Letter from Stanford President and Provost to Incoming Stanford Students

Dear XXX,

Congratulations on earning a place in Stanford University's Class of 2028! This is a moment to celebrate the hard work and determination that have brought you to this moment, and also to reflect on the next stage of your education. Amid all the challenging and polarizing issues being discussed in the world right now, you may be wondering what kind of intellectual community you would be joining at Stanford. And we think this is important to address directly.

Stanford strives to provide its students with a liberal education, which means one that broadens your mind and horizons by exposing you to different fields of study and different ways of thinking. A rigorous liberal education depends on questioning your assumptions and seeing if they hold up. As a member of the Stanford community, you will quickly learn that freedom of thought, inquiry, and expression are core values at Stanford. They animate our central missions of teaching and research. Stanford is also a place that values diversity in its broadest sense – which includes diversity of thought.

This means that every member of the Stanford community is accepted and valued for their unique characteristics and ideals. It is precisely the distinct attributes each community member brings to Stanford that, when openly and constructively shared, create a vibrant educational environment where the search for truth is advanced.

Our Founding Grant commits the University to "teach the blessings of liberty regulated by law, and … the great principles of government as derived from the inalienable rights of man to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness." The "blessings of liberty" are a middle point between mere license (doing whatever you want) and conformity (doing what others want you to do). Liberty to think and say what you believe involves taking responsibility as well. It requires recognizing the freedom and rights of others and helping to create the conditions that make everyone's freedom possible here on campus and in our broader society.

Freedom of expression does not include the right to threaten or harass others and prevent them from engaging as equal participants in campus life. But the freedom of expression necessary for fulfilling the mission of a university – and for a democracy – does require allowing speech that some may find offensive or wrong. Many of humanity's greatest advances have come from ideas that offended conventional wisdom and seemed heretical at first. In a university, the remedy for ideas that you think are wrong is not to seek to silence them but to counter them with better ideas, evidence, and arguments.

As a part of your education you should expect, and indeed welcome, disagreement. You will undoubtedly encounter and hear ideas that are contrary to your beliefs and values. Stanford culture will expect and demand that when you face disagreements that you respond with respect for the humanity of those you disagree with, and with an open and curious mind. We aim for an environment where we are tough on ideas, but generous and respectful to one another. Being exposed to the very different views of others will invariably broaden your outlook and may transform some of your beliefs -- or at least change your understanding of what they mean and how to defend them.

Your education at Stanford is designed to prepare you for life as a citizen of the communities in which you live. Whether it is your dormitory, your town, or your workplace, and regardless of what career path you eventually choose, you should have the skills to critically and constructively engage with those who are different from you.

Guided by the principles outlined above, we are delighted to welcome you and your unique perspective into this culture of free thought, inquiry, and expression. We hope you'll seriously embrace the extraordinary opportunities available here.

Sincerely,

/s/ Richard Saller, President, and Jenny S. Martinez, Provost

Comments

[Á àß äẞç ãþÇđ âÞ¢Đæ ǎB€Ðëf ảhf]

Sounds great, if wordy. But!

* How does it compare to past Stanford letters?

* How does it compare to other university letters?

* How much is just pleasing pablum which will never be enforced?

[Bored Lawyer]

Mostly anodyne generalities. The real test is how it's enforced.
On that note,
Loyola Law School Anti-Racism Fellow Goes on One Helluva Racist Rant
At a recent public meeting of the law school, the "Anti-Racism Fellow" said ""Get the f*** out of here all you ugly ass little Jewish people in this b**ch."
Want to bet nothing happens to her.

You can see the story and video here:
https://pjmedia.com/vodkapundit/2024/04/18/video-loyola-law-school-anti-racism-fellow-grace-obi-azuikel-is-one-helluva-racist-n4928291

[Eugene Volokh]

I saw the story, and listened to the video, but I couldn't really make out the words. How confident should we be that this is what she said? (Also, what exactly does "in this bitch" mean?) I just want to make sure the facts are right before opining on what should be done.

[SRG2]

I can't be sure of the last couple of words, but ignoring the priming of the text, she does still say, "”Get the fuck out of here all you ugly ass little Jewish people"

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

That's what one dubious clingerverse source ascribed to her, anyway.

[Drewski]

An Urban Dictionary entry from 2008 says it means "in this place," which makes sense.

[ChrisC]

True, but give them credit for at least writing something sober and reasonable. Most of their Ivy League competitors won't even go that far.

[TwomblyMan]

Will these nice words be parchment barriers? Without changes to the university's administrative procedures and faculty composition, I fear so.

[Eugene Volokh]

I entirely appreciate the question; the answer, I take it, is that it's hard to know until the next controversy arises. (Even if there are changes to administrative procedures, one still wouldn't know how they'll actually play out.) Nonetheless, the public statement is important, I think, partly because it precommits the administration in some measure, and partly because it may signal to students what is expected of them.

[TwomblyMan]

Both good points, but with potential weaknesses. The first’s weakness is that it assumes that the university is serious and subject to some form of enforcement that it cares about. I’m more willing to believe the first than the second. Bad press seems the most likely enforcement mechanism, but I suspect that an institution’s prestige insulates it from such harm in the medium- and long-term. The second’s weakness is that it assumes that students who disagree with the statement will self-select out on that basis. Again, I suspect that students’ willingness to do that is inversely proportional to an institution’s prestige.

[dwb68]

well said.

[Rossami]

Tragic that this has to be said at all.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

Would you prefer that our strongest research and teaching institutions emulate conservative-controlled campuses (Regent, Brigham Young, Bob Jones, Liberty, Ouachita Baptist, Wheaton, Ave Maria, Oral Roberts, Hillsdale, Grove City, Cedarville, Colorado Christian, Abilene Christian, Texas Christian, You Name It Christian, Maranatha Baptist, Dallas Baptist, Everything Else Baptist, Thomas Aquinas, Ozarks, Baylor, and dozens or hundreds like them) in this context?

[WuzYoungOnceToo]

Sincerely

Time will tell.

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

It is important to remember that racists, superstitious gay-bashers, misogynists, transphobes, white nationalists, immigrant haters, antisemites, Islamophobes, Christian dominionists, white supremacists, theocrats, and other bigots have rights, too.

Also, (some) affirmative action for conservatives might not be all bad.

[mike petrik]

The power of Christ compels you. The power of Christ compels you. The power of …..

[Rev. Arthur L. Kirkland]

I do not visit Starbucks, but I doubt the power of Christ and three dollars would buy a decent cup of coffee these days.

[Old Smokin' Egg]

“Stanford culture will expect and demand that when you face disagreements that you respond with respect for the humanity of those you disagree with… We aim for an environment where we are tough on ideas, but generous and respectful to one another.”

All too often, transgender activists and their allies have insisted that refusal to acknowledge the validity of their chosen gender identity is tantamount to denying their existence. This position will undoubtedly be embraced by Stanford’s DEI apparatus, and any Stanfordites who decline to honor said gender choices will find themselves called on the carpet for failing that “respect for the humanity” requirement.

Also, "…demand *that* when you face disagreements *that* you respond…”? Somebody needs a copy-editor (and it’s not Prof. Volokh, because I checked it against the original).