学术自由修辞的“灰色地带”

IF 0.3 4区哲学 N/A LITERATURE

PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC Pub Date : 2022-04-01 DOI:10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090

M. Bernard-Donals

{"title":"学术自由修辞的“灰色地带”","authors":"M. Bernard-Donals","doi":"10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"abstract:The tension between freedom of speech and academic freedom results from the contradiction between democracy and expertise, resulting in a rhetorical \"gray zone\" that stymies faculty appeals to due process and constitutional protection. It's not so much that certain \"uncivil\" words and utterances cannot be said in this gray zone; it's that such words, when said, require one's ejection from the (academic) demos. In an examination of the case of Steven Salaita, I'll show how the tyranny of the demos, in the guise of \"civility,\" \"community standards,\" or \"institutional values,\" trumps academic freedom, and how the commonplace of democracy—understood as public opinion—can and does compel faculty silence.","PeriodicalId":46176,"journal":{"name":"PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.3000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Academic Freedom's Rhetorical \\\"Gray Zone\\\"\",\"authors\":\"M. Bernard-Donals\",\"doi\":\"10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"abstract:The tension between freedom of speech and academic freedom results from the contradiction between democracy and expertise, resulting in a rhetorical \\\"gray zone\\\" that stymies faculty appeals to due process and constitutional protection. It's not so much that certain \\\"uncivil\\\" words and utterances cannot be said in this gray zone; it's that such words, when said, require one's ejection from the (academic) demos. In an examination of the case of Steven Salaita, I'll show how the tyranny of the demos, in the guise of \\\"civility,\\\" \\\"community standards,\\\" or \\\"institutional values,\\\" trumps academic freedom, and how the commonplace of democracy—understood as public opinion—can and does compel faculty silence.\",\"PeriodicalId\":46176,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"N/A\",\"JCRName\":\"LITERATURE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"N/A","JCRName":"LITERATURE","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

摘要

摘要：言论自由与学术自由之间的紧张关系源于民主与专业之间的矛盾，导致了一个修辞上的“灰色地带”，阻碍了教师对正当程序和宪法保护的诉求。与其说某些“不文明”的词语和言论不能在这个灰色地带说出；正是这样的话，一旦说出，就需要从（学术）演示中退出。在对史蒂文·萨莱塔案件的研究中，我将展示民众的暴政是如何以“文明”、“社区标准”或“制度价值观”为幌子，凌驾于学术自由之上的，以及被理解为公众舆论的普通民主是如何能够也确实迫使教师保持沉默的。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

查看原文本刊更多论文

Academic Freedom's Rhetorical "Gray Zone"

abstract:The tension between freedom of speech and academic freedom results from the contradiction between democracy and expertise, resulting in a rhetorical "gray zone" that stymies faculty appeals to due process and constitutional protection. It's not so much that certain "uncivil" words and utterances cannot be said in this gray zone; it's that such words, when said, require one's ejection from the (academic) demos. In an examination of the case of Steven Salaita, I'll show how the tyranny of the demos, in the guise of "civility," "community standards," or "institutional values," trumps academic freedom, and how the commonplace of democracy—understood as public opinion—can and does compel faculty silence.

求助全文

通过发布文献求助，成功后即可免费获取论文全文。去求助

来源期刊

PHILOSOPHY AND RHETORIC Multiple-

CiteScore

0.70

自引率

25.00%

发文量

期刊介绍： Philosophy and Rhetoric is dedicated to publication of high-quality articles involving the relationship between philosophy and rhetoric. It has a longstanding commitment to interdisciplinary scholarship and welcomes all theoretical and methodological perspectives that advance the journal"s mission. Philosophy and Rhetoric invites articles on such topics as the relationship between logic and rhetoric, the philosophical aspects of argumentation, philosophical views on the nature of rhetoric held by historical figures and during historical periods, psychological and sociological studies of rhetoric with a strong philosophical emphasis, and philosophical analyses of the relationship to rhetoric of other areas of human culture and thought, political theory and law.