Last week, Zak Moore '09 eloquently supported trustee candidate Stephen Smith '88 on this page ("Diversity of Vision Matters," Feb. 7). An issue he raised in support of his main argument -- namely, the importance of freedom of speech -- is something that struck me as particularly worthy of elaboration. It is worthier, certainly, than whatever I might have had to say about water pong.
Moore succinctly argues that the "vibrant marketplace of ideas" should not be tamed by de facto speech codes and correctly states that this market is "good for every student." It has been, unfortunately, my experience here to learn that occasionally not every student fully understands why or even that it is good for him or her.
Let me begin by addressing a counter point. It has been argued, indeed to me as a result of past columns, that the College has no responsibility to the lofty, philosophical notion of freedom of speech. The College is private! We have a constitutional right to free speech in this country to protect us from the government, the argument goes. Then it is asserted that the College is not the government. Indeed, we have this right to speech specifically so that institutions such as this college on this hill can decide what can be said on this hill!
Fortunately for all of us, this argument ignores the very nature of our institution. It reduces a "should" question to a "permission" question. Dartmouth is, indisputably, a private entity permitted to control speech within itself however it wants. However, due to its very purpose for existence, Dartmouth should exert no control over speech.
Dartmouth's essence, we all can agree, is education. Education in our modern sense consists primarily of acquisition of knowledge through skepticism and examination. It is more than a simple sponge-like absorption. It more properly involves notions of a gauntlet, with the student assaulted from all sides, forced to fend for himself and become stronger in his understandings of the world in the meantime. Dartmouth does its best to foster this, as opposed to being a cushy environment in which its students' beliefs are only reinforced through ideological pats on the back.
My own personal experience here serves as a great success story. I came here with what I was certain was a broad world view with strong beliefs about, well, everything, only to find upon restricting my environment to a small town in New Hampshire that my views were narrow and my convictions shaky. A mere three years later, I now have stronger, broader views, and it is all thanks to the fact that this campus has repeatedly challenged me.
It would be hard to find someone who disagrees with a desire for freedom of speech. And yet, it would also be hard to find someone who actually supports the logical end of the argument. It necessitates the toleration of opposing views -- and indeed even stupid, illogical, unreasonable or painful ones. Obviously this does not require silence in the face of such adversity and indeed nearly obligates every person to voice his opposition; but that opposition should not, as Moore correctly notes, amount to a de facto speech code that prevents, for example, The Dartmouth Review from publishing whatever it wants. This is a fine line, to be sure, but as with all things in life worth anything, the devil is in the details.
While I once resented my early years here, I now look back on them as my red badges of courage. Some views are clearly so hurtful and hate-filled that they cause much more pain than anything I have personally experienced, but in the end we cannot lose sight of the benefits of having even those upsetting views for sale in our marketplace. As the Western liberal tradition has taught us, even irrational and hurtful speech can make us stronger by forcing us to reexamine our positions and stand up to their adversity. As the Johnny Cash song goes, "Son, this world is rough, and if a man's gonna make it, he's gotta be tough." We should not fear free speech even if such speech is hateful. We should welcome it, let it roll off our more enlightened selves and continue down the path to true education.
