Faculty debate continues at SMU over the prospect of a George W. Bush presidential library and associated policy institute. Some are raising their voices in support.
The latest is a “Dear Colleague” letter today from several political science/history professors saying the open letter sent out by a faculty group Tuesday, asking that the institute be totally separated from SMU, contained misrepresentations, unverifiable claims, and unwarranted assumptions. The new letter presents arguments in support of the institute’s connection to SMU, asserting that it will be a boon to intellectual life at SMU.[W]e should expect that most fellows of the institute, and most of their policy prescriptions, would be conservative in one sense or another. However, a general philosophical orientation or distinctive worldview does not imply incompatibility with a university’s mission, especially in a unit that would neither be hiring any faculty nor granting any degrees....
[T]o suggest that open inquiry and academic freedom would be put at risk not only for SMU but for all academic institutions by the presence of an autonomous policy institute is wildly implausible.
Although it's entirely predictable that many SMU faculty members would reflexively oppose any and all connections with their dreaded presidential bugbear, it's good to see that some also take a balanced view.
Posted by Alan at March 22, 2007 12:22 PM