
Recent Comments