Top College News Subscribe to the Newsletter

Professor's email warning students of 'bigotry' goes viral

News Editor

Published: Sunday, August 19, 2012

Updated: Monday, August 20, 2012 06:08

Last class meeting and for 15 minutes today, we addressed “religious bigotry.” Several points are worth contemplating:

Religion and culture go “hand in hand.” For some cultures, they are so intertwined that it is difficult to know with certainty if a specific belief or custom is “cultural” or “religious” in origin. The student in class tonight who proclaimed that my class was supposed to be about different cultures (and not religion) lacks an understanding about what constitutes “culture.” (of course, I think her real agenda was to stop my comments about religion).

Students in my class who openly proclaimed that Christianity is the most valid religion, as some of you did last class, portrayed precisely what religious bigotry is. Bigots—racial bigot or religious bigots—never question their prejudices and bigotry. They are convinced their beliefs are correct. For the Christians in my class who argued the validity of Christianity last week, I suppose I should thank you for demonstrating to the rest of the class what religious arrogance and bigotry looks like. It seems to have not even occurred to you (I'm directing this comment to those students who manifested such bigotry), as I tried to point out in class tonight, how such bigotry is perceived and experienced by the Muslims, the Hindus, the Buddhists, the non-believers, and so on, in class, to have to sit and endure the tyranny of the masses (the dominant group, that is, which in this case, are Christians).

The male student who stood up in class and directed the rest of the class to “not participate” by not responding to my challenge, represented the worst of education. For starters, the idea that a person—student or instructor—would instruct other students on how to behave, is pretty arrogant and grossly disrespects the rights of other students who can and want to think for themselves and decide for themselves whether they want to engage in the exchange of ideas or not. Moreover, this “let's just put our fingers in our ears so we will not hear what we disagree with” is appallingly childish and exemplifies “anti-intellectualism.” The purpose of a university is to engage in dialogue, debate, and exchange ideas in order to try and come to some meaningful conclusion about an issue at hand. Not to shut ourselves off from ideas we find threatening.

Universities hold a special place in society where scholarly-minded folks can come together and discuss controversial, polemic, and often uncomfortable topics. Universities, including UCF, have special policies in place to protect our (both professors’ and students’) freedom to express ourselves. Neither students nor professors have a right to censor speech that makes us uncomfortable. We're adults. We're at a university. There is no topic that is “off-limits” for us to address in class, if even only remotely related to the course topic. I hope you will digest this message, and just as important, will take it to heart as it may apply to you.

Charles Negy

Recommended: Articles that may interest you

4 comments

Anonymous
Sun Sep 16 2012 12:43
I actually think some disciplinary action upon the professor by the university is warranted.
Anonymous
Sun Sep 16 2012 12:39
I question the maturity and integrity of a professor who resorts to sending out such an e-mail to students... thus circumventing the classroom in which certain students expressed the view that they did not want to be a part of such a discussion with this professor.
Gary
Sun Sep 9 2012 16:16
A professor sends a letter exhorting a change in behavior and thinking, and the contents of the letter deride the thought that anyone -- student or instructor -- should instruct other students on how to behave. Pot, meet kettle.

Also the bit about not censoring speech in a letter intended to suppress "arrogance" and "ignorance".

The real problem is that since religion influences culture and vice-versa, someone not trained in religious studies may indeed cross a line into lecturing outside of his field. Right or wrong, it seems that certain students perceived this to be the case.

I can understand the need for a classroom to have order and not devolve into an unguided discussion, certainly, but the students were responding to something here, and I think it is ignorance/arrogance to ignore that the professor in question perhaps could have at least given a better caveat about the fine line he would be walking and where his expertise does and does not obtain.

Another problem is assuming that these Christians were cradle Christians or cultural Christians only; did he know for a fact that none of his students were converts who had weighed evidence critically? Or well-raised cradle Christians who did the same? No; he simply assumed.

Proud Alumnus
Wed Aug 22 2012 10:49
Kudos to Professor Negy for defending the virtues of critical thinking in a culture increasingly valuing ignorance and unquestioning obediance, and thank you for continuing to teach students HOW to think, not WHAT to think, as some religious bigots would have it.




log out