Professor has independent thought, gets reprimanded
No. Yes. No.
These are my answers to the three questions leading this Chicago Sun-Times article about a law professor who feels he was denied a raise because of comments he made about the differences between Jewish and black law students.
What I find interesting in is John Gorby's statement that blacks are brought up in religious environments that "emphasize an emotional and spiritual religious experience rather than discussion and debate about the meaning of Scriptural language" in comparison with Judaism, which encourages questioning of the Bible. That statement is as harmless as Gorby believes. Most black people who are religious are either (Protestant) Christians or Muslims, and neither of those religions is well known for independent thought about its dogma. If there is a flaw with his statement, it is that religion probably doesn't have much of anything to do with how well or poorly a black student might do in law school; reasoning can be done in other realms than religion, but the fact it's rarely done in that aspect may have an effect. In short, Gorby's assertion is a reasonable, if potentially flawed conclusion. (The fact that Jewish children are generally brought up with critical analysis skills because of religion, however, would be an advantage. Fostering critical thinking early does make it more likely the skill will be used more often and in matters outside of religion.)
What Gorby said lead a black student to confront him in an elevator to ask him if it was true that black students don't do well in his class (which is ironic in the face of what can be gleaned from Gorby's statement) and a former dean of his law school to claim his remarks were "bad judgment". In her words: "[Academic freedom] does not excuse 'pondering' about racial or religious stereotypes to students who may legitimately may fear that their law professor may see them through that prism and treat them accordingly in class."
It should be noted that Gorby didn't state his thought to the black student who confronted him. Rather, Gorby spoke to the Jewish student who told others (who may have told others, and so on), hence Gorby's original intent likely suffered a "Telephone Game"-like fate.
Furthermore, if professors are expected to think before speaking, the students -- and know-it-all deans -- should be expected to think about what the professor is saying (or what the students was told the professor said) before assuming prejudice.
But that wouldn't be politically correct, would it?
These are my answers to the three questions leading this Chicago Sun-Times article about a law professor who feels he was denied a raise because of comments he made about the differences between Jewish and black law students.
What I find interesting in is John Gorby's statement that blacks are brought up in religious environments that "emphasize an emotional and spiritual religious experience rather than discussion and debate about the meaning of Scriptural language" in comparison with Judaism, which encourages questioning of the Bible. That statement is as harmless as Gorby believes. Most black people who are religious are either (Protestant) Christians or Muslims, and neither of those religions is well known for independent thought about its dogma. If there is a flaw with his statement, it is that religion probably doesn't have much of anything to do with how well or poorly a black student might do in law school; reasoning can be done in other realms than religion, but the fact it's rarely done in that aspect may have an effect. In short, Gorby's assertion is a reasonable, if potentially flawed conclusion. (The fact that Jewish children are generally brought up with critical analysis skills because of religion, however, would be an advantage. Fostering critical thinking early does make it more likely the skill will be used more often and in matters outside of religion.)
What Gorby said lead a black student to confront him in an elevator to ask him if it was true that black students don't do well in his class (which is ironic in the face of what can be gleaned from Gorby's statement) and a former dean of his law school to claim his remarks were "bad judgment". In her words: "[Academic freedom] does not excuse 'pondering' about racial or religious stereotypes to students who may legitimately may fear that their law professor may see them through that prism and treat them accordingly in class."
It should be noted that Gorby didn't state his thought to the black student who confronted him. Rather, Gorby spoke to the Jewish student who told others (who may have told others, and so on), hence Gorby's original intent likely suffered a "Telephone Game"-like fate.
Furthermore, if professors are expected to think before speaking, the students -- and know-it-all deans -- should be expected to think about what the professor is saying (or what the students was told the professor said) before assuming prejudice.
But that wouldn't be politically correct, would it?