Biblical Hebrew Forum

[George F Somsel <gfsomsel AT juno.com>]

On Mon, 05 Sep 2005 14:46:29 -0500 "Karl Randolph" <kwrandolph AT email.com>
writes:
> George:
> 
> While I don't have experience with Hebrew as 
> taught in public universities, I have seen 
> documented cases of viewpoint discrimination 
> in other fields, thus it does not surprise 
> me that it may happen in Hebrew at a 
> particular university.
> 
> In particular, it has been well documented 
> that people in the life sciences are often 
> discriminated against if they do not believe 
> in evolution. A few years ago, a professor 
> at Texas Tech University, teaching a class 
> that was a prerequisite for medical school, 
> bluntly told his students that if they did 
> not believe in evolution, they would receive 
> a failing grade, no matter how well they did 
> academically in the course. That was one of 
> the rare cases where a lawsuit succeeded in 
> granting relief. Another case where a legal 
> action failed was where a professor was 
> fired for not believing in evolution, and 
> that was the reason given for his firing, 
> even though he was given superior marks for 
> his teaching and research. However, most of 
> the discrimination is far more subtle, more 
> along the lines of innuendo and "not up to 
> standards", or other such weasel words. 
> While undergrads can often, though not 
> always,  answer "You teach that..." or 
> something similar, to show their familiarity 
> with what is taught without compromising 
> their beliefs, such anonymity is harder to 
> maintain in grad school.
> 
> Now back to Hebrew, it is unavoidable that 
> we will be influenced by our philosophical 
> presuppositions as we study the language. 
> That is why I have been up front where I 
> come from, while trying to avoid preaching 
> or proselytism (I figure that by the time 
> anyone who has achieved expertise to hold 
> his own in discussions in this forum, he has 
> already heard all the preaching/proselytism 
> m all points of view, so why waste the 
> bandwidth?). I have a far different view on 
> the historical development of the language 
> than one who holds to the Documentary 
> Hypothesis, and unless and until source 
> documents are found that can substantiate 
> either view, we must admit that both views 
> are not historically demonstrable. Likewise, 
> as Peter Kirk mentioned, where there is a 
> questionable reading, I will tend to come 
> down on the reading that is consistent with 
> my presuppositions, understanding word 
> definitions even grammar to be in line 
> thereto.
> 
> I don't know James Read's situation, in fact 
> he may have exacerbated his situation by 
> being outspoken, though he may have run into 
> professors like the one from Texas Tech. 
> Without knowing more details, I accept his 
> claim that he believed that he was being 
> coerced to change his beliefs in order to 
> graduate.
> 
> Karl W. Randolph.
___________

What you have cited as "well documented" is fairly obviously isolated
anecdotal information to which I could, if I were so inclined, respond
with equally isolated anecdotal information indicating precisely the
opposite.  I am unconvinced that there is any position maintained by a
major university such as St. Andrews which requires one to compromise his
principles.  Unless James Read can supply something other than nebulous
claims that this has occurred in his case, I must believe that his claims
are pure "baloney" being used as an excuse for either his unwillingness
to study the required material or his inability to master that material. 
We could undoubtedly continue this discussion with claims and
counterclaims for 20 or more iterations, but I am not Peter Kirk and have
no intention to carry any discussion which seems bound to be fruitless to
such an extreme.

george
gfsomsel
___________