I understand why some people think that I frequently view issues in terms of black and white, and that I give those issues little in the way of intensive thought. I understand why, but it’s a mistaken impression. Even the issues that I do see as very, very black and white (issues of bigotry and class divisions spring to mind) do not go unexamined in my head. I firmly believe that if you never question your ideas and beliefs, you’re probably wrong more times than not.
This longwinded lead is by way of introducing the news that Ben Stein has withdrawn from speaking at the UVM commencement, due, it seems, in no small part to pressure from the scientific community.
On reading that, I felt vaguely ill at ease, without being able to pin down why. I’m delighted that Stein isn’t speaking, he’s a nasty little piece of work who has no problem lying and slandering to win people over to his insane, baseless way of seeing things.
At the same time, I’m not sure how I feel about the scientific community barring people from speaking, the same way, I think we can safely assume, that the religious community would attempt to bar Richard Dawkins or Christopher Hitchens from speaking at a commencement.
I guess for me the whole thing hinges on whether Stein was, in fact, going to speak solely on the topic of economics. I’m not sure I believe he was, and even at that, his “expertise” is questionable, given that he’s been a supporter and endorser of the kinds of economic policies that have landed us where we are now, but if he was, then it can definitely be argued that his religious beliefs (wacky and backwards as they are) are irrelevant to the proceedings. As we would hope that a non religious person’s would be.
The issue becomes even less black and white, I feel, when you factor in Stein’s involvement with the travesty of a film “Expelled”. There’s an argument to be made for the position that given that that film was an attack on the scientific community, specifically targeting in large part the world of science in higher education and academia, Stein’s involvement in it was a direct insult to education and as such, he has no place speaking at an officially sanctioned event at an institution of learning.
So. I don’t really know what the right answer is. I know that no one should have to suffer through the garbage that Stein spews every time he opens his smug, lying little mouth.
In the end, I think I’m good with Stein no longer speaking at the commencement, because it was not an action taken by the university, and he wasn’t barred from speaking due to any legal action. Were either of those the case, it would, actually, spell bad things for the nature of dissent in this country, and how we deal with it. Which, funnily enough, would help make Stein’s case for him, the one he failed so badly at making in “Expelled”.
Well, that may just be the most ambivalent thing you’ll hear from me in a very, very long time.
February 2, 2009 at 12:14 pm
On a related note, I like the fact that this blog is one where I can have a discussion and not only hear an opposing view, but an opposing view where the reasoning and the logic behind the arguments are explained. I may not agree with you at all about economics, but you made me see the bias in my position on the Israel-Palatine conflict. Reasoned debate is the best way to self-correct and refine your positions, and this blog somehow manages to be intense yet open. So here’s a rare moment of appreciation for you in return.
February 2, 2009 at 1:58 pm
Ben Stein compared scientists to nazis and attacked science for excluding pseudoscientific crap (although of course he didn’t put it quite that way). So I think it’s perfectly justifiable under the circumstances to choose not to have Stein on the premises. I’m rather surprised, in fact, that Stein would even want to set foot in a seat of science and scientific teaching, given his views; was he trying to prove something?
February 2, 2009 at 2:06 pm
The difference is that the scientific community didn’t “bar” him from speaking. They simply made their voices and opinions heard. If someone like Stein can’t take the negative feedback of their own actions, well, screw ‘em. Stein has every right to say what he says about the scientific community. But he also has to deal with the backlash.