The right to opinion does not necessarily imply that one’s opinion is right. When a majority believes it does, however confusedly, it might be indicative of a democracy in decline.
The right to opinion or free speech, even on contentious viewpoints, is indeed indispensable for education, which is an integral part of the democratic process. The recent decision by Texas A&M University administrators to prohibit one of their philosophy professors from teaching excerpts from Plato’s Symposium—passages dealing with gender, sexuality and masculinity—has sparked arguments defending academic freedom and the First Amendment. Understandably and rightly so.
The University’s decision to censor Plato is backed by their newly adopted guidelines, which aim to scrutinize courses that “advocate race or gender ideology.” The censoring party apparently operates from a place of intellectual neutrality and seeks to regulate attempts it perceives as indoctrinating students to adopt specific moral worldviews. Freedom, it appears, is curtailed in the name of freedom.
This political impasse hints at a deeper philosophical concern: that a society committed to freedom for its own sake may, under conditions of fear, misunderstanding and suspicion, undermine the very conditions that make freedom possible. It is this concern that Socrates articulates in Plato’s The Republic (no doubt, Plato would have appreciated the different levels of irony on offer here). For Plato, when freedom is treated as an end in itself, the populace may lose its capacity for rational public discourse; immoderation, fanaticism and disorder may follow, leaving the door open for tyranny to exploit these conditions.
One philosophical response to help us find our way out of this impasse is to clarify that philosophy does not “advocate” for “ideologies;” it does not preach what to think but teaches students how to think or think critically. However, it is crucial to add that learning how to think is not an ethically or politically neutral exercise. Philosophical education molds the character of the student, a process we may call “ethical.” But this is not to be confused with ideological brainwashing or to be reduced to moral indoctrination.
In philosophical thinking, the student learns to critically examine their own values, thoughts and actions, shaped as they are considerably by the world they inhabit. But reflection does not occur in isolation. Philosophy relies on dialogue: it is interactive, contextual and collaborative, involving a mutual search for clarification, creativity and wisdom (as Socrates so brilliantly demonstrated). Historical, scientific, sociological and political study, the grappling with intellectual sources from diverse cultural traditions, and engaging with viewpoints that complicate our unchecked assumptions about race, gender and sexuality are indispensable aspects of the student’s journey. These exercises do not just help students gain nuanced and contextualized understandings of the world—which deters one from making hasty generalizations or judgments about it—but they also prepare them to encounter their own everyday reality with a spirit of wonder and renewed vigor.
Philosophy nurtures the ability to suspend judgment while entertaining conflicting viewpoints. It cultivates the taste for clarity by analyzing complex ideas and synthesizing seemingly disconnected thoughts or experiences. And it fosters self-examination and self-understanding. These intellectual virtues are sustained by ethical virtues such as humility and empathy: humility in the face of the unknown and empathy for the other, for diverse perspectives and experiences, and for the world around us. Inclusivity and diversity are, therefore, not just buzz words; they are essential ingredients that enrich one’s open-ended inquiry into the truth about the self and world.
I do not mean to suggest that there is a final truth, or that this final truth could be attained. Truths could be multiple, ever evolving, historically and materially. What matters is that the student strives for it (or them)—that is, the journey rather than the destination—and it is this open-ended movement that ennobles the student by avoiding the temptation to settle on a fixed ideology. The liberty or freedom to travel the path of truth is, of course, essential. But this freedom is for the sake of our common good and a shared perception of reality, both of which are crucial for the health of democracy. Democracy must be cultivated with care, and universities should be where that cultivation begins, not where it quietly ends.
Vinod Acharya is a teaching professor in Seattle University’s philosophy department, and the associate director of the university honors program.
