Scan barcode
indianajane's review against another edition
5.0
If you had told me that the next really good book that I would read on anything even parenthetically related to politics or the constitution would have been written by a liberal atheist, I would have been very dubious. But this book about the attack on free speech on college campuses and the effect that it has on society as a whole was excellent. Greg Lukianoff didn't, as is so often the case, ignore the errors of those he agrees with. The book was an even-handed look at the way colleges infringe on students' rights and the alarming changes in attitudes toward free speech.
lazygal's review against another edition
3.0
Seeing Mr. Lukianoff on BookTV piqued my interest, so I ordered this book via ILL. The disappointing part is that there should be a second subtitle "... and how I (and FIRE) are fighting the good fight", because all too often he inserts himself into the narrative. It reads more as an advertisement for FIRE (and him) than is necessary.
Having said that, it is truly frightening how many of these codes and limitations are not only being promoted by colleges but are not being protested by students. When I was in college (early 80s) there were a few professors we knew brought their personal biases into class and that it was better to agree with them (or not publicly disagree with them) but that was a mere few... From what this book suggests, that ratio has flipped radically and we're now in a world where students must agree with their professor or face sanctions, and not (as was in our case) just a lower grade. The mandated sensitivity training sessions were even more disturbing. I probably would have been tossed out of my college within that first week because I would not have put up with that!
Having said that, it is truly frightening how many of these codes and limitations are not only being promoted by colleges but are not being protested by students. When I was in college (early 80s) there were a few professors we knew brought their personal biases into class and that it was better to agree with them (or not publicly disagree with them) but that was a mere few... From what this book suggests, that ratio has flipped radically and we're now in a world where students must agree with their professor or face sanctions, and not (as was in our case) just a lower grade. The mandated sensitivity training sessions were even more disturbing. I probably would have been tossed out of my college within that first week because I would not have put up with that!
alisez's review
challenging
informative
slow-paced
2.5
It’s a collection of censorship cases in universities. No suggestions provided on why there’s this issue and how could we solve it (except by allowing free speech). Perhaps a better explanation on free speech would fix this issue.
hannahsmanyhobbies's review against another edition
2.0
While vaguely enlightening, I found this to be little interesting topic. Like most school dribble, with too much blah and not enough thought about what needs to be done. I get it, college students don't have free speech.
kikiandarrowsfishshelf's review against another edition
4.0
As I was reading this book, a friend asked if the author wasn’t a bit boy who cried wolf.
Maybe, but maybe not.
Freedom of Speech issues really interest me, especially when at times I have seen a double standard (for instance a student refusing to state an opinion on anything or a student being mocked because she wanted to change her name when she got married).
This is basically a Project Fire handbook. Fire focuses on freedom of speech issues, and it has more to do with the student view of freedom of speech as opposed to the teacher’s view of Academic Freedom. I found the part about speech and moral codes on campuses to be the most interesting and disturbing. At times the structure of imagine you are student, bored me but the book is thought provoking.
Maybe, but maybe not.
Freedom of Speech issues really interest me, especially when at times I have seen a double standard (for instance a student refusing to state an opinion on anything or a student being mocked because she wanted to change her name when she got married).
This is basically a Project Fire handbook. Fire focuses on freedom of speech issues, and it has more to do with the student view of freedom of speech as opposed to the teacher’s view of Academic Freedom. I found the part about speech and moral codes on campuses to be the most interesting and disturbing. At times the structure of imagine you are student, bored me but the book is thought provoking.
fionak's review against another edition
3.0
Some interesting information but not enough to justify the length of this book.
zelanator's review against another edition
4.0
I listened to this book on Audible. It may have been better to read the book only because the quality of the audio for this book was lacking. The narrator was superb, but must have been reading the book with a faulty microphone given frequent highs and lows in volume throughout the tape.
Anyways, on to the book. Lukianoff is a liberal atheist, Huff Post contributor, and, more importantly, the current President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). FIRE, along with the ACLU and other organizations, often defend students, faculty, and staff on college campuses when their first amendment right of free speech has been infringed upon. This book offers in one sense a summary of FIRE’s work during the early 2000s and in another sense Lukianoff’s assessment of how a climate of censorship on American college campuses has eroded the classic idea of what higher education should do: create a public space wherein the exchange of ideas can introduce students to multiple perspectives on the world (many potentially offensive), hone their critical thinking skills, and inure them to the tendency to have knee-jerk reactions to speech that they find offensive or “hurtful.”
Lukianoff indicates that the burgeoning administrative class and bureacritization of colleges and universities in the United States has contributed more to a censorious climate than individual radical student groups or professors. Administrators often wield an inordinate amount of power to censor “hurtful” or “offensive” speech under campus “speech codes” that often adopt such broad and vague definitions of “offensive speech” or “hate speech” that almost anyone could be guilty of violating such policies on campuses. More often than not, administrators and college presidents use this power to censor those who criticize their administrations (e.g. Peace College alumnae), create student orientation programs that Lukianoff says are Orwellian in nature (e.g. see Michigan State University), and ruin the lives of faculty for offenses such as discussing the origins of racial epithets like “wetback.” Lukianoff also joins a growing chorus of public intellectuals who believe that we have entered an “education bubble,” believing that the price of college education (exceeding 50k/year at many private colleges) has risen much higher than its actual value in the market. He fingers the well-compensated campus admin class as the primary driver of rising tuition costs and argues that colleges are becoming more expensive just as they are becoming less well-equipped to educate. In one particularly egregious example (I can’t remember the particular college), the annual salaries for admins had risen 80% while the budget for faculty (those actually doing the teaching) had declined by 1 or 2%.
Lukianoff argues that part of the problem also stems from the fact that primary education (K-12) has failed students by not providing them with a robust knowledge of their constitutional rights. In particular, most graduating high school seniors, he says, have only a simplistic view of the First Amendment and Free Speech, which makes it far too easy for campus admins to violate their rights.
Perhaps the most insidious effect of all this has been to create ideological homogeneity among the faculty, graduate student population, and even among undergraduates. Currently, many universities have a decidedly liberal bent with conservative and Christian voices being the most consistent targets of censorship and harassment. Drawing on convincing social psychological research, Lukianoff argues that ideological “echo chambers” erode critical thinking and push those with like-minded viewpoints toward more radical points-of-view. This means that scholarship becomes more partisan, biased, and ultimately estranged from society. However, Lukianoff’s more far-sighted point is that when the power to ban speech rests in the hands of biased and flawed individuals (i.e. campus admins), censorious behavior can cut both ways affecting both liberals and conservatives. Lukianoff shows time and time again that liberal professors and students are often the target of censorship campaigns when they could not keep abreast of changes in identity politics and eventually ran afoul of some particular interest group. Maybe that my main take-away from this book: when campus admins and others attempt to ban constitutionally protected speech in an attempt to avoid “hurt feelings,” it becomes a very slippery slope because opinions and perspectives will almost always offend someone.
There is a lot more to this book that what I’ve managed to describe above. I would highly recomend it to anyone interested in what’s happening on college campuses in America today, although hopefully Lukianoff’s updated volume will offer even more insights.
Anyways, on to the book. Lukianoff is a liberal atheist, Huff Post contributor, and, more importantly, the current President of the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE). FIRE, along with the ACLU and other organizations, often defend students, faculty, and staff on college campuses when their first amendment right of free speech has been infringed upon. This book offers in one sense a summary of FIRE’s work during the early 2000s and in another sense Lukianoff’s assessment of how a climate of censorship on American college campuses has eroded the classic idea of what higher education should do: create a public space wherein the exchange of ideas can introduce students to multiple perspectives on the world (many potentially offensive), hone their critical thinking skills, and inure them to the tendency to have knee-jerk reactions to speech that they find offensive or “hurtful.”
Lukianoff indicates that the burgeoning administrative class and bureacritization of colleges and universities in the United States has contributed more to a censorious climate than individual radical student groups or professors. Administrators often wield an inordinate amount of power to censor “hurtful” or “offensive” speech under campus “speech codes” that often adopt such broad and vague definitions of “offensive speech” or “hate speech” that almost anyone could be guilty of violating such policies on campuses. More often than not, administrators and college presidents use this power to censor those who criticize their administrations (e.g. Peace College alumnae), create student orientation programs that Lukianoff says are Orwellian in nature (e.g. see Michigan State University), and ruin the lives of faculty for offenses such as discussing the origins of racial epithets like “wetback.” Lukianoff also joins a growing chorus of public intellectuals who believe that we have entered an “education bubble,” believing that the price of college education (exceeding 50k/year at many private colleges) has risen much higher than its actual value in the market. He fingers the well-compensated campus admin class as the primary driver of rising tuition costs and argues that colleges are becoming more expensive just as they are becoming less well-equipped to educate. In one particularly egregious example (I can’t remember the particular college), the annual salaries for admins had risen 80% while the budget for faculty (those actually doing the teaching) had declined by 1 or 2%.
Lukianoff argues that part of the problem also stems from the fact that primary education (K-12) has failed students by not providing them with a robust knowledge of their constitutional rights. In particular, most graduating high school seniors, he says, have only a simplistic view of the First Amendment and Free Speech, which makes it far too easy for campus admins to violate their rights.
Perhaps the most insidious effect of all this has been to create ideological homogeneity among the faculty, graduate student population, and even among undergraduates. Currently, many universities have a decidedly liberal bent with conservative and Christian voices being the most consistent targets of censorship and harassment. Drawing on convincing social psychological research, Lukianoff argues that ideological “echo chambers” erode critical thinking and push those with like-minded viewpoints toward more radical points-of-view. This means that scholarship becomes more partisan, biased, and ultimately estranged from society. However, Lukianoff’s more far-sighted point is that when the power to ban speech rests in the hands of biased and flawed individuals (i.e. campus admins), censorious behavior can cut both ways affecting both liberals and conservatives. Lukianoff shows time and time again that liberal professors and students are often the target of censorship campaigns when they could not keep abreast of changes in identity politics and eventually ran afoul of some particular interest group. Maybe that my main take-away from this book: when campus admins and others attempt to ban constitutionally protected speech in an attempt to avoid “hurt feelings,” it becomes a very slippery slope because opinions and perspectives will almost always offend someone.
There is a lot more to this book that what I’ve managed to describe above. I would highly recomend it to anyone interested in what’s happening on college campuses in America today, although hopefully Lukianoff’s updated volume will offer even more insights.
More...