Why I am not HxA
How "Constructive Disagreement" Undermines Open Inquiry and Viewpoint Diversity
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 5663381 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Michael Veber (0000-0003-3573-2060, East Carolina University, corresponding author) |
| Year | 2025 |
| Volume | 54 |
| Issue | 6 |
| Pages | 991-998 |
| Publication date | 2025-10-15 |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | Theory and Society (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0304-2421 • E-ISSN: 1573-7853 |
| Publisher | Springer Science and Business Media LLC (PUBLISHER) |
| DOI | 10.1007/s11186-025-09655-x |
| OpenAlex | W4415192471 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 1 |
Heterodox Academy requires its members to pledge their support for its three ideals: open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement. Given the history of loyalty oaths in academia, it is surprising that a society that bills itself the way Heterodox Academy does would require one. And there is a more serious problem. "Constructive Disagreement", as Heterodox Academy understands and advocates for it, is inconsistent with open inquiry and viewpoint diversity
Constructive · Elitism · Loyalty · Pledge · Feminist Epistemology and Gender Studies · Management and Organizational Studies
| Citations per year | 1 |
|---|---|
| Citation span | 2026 - 2026 (1) |
| Highly cited | No |