Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakie
The idea that something is offensive, and possibly should be limited because of it, puts us on that slippery slope of political correctness that ends up eliminating any contrary thought. The liberal arts education of the 1960s and 1970s gave rise to populist movements such as the anti Viet Nam demonstrations. Fast forward to the late 1990s where students are ostracized and failed when they have opposing views....not illogical, just opposing. To get back to profanity. Catcher in the Rye was considered a book to be banned. Today it seems very tame. Still worthy, but tame.
|
I agree with you about the need to avoid censorship, and if teachers are flunking students for holding opposing view, that's wrong also. As long as students demonstrate that they've learned the material they were expected to learn; that should be all that's required. Whether they
believe what they've been taught is a personal matter and is none of the instructor's business.
However, I think to draw a straight line from a liberal arts education to Vietnam war protests is a stretch. There are all kinds of reasons people across the political spectrum protested that war. Having a liberal arts background wasn't one of them.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jakie
Who was it who stated that they may not agree with what you say, but defend to the death your right to say it? (Not an American, so I may misquote here.)
John
|
That would be Beatrice Hall, who in her 1907 book,
Friends of Voltaire, used that phrase to sum up Voltaire's outlook on life. She was English.
EDIT:
Opps -- just got up to this post where I see Lady Fitzgerald has already answered that question.