Skip to content
ADVERTISEMENT
Sign In
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
  • More
  • Sections
    • News
    • Advice
    • The Review
  • Topics
    • Data
    • Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion
    • Finance & Operations
    • International
    • Leadership & Governance
    • Teaching & Learning
    • Scholarship & Research
    • Student Success
    • Technology
    • Transitions
    • The Workplace
  • Magazine
    • Current Issue
    • Special Issues
    • Podcast: College Matters from The Chronicle
  • Newsletters
  • Events
    • Virtual Events
    • Chronicle On-The-Road
    • Professional Development
  • Ask Chron
  • Store
    • Featured Products
    • Reports
    • Data
    • Collections
    • Back Issues
  • Jobs
    • Find a Job
    • Post a Job
    • Professional Development
    • Career Resources
    • Virtual Career Fair
    Upcoming Events:
    College Advising
    Serving Higher Ed
    Chronicle Festival 2025
Sign In
Photo illustration of open, angry mouths
Photo illustration by The Chronicle; photos by Getty

The Truth, and Nothing but the Truth?

Academic freedom isn’t just about knowledge, but about expression.

The Review | Opinion
By Amna Khalid and Jeffrey Aaron Snyder February 25, 2022

In his response to our proposal to reorient the telos of higher education from “truth” to “critical inquiry” — a reorientation that we think will broaden the support for academic freedom — the philosopher Michael Veber makes two key claims: First, that truth alone is what the enterprise of higher education is after; and second, that if we give up on truth, we won’t have any other compelling reasons to defend free expression.

We never suggested that truth-seeking be abandoned. We are in favor of a big tent. If you are a faculty member whose work is motivated by the pursuit of truth, you do you.

To continue reading for FREE, please sign in.

Sign In

Or subscribe now to read with unlimited access for as low as $10/month.

Don’t have an account? Sign up now.

A free account provides you access to a limited number of free articles each month, plus newsletters, job postings, salary data, and exclusive store discounts.

Sign Up

In his response to our proposal to reorient the telos of higher education from “truth” to “critical inquiry” — a reorientation that we think will broaden the support for academic freedom — the philosopher Michael Veber makes two key claims: First, that truth alone is what the enterprise of higher education is after; and second, that if we give up on truth, we won’t have any other compelling reasons to defend free expression.

We never suggested that truth-seeking be abandoned. We are in favor of a big tent. If you are a faculty member whose work is motivated by the pursuit of truth, you do you.

Veber, though, is a truth-or-bust guy. Indeed, he thinks it’s “insane” that there are scholars like us — historians, no less — whose work is not trained on truth like a heat-seeking missile.

He alleges that we have discarded truth-seeking because it’s “not cool anymore,” as if a century of rich intellectual debate about what the great meta-historian Peter Novick called, in 1989, the “objectivity question” was nothing more than a passing fad. Professional historians have been skeptical that it’s possible for us to step off our own shadows since the First World War. That’s why history has to be “rewritten in every generation,” as we pose new questions and investigate novel angles in light of our present-day interests and intellectual frameworks.

Veber insists that historians should stick to what really happened. Either Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 or he did not, Veber proclaims. The fact that Hitler invaded Poland in 1939 is one among thousands of different facts that historians draw from to build our knowledge about Nazi Germany. But, as our first-year students are delighted to discover in our classes, history is much more than merely “one damn fact after another.”

The most significant historical questions cannot be reduced to a “true” or “false” trivia format. Regarding World War II and Nazi Germany, here are just a few questions historians continue to grapple with: To what extent was Hitler’s incursion into Poland driven by premeditated expansionist aspirations? Why did so many ordinary people participate in the Holocaust? How did Britain navigate the ethical pitfalls of joining forces with Stalin to forge an alliance against Hitler?

For Veber, truth and knowledge are one and the same; “What are teaching and research,” he asks, “if not efforts to obtain, maintain, and disseminate knowledge and, therefore, truth?”

Keeping in mind that our goal here is to convince more people in higher ed to care about threats to campus free expression and academic freedom, we much prefer the term “knowledge” to “truth.” The latter suggests absolutes, fixed points, and infallibility. The former, in contrast, signals that questions, claims, and findings are dynamic and always subject to revision.

For us, critical inquiry is capacious enough to include truth-seeking and knowledge-production, but extends beyond that to include interpretive and artistic endeavors as well as skill-building and know-how, from parsing an Emily Dickinson poem and playing the role of Macbeth to learning Spanish and mastering the art of welding.

ADVERTISEMENT

“Independent of a desire to get at truth or to get at something that entails truth,” Veber says, “Khalid and Snyder offer no good reason why we should value free speech. And I don’t think they can.”

Beyond the pursuit of truth, there are many good reasons to value free speech, most of which would fall under the general heading of self-expression. In addition to promoting creative projects, viewpoint diversity, and independent thinking, there is intrinsic value to being able to freely share your thoughts and feelings and to express your point of view.

Consider the case of Kimberly Diei, an African American graduate student in pharmacy at the University of Tennessee. Before reversing course when a free-speech advocacy group sent a letter, the University expelled Diei for her “crude” and “sexual” posts on social media, which included a photo of her in a tight dress and some rap lyrics inspired by her love of Cardi B. “UT spied on my social media activity,” Diei said. “I can be a successful and professional pharmacist as well as a strong woman that embraces her sexuality.”

“It’s so important to me to just have my voice,” she explained, “because people that look like me are often told ‘be quiet, stay in the back,’ and that just does not suit my personality.”

ADVERTISEMENT

Here is a quick survey of some noteworthy campus free-speech controversies from the past couple of years:

  • The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill denied Nikole Hannah-Jones tenure, reportedly under pressure from conservative members of the university system’s Board of Governors who objected to Hannah-Jones’s “1619 Project.”
  • The University of Florida blocked faculty members from testifying as expert witnesses in litigation against the state.
  • Collin College summarily dismissed at least four professors, including Michael Phillips for leading a campaign to take down Confederate monuments and suggesting his students wear masks, and L.D. Burnett for mocking former Vice President Mike Pence on Twitter.
  • Several colleges and universities investigated, sanctioned, and/or dismissed faculty members for mentioning the N-word for pedagogical purposes, including Laurie Sheck at the New School, Gary Shank at Duquesne University, and Jason Kilborn at the University of Illinois at Chicago. (The University of Southern California even pulled Greg Patton from his classroom for using a Mandarin word that sounds like the N-word.)
  • MIT’s Department of Earth, Atmospheric, and Planetary Sciences canceled a lecture by the geophysicist Dorian Abbot after a social-media furor erupted surrounding his criticism of campus DEI initiatives.
  • George Washington University removed satirical posters critical of the Chinese government on the grounds that they offended and negatively impacted the Chinese-student community.

Free speech in the name of truth is relevant in some of these cases. But it mostly hovers on the periphery. When Burnett tweeted that Pence should shut up “his little demon mouth” during the vice presidential debate, Collin College penalized her for allegedly violating their core values of “dignity and respect,” calling her post “hateful, vile, and ill-considered.” Whether her statement was “true” or “false” was immaterial. The best defense in cases like these is that students and faculty members have a right to express themselves without fear of punishment for touching on taboo topics or expressing “offensive” political views.

We wrote our original piece to provoke conversation. Veber’s spirited response suggests that this moment is ripe to revisit debates about the university’s telos and the value of academic freedom and free expression.

We welcome your thoughts and questions about this article. Please email the editors or submit a letter for publication.
Tags
Opinion
Share
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Facebook
  • Email
About the Author
Amna Khalid
Amna Khalid is an associate professor of history at Carleton College and host of the podcast Banished.
About the Author
Jeffrey Aaron Snyder
Jeffrey Aaron Snyder is an associate professor in the department of educational studies at Carleton College. He co-hosts the Banished podcast, which focuses on higher education, free expression and the culture wars.
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT

More News

Vector illustration of large open scissors  with several workers in seats dangling by white lines
Iced Out
Duke Administrators Accused of Bypassing Shared-Governance Process in Offering Buyouts
Illustration showing money being funnelled into the top of a microscope.
'A New Era'
Higher-Ed Associations Pitch an Alternative to Trump’s Cap on Research Funding
Illustration showing classical columns of various heights, each turning into a stack of coins
Endowment funds
The Nation’s Wealthiest Small Colleges Just Won a Big Tax Exemption
WASHINGTON, DISTICT OF COLUMBIA, UNITED STATES - 2025/04/14: A Pro-Palestinian demonstrator holding a sign with Release Mahmud Khalil written on it, stands in front of the ICE building while joining in a protest. Pro-Palestinian demonstrators rally in front of the ICE building, demanding freedom for Mahmoud Khalil and all those targeted for speaking out against genocide in Palestine. Protesters demand an end to U.S. complicity and solidarity with the resistance in Gaza. (Photo by Probal Rashid/LightRocket via Getty Images)
Campus Activism
An Anonymous Group’s List of Purported Critics of Israel Helped Steer a U.S. Crackdown on Student Activists

From The Review

John T. Scopes as he stood before the judges stand and was sentenced, July 2025.
The Review | Essay
100 Years Ago, the Scopes Monkey Trial Discovered Academic Freedom
By John K. Wilson
Vector illustration of a suited man with a pair of scissors for a tie and an American flag button on his lapel.
The Review | Opinion
A Damaging Endowment Tax Crosses the Finish Line
By Phillip Levine
University of Virginia President Jim Ryan keeps his emotions in check during a news conference, Monday, Nov. 14, 2022 in Charlottesville. Va. Authorities say three people have been killed and two others were wounded in a shooting at the University of Virginia and a student is in custody. (AP Photo/Steve Helber)
The Review | Opinion
Jim Ryan’s Resignation Is a Warning
By Robert Zaretsky

Upcoming Events

07-31-Turbulent-Workday_assets v2_Plain.png
Keeping Your Institution Moving Forward in Turbulent Times
Ascendium_Housing_Plain.png
What It Really Takes to Serve Students’ Basic Needs: Housing
Lead With Insight
  • Explore Content
    • Latest News
    • Newsletters
    • Letters
    • Free Reports and Guides
    • Professional Development
    • Events
    • Chronicle Store
    • Chronicle Intelligence
    • Jobs in Higher Education
    • Post a Job
  • Know The Chronicle
    • About Us
    • Vision, Mission, Values
    • DEI at The Chronicle
    • Write for Us
    • Work at The Chronicle
    • Our Reporting Process
    • Advertise With Us
    • Brand Studio
    • Accessibility Statement
  • Account and Access
    • Manage Your Account
    • Manage Newsletters
    • Individual Subscriptions
    • Group and Institutional Access
    • Subscription & Account FAQ
  • Get Support
    • Contact Us
    • Reprints & Permissions
    • User Agreement
    • Terms and Conditions
    • Privacy Policy
    • California Privacy Policy
    • Do Not Sell My Personal Information
1255 23rd Street, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20037
© 2025 The Chronicle of Higher Education
The Chronicle of Higher Education is academe’s most trusted resource for independent journalism, career development, and forward-looking intelligence. Our readers lead, teach, learn, and innovate with insights from The Chronicle.
Follow Us
  • twitter
  • instagram
  • youtube
  • facebook
  • linkedin