Thanks, Nathan. Columbia is under a dark cloud of its own making, The campus was empty and sad when we visited a month ago. The dishonest posturing that passes as leadership has severely damaged the university. The Core Curriculum.was one of the great intellectual experiences of my life. I hope renewed dedication to open inquiry and debate restores the school’s health and reputation.
It's nice to know that these people exist, but this seems like a puff PR piece - no mention of the elephant in the room - Israel. Do any Zionist pro-israel Middle East Studies profs. exist at Columbia? If so, I'd love to hear about them, or any pro-israel instructors. .
There is plenty of reading material about Israel/Gaza views in academia. It’s not hard to find. You can’t ask that every single person writes about that single topic.
Even if that were the case, you have no reason to be asking that every single piece of writing addresses some specific topic and avoids all other topics. Not only are you not an arbiter of what people can write about, but there is no moral imperative that prohibits people from choosing to talk about a topic like the state of intellectualism at Columbia.
This article doesn't prevent someone else from addressing whatever topic you feel a need to be addressed. In fact, there may even be an imperative for this author to choose a different topic, since Israel/Gaza has been fully saturated, and is a waste of his time to pontificate about.
Back to your point, even in your proposition, to say that Columbia University is known for antisemitism and anti-Zionism would be to affirm that Columbia University is primarily known for being Columbia University. It is an institution for education. It is a group of people on pieces of land coming together for a primary purpose of pedagogy, edification, and, yes, intellectualism. So to criticize writing for addressing what you acknowledge as the primary essence is just incoherent and inconsistent. There really is never a time where writing about intellectualism would be inappropriate qua writing about Columbia University.
Thanks, Nathan. Columbia is under a dark cloud of its own making, The campus was empty and sad when we visited a month ago. The dishonest posturing that passes as leadership has severely damaged the university. The Core Curriculum.was one of the great intellectual experiences of my life. I hope renewed dedication to open inquiry and debate restores the school’s health and reputation.
It's nice to know that these people exist, but this seems like a puff PR piece - no mention of the elephant in the room - Israel. Do any Zionist pro-israel Middle East Studies profs. exist at Columbia? If so, I'd love to hear about them, or any pro-israel instructors. .
There is plenty of reading material about Israel/Gaza views in academia. It’s not hard to find. You can’t ask that every single person writes about that single topic.
I can ask that if antisemitism and anti-Zionism are what Columbia U. has been known for since Oct. 7th. Like I said “elephant in the room”.
Even if that were the case, you have no reason to be asking that every single piece of writing addresses some specific topic and avoids all other topics. Not only are you not an arbiter of what people can write about, but there is no moral imperative that prohibits people from choosing to talk about a topic like the state of intellectualism at Columbia.
This article doesn't prevent someone else from addressing whatever topic you feel a need to be addressed. In fact, there may even be an imperative for this author to choose a different topic, since Israel/Gaza has been fully saturated, and is a waste of his time to pontificate about.
Back to your point, even in your proposition, to say that Columbia University is known for antisemitism and anti-Zionism would be to affirm that Columbia University is primarily known for being Columbia University. It is an institution for education. It is a group of people on pieces of land coming together for a primary purpose of pedagogy, edification, and, yes, intellectualism. So to criticize writing for addressing what you acknowledge as the primary essence is just incoherent and inconsistent. There really is never a time where writing about intellectualism would be inappropriate qua writing about Columbia University.