JANUARY 18, 2023 BY JAMES F. MCGRATH
"A lot of people have written already about the recent case in which Hamline University decided not to continue to employ an adjunct art history professor, Erika López Prater, after a student took offense at her showing (with due warning in advance) of a Medieval Muslim work of art depicting the prophet Muhammad. Prater is now suing Hamline. Below is my effort to articulate my stance on the matter.
"Inclusivity and respect on the one hand, and freedom of expression/academic freedom on the other, are positive values. Sometimes the pursuit of one of our important values is in tension with another. Then we have to choose which to prioritize. If more institutions would indicate up front what they put first when these values conflict, there would be less shock and less public outcry when they apply their clearly-stated prioritization, even from those who might disagree with their stance.
"Ultimately, for me there are two key concerns. One is that history includes things that some people find offensive. Whether one is dealing with individuals who want to believe that the historical Jesus thought of himself as fully God as per the later creeds, or individuals who want to believe that their nation never committed any atrocities, history presents inconvenient data. To hide that information is to put one’s teaching in the service of an ideologies that educators should not be required to subscribe to or promote.
"Of course, that’s not strictly analogous with the case of Islam and the depiction of Muhammad, since there is nothing in conservative Christianity that constitutes a prohibition of
hearing or seeing something you disagree with. In some streams of Islam, however, there is a prohibition against depicting the Prophet, and some would say that depiction of any living thing is prohibited. I think there’s more to be gained by making analogies with Judaism. Most Jews won’t pronounce the divine name, but they don’t expect others to share that scruple. If you are serving food that isn’t kosher you alert Jews and they abstain or you come to some arrangement for an alternative.
"The particular Muslim student who objected to the art being shown was equivalent to saying “you shouldn’t have served pork even though you announced the menu in advance and offered an alternative, because my religion prohibits me from consuming pork.”
"The student was demanding that no one see the image because of her scruples, in essence, wasn’t she? In a pluralist society you should not be obligated to make an image of Muhammad if you find that objectionable, but neither should you be able to prohibit others from seeing such images if they choose. There isn’t a perfect balance that will make everyone happy, but there is a tried and true approach in the United States that, however imperfect, seems to work better than alternatives........
---
"What are your thoughts about this? Please feel free to share them!"
--James F. McGrath
Read the rest of this excellent blog article on Professor McGrath's blog: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/religionprof/
My comment: Bizarre! What has happened to freedom of speech in the U.S., especially for teachers and professors?! IF a student takes an Art History course, she ought to expect to see some paintings that don't agree with her own life stance. What right does she have to have a professor fired because he showed a painting against her particular view of Islam!?
It's good that I no longer teach! I wouldn't survive in this intolerant, anti-free-speech current time.
This professor is only one of many who have been fired in the last several years because students were "offended" by their professor's instruction.
Dan Wilcox
No comments:
Post a Comment