Tuesday, February 21, 2006

Thought Police 1; Free Speech 0

Larry Summers, the president of Harvard, resigned today. I shouldn't really care too much about this since I have nothing to do with Dr. Summers, Harvard or higher education for that matter, but the circumstances that led to his resignation are what compel me to post on the subject.
In January of 2005 he gave a speech at a conference on diversfication of the science and engineering workforce. He discussed possible reasons for the current underrepresentation of women at the top in many fields, especially in science and engineering. He said that although his remarks were provocative, it was vitally important to study the underlying reasons. These may include social issues, such as willingness to commit fully to a highly demanding career, and biological differences between the genders.

Here's the part of the speech that was so controversial:
"So my best guess, to provoke you, of what's behind all of this is that the largest phenomenon, by far, is the general clash between people's legitimate family desires and employers' current desire for high power and high intensity, that in the special case of science and engineering, there are issues of intrinsic aptitude, and particularly of the variability of aptitude, and that those considerations are reinforced by what are in fact lesser factors involving socialization and continuing discrimination. I would like nothing better than to be proved wrong."

This was too much for poor, hyperventilating Nancy Hopkins to bear:
Nancy Hopkins, a biologist at Massachusetts Institute of Technology, walked out on Summers' talk, saying later that if she hadn't left, ''I would've either blacked out or thrown up." Five other participants reached by the Globe, including Denice D. Denton, chancellor designate of the University of California, Santa Cruz, also said they were deeply offended, while four other attendees said they were not.

Soon after there were demonstrations on campus demanding that he resign because of his "insensitive" and "sexist" remarks. After a month of the situation smoldering the School of Arts and Sciences gave Dr. Summers a vote of no confidence, an unprecedented step in the history of Harvard. Since then it is apparent they have been unrelenting in their pressure for him to step down. Today he finally capitulated and he had this to say:
"I have reluctantly concluded that the rifts between me and segments of the Arts and Sciences faculty make it infeasible for me to advance the agenda of renewal that I see as crucial to Harvard's future. I believe, therefore, that it is best for the University to have new leadership." (Read Summers's letter.)

Commentary

What I find so disturbing about this entire episode is that the president of what is arguably the most prestigious university in the United States should be forced to resign because he dared to suggest that there may be innate differences between men and women. In other words, he dared to stray from the liberal/PC dogma that the Arts and Sciences department preached and he paid for it with his job. He wanted to generate discussion and instead he got fully censured. I was under the impression that college--especially an Ivy League college--was a place where young malleable minds go to pick and choose from a garden of different, sometimes conflicting ideas and later assemble those carefully chosen ingredients together into what could be called their Philosophy of Life. In short--the university presents, the student decides. If a university president is forced to resign by the PC Thought Police, what does that say about the state of higher education in America in general?
I wish Harvard all the best in finding a new president. Hopefully they will find somebody who kow-tows to the Arts and Sciences department, realizes a university president should be seen and not heard, and above all doesn't court controversy by suggesting debate when trying to find answers to the problems that plague us today.

(I urge you to read the whole speech that got him in trouble in the first place and determine for yourself if his words are sexist.)







No comments: