Abstract

ABSTRACT The tension between freedom of speech and academic freedom results from the contradiction between democracy and expertise, resulting in a rhetorical “gray zone” that stymies faculty appeals to due process and constitutional protection. It’s not so much that certain “uncivil” words and utterances cannot be said in this gray zone; it’s that such words, when said, require one’s ejection from the (academic) demos. In an examination of the case of Steven Salaita, I’ll show how the tyranny of the demos, in the guise of “civility,” “community standards,” or “institutional values,” trumps academic freedom, and how the commonplace of democracy—understood as public opinion—can and does compel faculty silence.

Journal
Philosophy & Rhetoric
Published
2022-04-01
DOI
10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
Export

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (0)

No articles in this index cite this work.

References (9)

  1. Agamben, Giorgio. 2013. “Elements for a Theory of Destituent Power.” Trans. StephanieWakefield. http://living…
  2. AAUP Policy Documents and Reports
  3. “Statement on Extramural Utterances.” AAUP Policy Documents and Reports
  4. Academic Freedom after September 11
  5. Democracy, Expertise, and Academic Freedom: A First Amendment Jurisprudence for the Moder…
Show all 9 →
  1. The Future of Academic Freedom
  2. Paper presented at the University of South Carolina Rhetorical Theory Conference
  3. University Reform: The Founding of the American Association of University Professors
  4. Wise, Phyllis. 2014. “The Principles on Which We Stand.”https://will.illinois.edu/nfs/08-22-2014_Wise_Email_O…