In the name of Academic Freedom a curious phenomenon has developed. Teachers are unwilling to teach the truth. They claim there is no truth. They claim the truth is whatever you want it to be-whatever feels good to you is your truth. However, those same teachers stack the deck against free and honest inquiry. There is something very wrong at schools I've heard of an been to. Imagine attending a school and discovering that they have a religion department, and the classes on Buddhism are taught by a Buddhist Monk, the classes on another popular religion by a representative of that faith, the classes on Judaism by a Rabbi, and the classes on Catholicism by an atheist.
This isn't funny. I have nothing against recieving an alternate viewpoint on a given subject. Yet this sort of thing happens not only with religion, but also Philosophy, Science, and even in Law schools. It is as if the people who run the school are afraid to let students think for themselves. They claim that their whole purpose in doing such things is to allow people to think for themselves, but have you seen the movie "Expelled: No Intelligence Allowed?" It's one thing to say "I believe that evolution is true, and this is why...." It is another thing to try and prevent students from exploring other possibilities by telling them there are no other possibilities, and persecuting teachers who say otherwise. This is not academic freedom-this is forced indoctrination.
If Evolution is true, let the students find out by eliminating other possibilities, for that is the scientific method in all its glory. Likewise, if a particular religion is seen as false by an atheist, why does the atheist need to teach students about that religion instead of letting a more qualified representative who actually believes what they are teaching? The only reason to do this is that the atheist in question is interested in controlling the minds of the students. If that atheist fears that students might take a religion they are prejudiced and intolerant of seriously, he's not going to hire someone who actually does take it seriously to teach about it.
In philosophy, few universities teach metaphysics anymore, yet Nietzsche, Hume, Kant, Hegel, and Sarte are well read. Again, the idea here is to control people's minds, control the dissemination of truth. If Metaphysics, or... forbid it it no... Ethics, were taught, people might actually start thinking there is truth. (Shhh..... hussssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhh) We can't have that... after all the honorable Nietzsche said there is no truth. If there isn't any truth, we can't have people saying there is truth, except Mr. Nietche who claims that it is true that there is no truth. Remember that: His truth is "there is no truth." But, if there is no truth, how can it be true that "there is no truth?"
Well... as long as no one let's the students think, we won't have to worry about them realizing that there is truth after all-by Nietzsche's own admission (Hush.... Hush...). It has to be true that there is no truth, after all. But if there isn't any truth, how can it be true that there is no truth?
The solution to this dilemma is that students aren't allowed to ask such questions, and teachers get fired for entertaining such questions and admitting that: There is truth, there is a religion that is most probably correct, there are scientific theories that should be rejected, accepted, and/or explored further by honest unprejudiced, tolerant, open minded inquiry, and that there are laws that need to be made and respected, like our Constitution, and the Bill of Rights, for example.
I have been told that the Constitution and the Declaration of Independence are no longer taught in law school. Politicians, likewise, have only learned one thing about the Constitution: separation of powers.
Lawyers who are not taught about the constitution learn about court cases that build one upon another. Judges, when changing laws enacted by elected representatives, use domestic court cases and international precedent to decide if something is unconstitutional-Not the Constitution. Judges don't use the Constitution and thwart the democratic process. Our elected official's response to this abuse of power is: Separation of Powers!
Is there something wrong here? Everyone is doing what feels good to them because "there is no truth" but no one is doing what is right because "there is no truth". Who is to blame- Liberal teachers who teach our youth, not the truth, but what the teachers want them to believe: "there is no truth."
Who suffers? Everyone-because we are headed straight to wards Oligarchy and Totalitarianism, because when everyone becomes a self appointed authority on truth, only those with power and the ability to intimidate and indoctrinate others win the arguments-and they usually end up becoming military dictators like Hitler, Stalin, Castro, etc... We've stopped fearing the enemy because we are becoming the enemy.
