[oregontim]

I think it is inappropriate to deny academic freedom to people who advocate controversial ideas, even ones that some may consider morally abhorrent.  What I do believe is that academic freedom needs to comply with accepted standards of rigor. If any advocacy repeatedly fails to meet an acceptable standard of scholarship, even (or perhaps especially) when the policy advocated is "generally accepted", then such a person may reasonably be asked to leave. This should be true at Hoover and also in the University at large.

+1 thanks Goose. Much as I hate what Scott Atlas is saying (I called it "despicable" in an earlier post in this thread) I'm troubled by the idea of a university firing somebody for voicing an unpopular opinion. Your approach to this here, in your post above, works for me. Not as a rationale for anything specific on Atlas, but as a way to navigate the uncomfortable waters of controversial ideas in a university environment.

[oregontim]

I think it is inappropriate to deny academic freedom to people who advocate controversial ideas, even ones that some may consider morally abhorrent.  What I do believe is that academic freedom needs to comply with accepted standards of rigor. If any advocacy repeatedly fails to meet an acceptable standard of scholarship, even (or perhaps especially) when the policy advocated is "generally accepted", then such a person may reasonably be asked to leave. This should be true at Hoover and also in the University at large.

+1 thanks Goose. Much as I hate what Scott Atlas is saying (I called it "despicable" in an earlier post in this thread) I'm troubled by the idea of a university firing somebody for voicing an unpopular opinion. Your approach to this here, in your post above, works for me. Not as a rationale for anything specific on Atlas, but as a way to navigate the uncomfortable waters of controversial ideas in a university environment.