This dissertation has been 64—6982 microfilmed exactly as received PYLE, Gordon Bruce, 1922— THE COMMUNIST ISSUE AND DUE PROCESS ON THE CAMPUS. The Ohio State University, Ph.D., 1958 Education, general University Microfilms, Inc., Ann Arbor-, Michigan THE COMMUNIST ISSUE AND DUE PROCESS ON THE CAMPUS DISSERTATION Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By GORDON BRUCE PYLE, B.A.E., M.A.E ****** The Ohio State University 1958 Approved by Adviser Department of Education ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The writer is indebted to many people for their assistance during the writing of this dissertation. To my adviser, Professor H. Gordon Hullfish, particular thanks is due for assistance, council and friendship during the development of the work. The kindness and encouragement of Professors Everett Kircher and Robert Jewett was also greatly appreciated. Finally thanks is due my wife, Janice, whose vaca­ tion at the beach (with the children) made the completion of the dissertation possible. ii CONTENTS Chapter Page I. ACADEMIC FREEDOM— TRADITION AND CONCEPT .... 1 Western Pluralism .......................... 2 The Rise of Science...........................10 The Classical Position .................... 20 The Professional Competence Position .... 24 The Complications.............................31 II. THE COMMUNISTS AND EDUCATIONAL FREEDOM .... 35 Cosmology and Epistemology ................ 36 The Role of the Intellectual................ 49 Role of the Vanguard S t a t e .................. 63 Education in the Soviet U n i o n ................ 76 III. BEARING OF THE COMMUNIST MOVEMENT ON THE PROFESSIONAL COMPETENCE POLICY OF EXCLUDING COMMUNIST TEACHERS ........................ 93 History of the Communist Party in the United States ............................ 99 Professional Competence--an Answer to Educational Conspiracy .................. 113 IV. THE CLASSICAL P O S I T I O N ........................ 136 Proposals of the C l a s s i c i s t s............... 168 V. CONCLUSION .................................... 175 Possible Next S t e p s ..........................191 BIBLIOGRAPHY........................................ 210 iil CHAPTER I ACADEMIC FREEDOM— TRADITION AND CONCEPT Scholars have always considered free inquiry to be essential to the effective search for truth and, hence, have always held academic freedom in high esteem. This tradition, often questioned by non-scholars, has recently come under an extensive re-examination in the United States. The vagaries of the international Communist movement have led to various forms of reaction, including a tendency to repress thought. Indeed, a confluence of forces (namely, the democratic com­ mitment to a changing society and the Communist commitment to the use of dubious methods in the creation of a changed society) has led to a situation which has threatened the tradition of academic freedom from the left, the right, and the center. There are some in the profession who claim that the test of our faith in the tradition depends upon a willingness to maintain some Communists in the classrooms of America. Others, equally dedicated to the tradition, insist that the only way to preserve it is to exclude all Communist Party members from teaching positions. As if this conflict within the profession were not enough, some legislative investiga­ tions into matters concerning education have been conducted, 1 allegedly, in defense of academic freedom. A tradition which arouses such ambivalent emotions in diverse groups needs careful examination. Like many other noble concepts, "academic freedom" fails to convey specific meaning— in fact, it has many mean­ ings. To the man in the street the tradition probably implies a kind of scholarly consideration of all points of view. The pluralistic nature of Western culture is perhaps one reason for the vagueness of this view; yet this same pluralism has contributed mightily to the more specific definitions which in time came to form a part of the tradi­ tion's rich folklore. The rise of the scientific method is another important factor, also, that aided the evolution of the liberal tradition of intellectual freedom in Western society. Each factor must be examined if we are to discover the part it has played in underscoring a need for free inquiry. Western Pluralism In the ancient Greek states numerous philosophies competed for the minds of men. Some saw reality as eternal, immutable, immovable, and indivisible; others declared that nothing was fixed save the law of change itself. Some of the Sophists insisted that "justice was the interest of the stronger"— Socrates, on the other hand, associated virtue with knowledge. The Epicureans developed (to varying degrees) 3 a hedonistic point of view, while the Stoics introduced a more austere and puritanical strain into Greek thought. Numerous ways for settling the conflicts between dif­ fering views could have been suggested— and were. Pericles, to his credit, is alleged to have said that "... instead of looking upon discussion as a stumbling-block in the way of action, we think it an indispensible preliminary to any wise action at all." William G. Carleton believes that the balance of forces within a pluralistic culture conspire to foster such libertarian concepts. He has said that Greek thinking, then, resulted in a wide diver­ sity of ideas. And this multiplicity of philoso­ phies and values has come down to Western civili­ zation to make that civilization widely diverse and pluralistic in its thinking— and therefore an essentially libertarian civilization. The peoples of Western Europe have had many philosophies from which to choose; and these various philosophies and value-systems have checked one another and resulted in a relatively large measure of toler­ ance and freedom. Since the time of the Greeks, Western civilization has been pluralistic— in some periods more pluralistic than others— and hence uncongenial to monolithic systems and congenial to liberty.1 One period less pluralistic than others was the Middle Ages. The monolithic prescriptions of the Roman Church were then influential throughout Europe. It is easy to exagger­ ate this influence, however, because evolving Christian "^C-l Staff, Syllabus. Comprehensive Course C-l. Ameri­ can Institutions. Part II, C-12 (Gainesville: University of Florida, 1956), p. 335. 4 doctrine was not unaffected, during its earlier development, by existing ideologies. Reisner states: Into the simple religious teaching of Jesus had infiltrated, during the three centuries following his death, a technical metaphysical system which was the heritage, not from Sinai nor from Calvary, but from Athens and Alexandria, . .2 The monolithic influence of the medieval church was vitiated by the developing cultures of later periods, also. The powers of the fedual lord and those of the king often provided powerful alternatives to Papal thought. The reverse is also true, as Richard O ’Sullivan has pointed out. The existence of the Catholic Church and the distinction it makes between the spiritual and the temporal powers sets a barrier to the total­ itarian aspirations of the State. The natural tendency of civil rulers is to exaggerate their power, and to remove or to ignore all limitations on it. The effort of civil rulers, even of Christian rulers, has constantly been to reduce the Church to obedience to their will. Christian history is full of the conflict between Papacy and Empire, between Church and State.3 The gradual evolution of modern states out of feudal Europe aided, and was in turn aided by, the Protestant Reformation. The religious changes which occurred during the Reformation involved a break with internationally centralized theology in favor of a more national, local, or individualized 2E. H. Reisner, Historical Foundations of Modern Edu­ cation (New York: The Macmillan Co., 1928), p. 180. 3The Western Tradition (B.B.C. European Programme) (London: Vox Mundi Limited, 19^9), P. 42. form. Protestants, believing in "the priesthood of the individual soul," became the champions of education and a vernacular Bible. It was their purpose to make it possible for individuals to learn to read and thus be able to under­ stand God's plan for themselves. The Reformation created a great schism in Christian­ ity and eventually, especially as the United States of America developed, hundreds of competing denominations evolved. This institutional development, coupled as it was with an emphasis on individual responsibility, represented a considerable gain in the possibility of free choice. When we turn to the American scene we find an unusual diversity in all aspects of life— climate, topography, occu­ pation, race, national origin, political opinion, and religious beliefs, ©lis wide pluralism did not always exist, and while many may see in it a reasonable ground for the tradition of free inquiry, it has not always been a sure ground. To understand the role diversity has played in creating the grounds for, and the problems confronting, free inquiry in the United States we may fruitfully examine certain aspects of American history and government. The Puritans came to America to secure religious free­ dom but they seemed no more inclined to tolerate error, upon securing their opportunity, than did the Orthodox Church from which they had fled. The experiences of Thomas Hooker, Anne Hutchinson, and Roger Williams testify to the authoritarian character of early New England leaders. The influence of