When I was exploring the subject of academia and its connection to autonomy or complacency, I came to the realization that both aspects are actually outcomes of exercising academic freedom, and by extension democracy. Academic freedom, like democracy, is itself evolving to accommodate those human aspirations for a more ideal state of being and an elevated state of consciousness, or as the well-known philosopher Oscar Wilde puts it "know thyself" was written over the portal of the antique world. Over the portal of the new world, "be thyself" shall be written.” Accordingly, the true purpose of political correctness, which is increasingly becoming an integral part of academia, should not be reversing any gains pertaining to freedom of thought and expression but rather to pursue and promote truth over all other considerations. The following quote by Albert Einstein accurately explains this central aspect of academia even further “By academic freedom I understand the right to search for truth and to publish and teach what one holds to be true. This right implies also a duty: one must not conceal any part of what one has recognized to be true.” Having said that, what I am about to address is an issue that constitutes an integral aspect of the benefits and pitfalls of academic freedom, particularly in the areas of the humanities. This issue pertains to autonomy versus complacency, in acquiring and disseminating knowledge.

Furthermore, the issue pertains to those professors who favor glossing over facts or downplaying certain unpopular truths for the sake of maintaining harmony in their classrooms and among their students. They, by adopting such an approach, subscribe to the philosophy of imparting a customized version of truth by basically telling their audience what they expect to hear and nothing more. This group of academics includes those who prefer to impart an enhanced and at times idealized and polished version of events, particularly of social, theological, or historical significance, in order to intentionally avoid unwelcomed discussions or debates. This kind of approach can cause the lecturer to tiptoe around hotly debated issues and therefore do more harm than good to the highly valued academic freedom. Even though it is commendable to pay heed to the sensitivities of others and their cultural, religious, ethnic, and racial particularities it should not be at the expense of true knowledge and true understanding. In order for a teacher to avoid the pitfalls of such a sheltered teaching style, they need to be diplomatic in their approach, but in a way that remind their listeners that pleasant and unpleasant truths are part of life and therefore should be perceived as such. Employing an entirely reserved approach can lead to a tendency on the part of certain professors to forsake the dignity associated with academic honesty and in turn surrender the momentum to their audience, causing the discussion to bypass the benefit of critical thinking and consequently descend into the realm of disinformation and half-truths. Moreover this type of approach can inadvertently turn educators into apologists, rather than advocates for the truth. Being diplomatic when discussing matters of sensitive nature is recommended but not to the point of sacrificing beneficial and healthy intellectual inquiries.

The establishment of a genuine and trustworthy relationship between instructors and students can no longer be looked at as merely an arrangement where someone with superior knowledge imparts that knowledge to a partly or mostly unengaged audience. Educators and students should rather establish a relationship of equals who have a mutual interest in advancing knowledge, regardless of whether one is on the giving or the receiving end of that knowledge. In other words, both instructors and students have a stake in an honest exchange of ideas and information. To put this simply, the more one teaches, the more one comes to the realization that education is fundamentally mutual. When students are given the opportunity to be engaged, the ensuing exchange becomes an outlet of intellectual energy that truly injects vitality into the issues being explored. Contrary to some educators’ views, today’s college students possess intelligence that is unique to their generation, which can be brought to the surface given the right approach and the existence of an atmosphere conducive to a more pluralistic education.

Professor Fathi El-Shihibi teaches Islam in the Department of Philosophy and Religion at Northeastern University.