The Volokh Conspiracy
Mostly law professors | Sometimes contrarian | Often libertarian | Always independent
Faculty Letter to SUNY Fredonia in Support of Stephen Kershnar
The Foundation for Individual Rights in Education has posted a faculty letter in support of Stephen Kershnar, the philosophy professor currently barred from the SUNY Fredonia campus for publicly engaging in a philosophical discussion of the immorality of sexual acts between children and adults. You can find more background about the controversy here.
It remains to be seen how SUNY Fredonia would distinguish Professor Kershnar's discussion of these issues on the Brain a Vat podcast in 2022, which happened to attract the attention of conservative activists, from his discussion of these issues in a scholarly monograph published in 2015 or in his 2001 or 2008 articles in scholarly journals that first developed those arguments. Interestingly, he was promoted to full professor after the publication of the first of those articles and was serving as department chair when the book was published. It is almost as if the university recognized that he was doing ordinary philosophical work until the outside world started calling for his head. And almost as if SUNY Fredonia would be equally willing to throw any other professor under the bus if their scholarly work suddenly attracted public controversy.
The initial signatories to the letter are primarily scholars working in the area of philosophy and applied ethics, but it is open for more signatories. If you would like to join the list, contact facultyoutreach@thefire.org.
From the letter:
Although you have described the video podcast as "widely shared," in fact the podcast in which Professor Kershnar discussed arguments on ethical issues relating to sexual contact with children has not been widely viewed. What has been widely shared is a brief clip from the podcast. Universities should be places where scholars can safely engage in the task of carefully thinking through the logic and implications of arguments about ethical human behavior, and that is what Professor Kershnar and his interlocutors do in this podcast. Society will be impoverished if such inquiries cannot take place and if ideas about morality are suppressed and censored because they are unpopular or offend the sensibilities of the broader public. If Professor Kershnar's ideas are wrong, then we all benefit from seeing those errors exposed through intellectual engagement.
Earlier letters from the Academic Freedom Alliance and from FIRE explaining the academic freedom concerns raised by this case can be found here and here.
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
I agree that Prof. Kershnar's statements and opinions are and should be protected.
I am more skeptical that "ordinary philosophical work" typically encompasses apologia for adults engaging in sexual activity with one year olds, but it's possible that the discipline has moved on somewhat since I was in school.
I haven't looked into Prof K's work enough to know if he was just thinking out loud and teasing out arguments, or if he was starting from the position that he would really enjoy sex with children and wanted to build an argument in support of his desires. But like you imply, that is irrelevant (unless one day he puts his theory into practice one gray December morn).
Peter Singer is a great example. I think his views on euthanasia, infanticide and human unexceptionalism are profoundly wrong, but it would also be profoundly wrong to have fired him for making those arguments.
There was a time when most people wouldn’t consider “ordinary philosophical work” to encompass apologia for adults engaging in sodomy.
"...the philosophy professor currently barred from the SUNY Fredonia campus for publicly engaging in a philosophical discussion of the immorality of sexual acts between children and adults...."
Keith,
Out of curiosity; why did you not phrase this as "...discussion of the morality of sexual acts between..."? I think your wording [ie, morality vs immorality] is certainly not wrong, and it's just a stylistic thing. But for whatever reason, this word-choice jumped out at me, and I'll be interested in hearing about your thought-process. (We lawyers and law professors are wordsmiths, of a sort, and the linguist and the psychologist in me is always interested in seeing how people choose to express certain ideas.)
Two years from now this guy will be a Lefty hero and they’ll often cite the Kershnar’s Paradox of LGBTQP Tolerance, “a tolerant society demands you have to gay molest little kids in order have adults who are tolerant of gays (and gay themselves)”.
There seem to be fewer Conspirators (and luminaries of the clingerverse) associated with this letter. Is this guy not a movement conservative and Federalist Society member?
Mainstreamers I guess good Rev. USA Today had that column on pedos...as it said, Adults who sexually abuse a child are not always pedos..and we should have empathy for them. The Lincoln project comes to mind. that said I'm not for the death sentence but do make allowances for pedos...once we start mainstreaming pedos and having empathy for them a society isn't worth saving.
I know next to nothing about this guy. One of the first things I read about him (Brian Leiter, I believe) indicated this professor argues pedophilia should be illegal. Do you have differing information, do you have a genuine explanation of the Conspirators' conduct that does not involve selective support for clingers, or are you just mumbling QAnon-style?
I haven't been able to find his writings on pedophilia online, so I can't confirm that he does think it should be illegal (although such a position seems difficult to square with the opinions he's on hot water for at the moment). But with a CV replete with defenses of discrimination against women, slavery, torture, and Prof. Blackman's interpretation of the emoluments clause, I'm not sure you want to be rushing to claim him for your liberal-libertarian mainstream.
I am not rushing to claim anyone. I am addressing hypocrisy, partisanship, and apparent lack of principles among right-wing law professors who express selective outrage that seems partisanship masquerading as principle.
@Noscitur a sociis, there's no link.
This guy gave at talk on libertarianism in 2009. He spent most of his time arguing some irrelevant point on private property paradox of "who owned" the land first. Honestly it was stupid given most of the audience was pissed off about the bailouts and Bush/Obama wars. Wasn't interested in the Fed or corporate cronyism. During the Q/A, I do recall having a discussion on nonintervention and genocide. For some reason our discussion veered into the Holodomor. I mentioned the 5-10Million starved by Troysky/Stalin and he got very argumentative. Frist it was less than six million, he made that very very clear to me. And he was firm that it wasn't genocide. The whole thing was weird to be honest. I wasn't stupid and understand why he said that. I left thinking he wasn't quite the libertarian I was.
That happened some time after 2009?
"It's the civil right's cause of our time!" -- VP Sasha Obama
Fredonia? I thought that was the country in "Duck Soup." Turns out that's "Freedonia."
Still, if I lived there I'd think it a good idea to change the name, just for clarity.
How about "Sylvania"?
"We're looking for a new treasurer."
"You just hired a treasurer last week!"
"That's the one we're looking for."
Similar reaction here - the name looks fake.
I think it's impossible to defend this:
“The notion that it’s wrong even with a one-year-old is not quite obvious to me.”
I get FIRE, and other academic freedom organizations want to be absolute in their support for academic freedom, but I think you can make the point even if this guy has gone beyond any morally defensive statement, he shouldn't be fired for it.
" I get FIRE, and other academic freedom organizations want to be absolute in their support for academic freedom, "
That is a silly statement. FIRE issues passes to conservative-controlled schools that mock academic freedom (a hypocritical position that conveniently flatters FIRE's wingnut donors).
Is there no limit to academic freedom? A professor advocates one of the following, Should he be allowed to continue in his position:
(1) Repeal of the 13th amendment and return to chattel slavery.
(2) Expulsion of all Jews from the country.
(3) Stripping women of all or most of their rights, and return of their legal status to that of 1900.
I'll get to the point(s).
1) Pedophilia is morally wrong.
2) It was never necessary to take the opposite position (that it isn't) any more than it is necessary to take the position that child abuse can ever be justified. Because pedophilia is child abuse.
3) Prof. Kershnar's remarks in support will do harm. They will be taken as license to commit.
4) People never read the "full account" of anything. Even if Kershnar privately disagrees with himself, he will be quoted in the brief. That will cause massive harm because that's all the encouragement someone will need to justify their crimes.
5) This prof needs to make his bonafide position absolutely crystal clear or justly suffer the financial consequences he is loathe to experience.
6) This is not a Right/Left issue. It's about kids and what's best for THEM and they very likely won't care about politics for a long time. Making it so only distracts and dilutes its importance. (Don't defend him because you think he's being attacked by the Right and you consider yourself on the Left.) This issue is beyond all of that, AND he has been criticized by both.
Looking to effortlessly tackle complex calculations involving taxes? Enter the world of Calculator Area, your one-stop solution for all things numerical. From VAT to GST and beyond, this versatile platform offers a suite of specialized calculators designed to streamline your financial processes. Whether you're a business owner, a diligent shopper, or a curious learner, our range of calculators empowers you to swiftly compute values, leaving behind the days of manual computations and uncertainty. Say goodbye to the headache of tax-related arithmetic – Calculator Area (https://calculatorarea.com/) is here to simplify your math and amplify your productivity. Explore the realm of precision and convenience today!