CONTRARY to the perpetual grumbling of those who consider themselves too practical to spend their time thinking deeply or abstractly, philosophy courses are consistently among the best that any college or university has to offer. The experience of closely analyzing controversial arguments is not only inherently enjoyable, but it also helps to develop critical thinking and problem-solving skills that are invaluable outside of the classroom. Through debate and reasoned argument, students learn to defend positions in a diverse spectrum of fields including metaphysics, politics, ethics and religion. Vital to this learning process is the maintenance of an atmosphere in which all parties involved can express their beliefs with vigor and candor. In an instructive case at Lakeland Community College in Ohio, however, a Catholic philosophy professor has been silenced for revealing his religious beliefs to the students in his moral philosophy class. Although this instance raises interesting questions about the proper role of professors' personal beliefs in the classroom, it is clear that instructors should be left free to express their own controversial opinions as long as they remain fair and respectful to their students.
Dr. James Tuttle, who has taught philosophy at Lakeland for years, was recently removed by the college's administration after refusing to conceal his religious views from his pupils. This sad chain of events was set in motion in March 2003, when a student wrote a letter of complaint to the dean of arts and humanities at Lakeland. In the letter, the student lamented that Dr. Tuttle expressed his traditional Catholic beliefs too frequently, and then went on to suggest that he wasforced to undergo "counseling for tolerance." After hearing of this complaint, Dr. Tuttle added a disclaimer to his course syllabi, again stating his religious beliefs and offering to speak with students outside of class if they wanted to discuss his teaching methods.
But this was not good enough for Lakeland administrators, who said they were "bothered" by the disclaimer. Next, administrators docked Dr. Tuttle's pay, reduced his course load to one class per semester and informed him that perhaps he "would be happier in a sectarian classroom." When he protested and demanded to be restored back to his full course schedule, administrators denied him and then went on to remove his rightful seniority status, giving him last pick in the selection of classes to teach. At this point, Dr. Tuttle refused to accept such a slap in the face from his administration, and decided not to return to his job ("Catholic professor punished for views," WorldNetDaily.com, Feb. 5).
Although Lakeland is a public college, the issue of separation of church and state does not enter into this equation. Moral philosophy can scarcely be discussed, much less taught in depth, without reference to the continuing influence of religious beliefs in this area of study. As such, one can't make the claim that professors should refrain from discussing the viability of religious arguments in philosophy classes.
There might be a valid complaint against Dr. Tuttle, however, if he were using his professorship to indoctrinate his students with his own religious beliefs rather than giving them a fair representation of the issues at hand. But merely stating one's own religious beliefs in a philosophy class is by no means equivalent to teaching these views as truth. As long as alternative viewpoints are introduced and allowed on an equal footing, and grades are not biased against students who dissent from the professor's beliefs, classroom indoctrination can be avoided, especially in an elective class like Dr. Tuttle's. Indeed, there have been no complaints from students regarding unfairness in grading or biased presentation of material in Dr. Tuttle's classes. The initial student letter complained only about the lack of "tolerance" inherent in Dr. Tuttle's statements of his religious beliefs. But in fact, all evidence suggests that these statements alone showed no intolerance, and were perfectly consistent with the legitimate classroom aim of teaching rather than converting students.
I am not a Catholic. I am not even a Christian. But I can appreciate that tolerance for my non-religious moral beliefs does not require the silencing of professors who disagree with me about the subject matter of a course. Quite to the contrary, tolerance entails allowing the open expression of all viewpoints in the classroom, even those you find mistaken or offensive. The complaining student at Lakeland was right to suggest that intolerance is an ugly thing
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | 3 days agoThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 3 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
