Academic Freedom’s Rhetorical “Gray Zone”
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 21371650 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Bernard–Donals (University of Wisconsin–Madison, corresponding author), Michael Bernard-Donals (University of Wisconsin–Madison) |
| Year | 2022 |
| Volume | 55 |
| Issue | 1 |
| Pages | 90-96 |
| Publication date | 2022-04-01 |
| Open Access | No |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Philosophy and Rhetoric (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0031-8213 • E-ISSN: 1527-2079 |
| Publisher | The Pennsylvania State University Press (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.5325/philrhet.55.1.0090 |
| OpenAlex | W4223998553 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
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
Academic freedom · Aesthetics · Civility · Contradiction · Democracy · Epistemology · Gray (unit) · Higher education · Linguistics · Political science · Politics · Rhetorical question · Silence · Sociology · Academic Freedom and Politics · Law · Philosophy
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |