On Academic Freedom by William H. Halverson and James R. Carter, the meaning of academic freedom is thoroughly explained. Halverson and Carter begin by describing the purpose of universities as a place to discover the truth. They say humans tend to make the mistake that what they have learned is the truth. They carry on further explaining that everything we learn may not be the truth; for that reason we must get rid of ignorance and error to find the real truth. The first step to finding the truth is to try to disprove the truth we know. If we can show the truth we know is not true, then it may not be the very truth after all. Halverson and Carter say that academic freedom is the opportunity to hold opinions based on the evidence they have and to talk about the opinions without being afraid of what others may say or think. They say there are two conditions to academic freedom: the first is that academic freedom can only exist in a community of open and intelligent individuals who recognize that in principle, every legitimate question deserves an answer, and that the legitimacy of question and answer cannot merely be assumed,
but must be shown capable of withstanding criticism. The second is that academic freedom requires that this community make truth its common purpose and free and open discussion the means to it. They add, saying that students should be allowed to have their own opinions/views but they must be open to criticism and direction from instructors and peers. Halverson and Carter describe the enemies of academic freedom: fear, sheer laziness, undue respect for tradition, and external enemies. They end their essay by saying that academic freedom enables views that are supported with evidence, in other words, the truth to triumph.
I really enjoyed reading On Academic Freedom by William H. Halverson and James R. Carter. It was very compelling to read about academic freedom. The beginning about the purpose of universities drew my attention. I had always thought that universities were for higher education; I did not think it was a place to discover the truth. After reading this essay, I have a better understanding of what universities are for and how academic freedom affiliates with it. My answers to the discussion questions are: Question one: The paradox in the statement, “the surest way to establish the truth of an assertion is to try to disprove it.” is “the surest way”. By saying that it is “the surest way”, how can anyone be sure that it is the surest way? The words used makes it contradictory to common sense, but it may be true. Question two: The two necessary conditions that without academic freedom cannot exist are: one, that academic freedom can only exist in a community of open and intelligent individuals who recognize that in principle, every legitimate question deserves an answer, and that the legitimacy of question and answer cannot merely be assumed but must be shown capable of withstanding criticism and two, academic freedom requires
that this community make truth its common purpose and free and open discussion the means to it. Question three: People are also persuaded by their emotions. Evidence may prove to be persuasive, but sometimes emotions are even more persuasive. Question four: According to Halverson and Carter, the enemies of academic freedom are fear, sheer laziness, undue respect for tradition, and external enemies. Question five: According to Halverson and Carter, we should regard the opinions we have received from people we respect as directions to help guide us in the right direction.
In Are We Going to Get Smarter? by Roger C. Schank, Schank discusses the probability of increased intelligence in future generations. He explains that it is up to our own opinion of what intelligence is. Schank describes a past experience he had when he joined the Board of Encyclopedia Britannica. He explains that when he was there, he suggested to the Board that they make an Encyclopedia ten times the size of the one they have now for the same price. The other board members did not think it was necessary for them to make such a thing; they believed that Encyclopedia had enough information. He tried to explain to them that they would be out of business in ten years because something like the World Wide Web was going to be established. He was right. Schank also includes information about the late Mortimer Adler, the chairman of the board of the Encyclopedia Britannica; who believed the most important thoughts had already been written down. He continues, giving different scenarios regarding knowledge and technology. Schank says that intelligence may be the ability to know what questions to ask, rather than how to answer questions. He states education had always been about doing rather than about knowing. Schank concludes his writing with an image of the future and the emphasis of how intelligence will be like then.
Are We Going to Get Smarter by Roger C. Schank was very interesting. I liked how he explained that it was up to us to define intelligence. It was especially intriguing reading about his experience as a member of the Board of Encyclopedia Britannica. Schank related technology to the amount of intelligence that generation would have; I agree with him because as technology gets more advanced, the level education increases.