Recent contretemps at Duke University and elswhere (as even The Chronicle for Higher Education picks up the fracas. http://www.frontpagemag.com/Content/read.asp?ID=75) has given rise to this formulation of the issue by philosphy professor Robert Brandon: "The serious and interesting issue is how do we explain the surplus of liberals in academia...?" Arthur Silber answers that it is the consonance of a career with little responsibility and much freedom and socio-political rationales writ large for extending the same to everyone els. In other words, self-selection. http://www.techcentralstation.com/021704B.html But if true, what explains the observedable variance: liberal arts and the humanities are taught by the most Left-leaning - business and engineering schools the least? Does Silber's Self-Selection for (irr?)Responsiblity thesis explain it? - and how? --Orson
Man, I'd like to know the answer to this one myself. I'm very center; I distrust ideology from any source, left or right. Whenever I read anything from the Critical Legal Studies types, enjoying tenure at Havahd whilst insisting that the law exists to oppress the poor (historical nonsense, BTW) and claiming great things for Marxism, by all that's holy! (how can ANY intellectually honest person be a Marxist-Leninist in this day and age, I'd like to know?), I grind my molars to little ivory nubs! End of furious rant.
The whole argument is based on the assumption that the liberal perspective predominates in academic departments. Silber accepts the assumption then tries to explain it. I'd like to see the evidence.