It is a source of pride that universities have, over time, played a significant role in the development and dissemination of ideas.

Universities have never, however, had a monopoly on the truth. Ideas which once were widely recognized and accepted, such as the view a century ago that women were biologically and psychologically inferior to men, have been discredited. Other ideas, now generally accepted, such as the heliocentric notion of the earth, were once considered by scholars to be heretical. And still other ideas, such as those of Hitler's Germany, won some measure of acceptance in their own country but were rejected elsewhere.

It is the case, nevertheless, that for several centuries, one of the purposes of universities has been to provide a sanctuary in which truth might be discerned.

Yet the question of whether universities are fit places for debate and for the pursuit of knowledge has long engendered struggle. In nineteenth century Germany the Carlsbad Decrees sought to restrict universities' freedom of inquiry. More recently, a student at a nearby university has said that Henry Kissinger's decision not to attempt to speak there had "benefited" "the integrity of the university."

Benefited the integrity of the university in what way? Surely the university's obligation to be open to all ideas, whatever their source and nature, was seriously infringed.

University libraries old volumes, pamphlets and broadsides proclaiming and arguing an enormous range of viewpoints. So, too, should universities be open to speakers of every persuasion. The university community deserves the same access to the arguments of every invited speaker as it has to those of the authors on its library shelves, no matter how platitudinous, subversive or immoral.

When members of an audience believe that an argument must be refuted, the proper action is not to seek to bar the speaker's presence at the university, nor to shout him or her down, any more than it is to storm the library and burn or deface offending books. The proper response is to hear the speaker out, no matter how odious or tedious the arguments may be. Opposition to the speaker's views can be expressed through picketing and pamphleting before the speech; through question and argument from the floor, when that is invited; through subsequent debate, perhaps with opposing speakers or panels of critics, or through written rebuttals.

The University enterprise is a search for truth, a search that must travel the broadest possible path. It follows that universities must therefore be places in which every idea good and bad, moral and immoral, may be expounded and understood, ebutted, or ignored. To choose a more narrow path frustrates the essence of the university's function.

John B. Fox Jr. '57 is Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.