This dissertation has been microfilmed exactly as received 67-16,303 LUCAS, Christopher John, 1940- AMEBICAN CONCEPTIONS OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY. The Ohio State University, Ph.D,, 1967 Education, history University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor, Michigan AMERICAN CONCEPTIONS OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM IN THE TWENTIETH CENTURY DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the.Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Christopher John Lucas, A. B., M.A.T, ***** The Ohio State University 1967 Approved by mmnA // Adviser School of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I am indebted to Professor Robert B. Sutton for his counsel and assistance in the preparation of this study. His incisive interroga­ tions of my lines of thought were most helpful throughout. His facility for conferring a measure of coherence and concision upon my materials eliminated needless obscurity at many points. Dr. Sutton's inde­ fatigable questioning contributed significantly to whatever merit this writing may possess; of course whatever defects remain are not his responsibility. I should also like to express my gratitude to the staff of The Ohio State University Libraries for their interest and cooperation in locating sources that otherwise would not have been available to me. My thanks are due also to Professors Everett J. Kircher and Bernard Me hi who were kind enough to serve on the reading and examining committees for this dissertation. Their teaching and easy camradery have been an inspiration to me and worthy of emulation in years to come. I gratefully acknowledge the clerical assistance of Mrs. Louise F. Brown who consented to type the final manuscript. Finally, I wish to thank Miss Teresa M. Stout for her typing help and her patience while awaiting the completion of this work to become my wife. ii VITA February 21, 1940 Born—Indianapolis, Indiana 1958-1959. , . Butler University, Indianapolis, Indiana 1962 ......................... B.A., Syracuse University, Syracuse, New York 1962-1963 .... Garrett Theological Seminary, Evanston, Illinois 1963-1964. Secondary School English Teacher, Chicago, Illin ois 1964. ...... M.A.T. , Northwestern University, Evanston, Illin ois 1964-1967. Teaching Associate , Area of Philosophy of Education, School of Education, The Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio FIELDS OF STUDY Major Field: Philosophy of Education Studies in Philosophy of Education. Professors Everett Kircher, Frederick Neff, and George Maccia Studies in History of Education. Professors Robert Sutton and Bernard Mehl Studies in Philosophy. Professors Marvin Fox, Wallace Anderson, Paul Olscamp, and Richard Severens Studies in Comparative Education. Professors Robert Sutton and Donald Sanders 111 CONTENTS Page ACKNOWLEDGMENTS.. .................... ü V IT A .. ........................................................................................................... iii CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION .................................................................... 1 II IMAGES OF THE PROFESSOR................................................... 20 The Scholarly Isolate ................................................... 21 The Academic Philistine .......................................... 32 Reaction and the Myth of Useless Learning .... 35 The Chauvinist ............................................................... 41 The Decline of G entility ............................................ 48 The Institutional Hireling ............................................ 54 Sum m ary .................... 56 III THE GROWING DEBATE: 1915-1930 ................................... 59 The "Hired Man" Theory .................... 59 The Analogy from Judicial Immunity ....................... 70 A Framework for the Issues ........................................ 89 The Question of Extramural Utterances ................ 95 Procedural Safeguards ................................................. 110 Sectarian Loyalty and Academic Freedom 124 Sum m ary ............................................................................. 146 IV FREE TEACHING IN A FRIGHTENED SOCIETY: 1930-1949 ........................... 149 A Climate of Crisis ........................................................ 149 Attacks on Higher Learning ........................................ 165 Anti-Intellectualism and Brain Trusters ................ 171 The Ideal of Unprincipled Institutions: A Paradox ...................................................................... 181 iv CONTENTS (Contd.) CHAPTER Page Intramural Utterances. ............................................ 196 Social Mores and Professional Responsibility ....................................................... 206 The Bertrand Russell C ase ..................................... 214 Summary. ................................................................... 233 V OLD FEARS AND NEW ASPIRATIONS:1949-1967 . 237 The Climate of Opinion .......................................... 237 The Advent of a Debate ....................... 255 Should Communists Be Allowed to Teach 263 Sectarian Loyalty and Academic Freedom .... 284 A Note on "Lernfreiheit" .......................... 299 Sum m ary. ................................................................... 326 VI IN RETROSPECT AND PROSPECT................................... 329 In Retrospect .................. 329 The Meanings of Academic Freedom and Their Rationale .......................... ..................... 339 In Prospect ................................................................. 350 APPENDIX....................................................................................................... 360 BIBLIOGRAPHY. .......................................................................................... 364 V CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION The question of academic freedom is not one which stands by it-- self, or can be settled by itself. It is connected with the other problems of liberty; these in turn reach out to embrace further controversies in­ volving the nature of truth and how it can best be secured, the role of the scholar in society, the nature of the educating institution, and so on. There have been many disputes about freedom; very likely there will be many more. The issues command intense, passionate loyalties. The issues or problems involved are very rarely dealt with dispassionately, with that analytic scrutiny that best affords clear vision. Pronounce­ ments are likely to be exhortatory and polemical. This is not always necessarily bad. Apathy and indifference do not conduce to securing real solutions to problems, but neither does partisan rhetoric. An inten­ sity of concern balanced and disciplined by discernment of judgment seems required. It almost goes without saying that these are more easily recommended than achieved. Yet in an area as complex and difficult as that wherein issues of academic freedom are raised, it would seem that nothing less will suffice. A clear understanding of what is involved when one speaks of "academic freedom" is not come by easily. It is likely to be a symbol or slogan to which people will respond mindlessly, favored by all be­ cause it means all things to all people. But in given situations, it be­ comes a source of heated controversy. Then differences of opinion emerge and become explicit. "A man must be free to think as he wills and to say what he thinks, " one group will demand. "What about those who violate the canons of common sense and ordinary decency?" retorts another group. To the general public, practically every academic issue which becomes a matter of public concern is one of freedom of speech and of teaching. The impression is given that a great conflict is going on in the schools, that trustees and professors (or students) are arrayed in opposing camps. It is thought that one party is insisting upon common decency and good sense while the other is demanding freedom to think and speak as they will. It is noted that the contending parties are pre­ senting mutually hostile and irreconcilable demands. And so the issue is formulated. In the mass media, reactions to some incident are condemnatory of administrative action if the writer feels that there is a substantial danger that inquiry and discussion are being stifled, especially if a vivid imagination sees the college or university being strangled in the grip of reactionary overlords. But comments are likely to be laudatory on equally general grounds if there is a feeling that teachers are running amuck, rampant radicals, subverting hallowed traditions, permanently addling the brains of their benighted students in the process. Then universities are seen as noxious cesspools of iniquitous doctrine, trustees or administrative officials as valiant defenders of All That Is Good and Right. Students are viewed as the martyred victims of repressive dis­ cipline, or irresponsible anarchists jousting against the matured wisdom enshrined in the established order. "Academic freedom" becomes a common rubric under which all partisans concerned subsume their de­ mands . The champions of freedom point out the evils which may arise when free inquiry and discussion are restricted, as well as the danger inherent in stopping men from teaching what they believe to be the truth by those who, in the nature of the case, are less expert in the subject of inquiry than is the scholar himself. They note that men of visceral reaction, their prejudices enflamed, have too often endangered newly- won truths. The progress of enlightenment and knowledge