More on Campus Liberalism

I received a very thoughtful response to my questions regarding the overwhelming liberalism of university professors from Professor Zywicki:

Thanks for your note. I think the first point is actually a key one--I have been surprised by how many people have simply denied that any imbalance on campus exists. I was stunned by the response to the post I did on Dan Klein's study, where many people just just denied that there was an imbalance at all. So, you are right, the important question is whether the imbalance is a problem--but first there has to be an agreement on whether there is an imbalance.

So then the question is whether there is a problem. The point, of course, is to educate students to think for themselves and to develop critical thinking skills about the world, to become good citizens, leaders, and self-reliant individuals, and I would add, to understand the intellectual heritage of the western world. I think that if we see one of our goals to educate good citizens who can participate in the governance of a free and democratic society, it is imperative that students be exposed to all viewpoints about the world and to learn to evaluate the truth and resonance of competing world views.

So there are two possible problems. One is simply that students never get exposed to a variety of viewpoints and thus are never fully educated in a manner so as to develop intellectually as individuals and as citizens. Second, if they are not given the tools and encouragement to engage in a dialogue among competing ideas, they can just tune out--which may be what they are doing now. Regardless, in either situation, they are not coming out of school with a truly "liberal" education.

It is possible that even a lopsided faculty can cultivate these skills, but we know in practice that many professors do not. They tend to teach to what they know and like and think is important. I read almost everything Marx ever wrote when I was in college, yet never read The Federalist, Hayek, or many other defenders of a free society. I had to go find that stuff on my own. Most students will not be as persistent about this as I was.

So it has nothing to do with which side is up or down, because it has nothing to do with what students think. It has to do with developing the skills and critical thinking to be educated as individuals, citizens, and understanding the foundations of a free society. If kids are just reflexively rejecting what they hear in class, but are adopting other views equally reflexively, that doesn't help anyone in the long run.

Apparently, he received a lot of responses to his initial Volokh Conspiracy posting, many of them asking the same question I did; What difference does it make if university professors are mostly liberal? His response is here.

He's obviously given this a lot of thought, but to date I haven't seen any evidence to speak of regarding the effects of professorial liberalism on students. Professor Zywicki seems to be expounding a theory of the function of universities in society that sounds very good, but may or may not have any historical basis.

So I wrote him another letter:

Hm - maybe so. I'm no student of university history, but do you suppose it was ever the case that university professors presented a balanced view? On your own showing it was not the case when you were in school; do we have any evidence that it ever was the case? Or might students in previous years received equally biased instruction with an opposite emphasis?

Furthermore, while I'm reflexively inclined to agree that most unversity students probably don't spend a lot of time seeking out competing viewpoints to those they receive in class, do we have any evidence as to the truth of that opinion? For instance, it seems as though many students in the 60's actively sought competing viewpoints, and as a result engaged in serious (sometimes counterproductive) protest regarding what they were taught in class. If we assume that students today would not do likewise, I wonder if that assumption is the result of advancing age and the usual denigration of "kids today" by their elders. (Joke.)

So in short, the concern is that students will not receive a truly "liberal" education if they are not taught critical thinking skills in class. That may be so, but other anecdotal evidence seems to suggest that the very atmosphere of a university might go a long way to encouraging critical thinking, whatever happens in class. It would make an interesting study.

Of course, that leaves out the entire question of how we produce good citizens, leaders and self-reliant individuals among those who don't go to college. That group has been producing people perfectly capable of thinking for themselves for years, without the help of university professors at all, liberal or otherwise. Which is another way of saying that, without actual evidence, this whole discussion could be a non-issue.

Anyone care to share their own experiences in finding diverse opinions to learn from, in or out of college?

Benshlomo says, Arguing without evidence doesn't get us very far, but it's a lot more fun than proving one's points.