Academic Freedom and Classroom Conduct (NO COVID DISCUSSION)

Before descending into name-calling, Capra was the only person here who briefly addressed the issue of teaching CRT-related ideas as an exercise of academic freedom.

Is anyone else here willing to do so?

Here's an excellent article on the subject:

www.propublica.org/article/desantis-critical-race-theory-florida-college-professors

Whatever one thinks of critical race theory, the state’s [Florida's] interference limits the freedom of professors who are experts in their fields to decide what to teach their students.

Cox worried, not without reason, that the law effectively banned him from discussing his ideas in class, and that teaching the courses could cost him his livelihood.

Cox, who is the only Black professor in the sociology department, will not be considered for tenure until this fall.

His salary was his family’s only income while his wife stayed home with their baby.

While Capra's stance is inconsistent with supporting academic freedom, what say those others appalled by Hamline's reaction to Prater's trolling of her Muslim students?

For the sake of consistency, I assume that you all support Professor's Cox's right to teach as he sees fit?

Wait - this makes zero sense. "The body of history... constitutes history"?

It makes sense when properly quoted; you removed the "s from my "history."

That's a circular statement.

See above.

You stated, and emphasized, the equivalency that "History IS opinion".

By definition, yes.

If, as you claim {History = Opinion}, then using your own equivalency, "The body of history opinion regarding the Holocaust, including denial thereof, constitutes history"

See above; you're subtly misquoting me.

History is NOT opinion.

By definition, it is.

That reality may creep in at times is necessary to the goals of the given historical propagandist/s.

Vintage actually makes this point above - a comment you liked! - but you seem nonetheless not to grasp it.

People may have their own opinions ABOUT history, but history itself is not opinion, it is facts and objective truths.

History may include facts and objective truth/s as noted above, but is most certainly NOT wholly constituted of such elements.

The Civil War happened (objective truth).

Correct.

Some want to foist their biased "opinions" about the Civil War into the realm of historical fact, but they are wrong to try.

Most foist, and I'd call these foisters "historians."

And also simply historians.

Propaganda we like, we call history.

Propaganda we do not like?

We call it propaganda.

The Holocaust happened (objective truth).

Correct.

Some want to foist their biased "opinions" about the Holocaust into the realm of historical fact, but they are wrong to try.

See above.

CRT is another "opinion" or "viewpoint" about the facts of US History.

CRT is interdisciplinary, and intertwines with "history" or if you wish, simply history, as noted above.

Some are trying to foist this biased CRT-opinion into the realm of historical fact, but again, they are wrong to try.

See above.

The term "historical fact" is an oxymoron.
______________________________

Good to have this mindful exchange, JCJ, but Zod is more than ever inclined to conclude that when Muslims are trolled by an academic arsonist, this is applauded by conservatives as academic freedom, but when history which makes conservatives uncomfortable is presented, these conservatives revert to the stance of the offended Muslims they decried.

This is, at best, a severe disconnect.

Stopping at this first reply statement. I have no idea what you removed the "s from my "history." means!

What line do you think I misquoted and please highlight what "s" you're referring to. 

Maybe, but I have a Hanzo. Don't bring a story to a Sword fight.......

...too quiet-