Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
freespeech.mit.edu
Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
1–10 of 194 posts
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#2I love the explicitness of “they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe.”
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#3Meanwhile, the University of California seems to have implemented a DEI litmus test on all applications for faculty positions and promotion. Does anyone know if this is actually true? Is this reasonable?
https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wokeademia.html?m...
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#4This is likely in response to the recent Dorian Abbot cancellation:
https://amp.theatlantic.com/amp/article/620352/
(Sorry about the AMP link, I couldn't figure out how to get a normal link.)
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#5I love the explicitness of “they may not obstruct or otherwise interfere with the freedom of others to express views they reject or even loathe.”
No post body was provided.
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#6Meanwhile, the University of California seems to have implemented a DEI litmus test on all applications for faculty positions and promotion. Does anyone know if this is actually true? Is this reasonable? https://johnhcochrane.blogspot.com/2020/01/wokeademia.html?m...
Just as a side note. The link to this post was flagged after being submitted to HN yesterday within a very short time frame.
You might want to consider your karma points and preemptively remove it and pay your dues to the community by apologizing for not adhering to group speak.
I very much stand on the left side of the political spectrum, while the linked blogpost clearly comes from the liberal to right spectrum. But I still think that the old Rosa Luxemburg quote should apply:
> Freedom is always the freedom of the dissenter (Freiheit ist immer die Freiheit der Andersdenkenden)
I valued the posting yesterday as it provided differing views that made me think, evaluate and understand my own position better afterwards.
Edit:
Please excuse my sarcasm in the first paragraphs, but I was troubled yesterday that the link was flagged to death and that not a civil discussion was able to arise. I was only used to this way of dealing with dissenting opinions on other forums until then.
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#7Most responses to this will be positive, and they should be. Typically, the real evaluation is the market (will more students and professors be drawn to MIT?). However, there is already a tremendous demand for admission (from students) and competitive hiring processes (for professors).
So...how many other comparable institutions will follow suit? Will universities in California adopt, oppose, or ignore?
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#8Taking this with a grain of salt after what they have done to rms.
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#9Based. Abelson and Sussman, of SICP fame, are among the signatories. So is Ronald Rivest, the R in RSA (and CLRS). Chomsky too.
Re: Improving MIT’s written commitment to freedom of expression
#10[deleted]