Well, this is a well written and pleasantly contemplative piece describing, I assume, the general purpose of the Harvard Salient, in its new incarnation. It touches on important, albeit somewhat abstract philosophical concepts. I will remain interested to see what comes next from this minority publication at Harvard.
When it comes to impact on the Harvard Community, however, the writers at the Salient will have to do more than wander in a field of daisies contemplating the morality of the philosophers on a sunny summer afternoon, as this piece seems to do.
To impact the world, or even just the Harvard Community, requires a much more significant journalistic effort. Fox News, for example, has succeeded in influencing the world towards more conservative ideas, and it's news coverage is decidedly less contemplative and more practical, not to mention more voluminous than the Harvard Salient.
If this meandering piece somehow helps to lead some deep thinkers in the Harvard Community towards more conservative thinking, that is to the good, but it strikes me as too ethereal to have much impact. In my experience, deep thought is better applied to the physical, chemical, and biological sciences where it can be put to more practical use than it can in politics and philosophy. In retrospect, that is why I chose, back in 1985, to concentrate in Biology as opposed to my other option, which was Government.
In any event, I do applaud the small conservative gains made recently at Harvard, including certain changes in the faculty. Of particular note, I wholeheartedly endorse President Garber's statements about Harvard being an institution of education, not activism. The development of the young mind is better served by objective teaching of all sides of an issue, followed by an opportunity for students to come to their own conclusion(s) and to express them without fear of retribution from activist professors.
Indeed, a highly activist faculty turns Harvard into an institution of indoctrination rather than an institution of education. The faculty activism and intimidation must end, and perhaps this would be a somewhat more tangible and practical issue for the Salient to focus on.
This philosophical babble has caused me to yearn for the previous, and much more relevant Salient. Bring back the former editors, this mealy-mouthed stuff is painfully boring and ineffectual. Booooooo……
"But freedom of discourse is only valuable as a means to achieve moral clarity: an understanding of right and wrong that derives from an individual’s self reflection."
what a load of shit. Freedom of discourse has value in itself. there is no such thing as "only" , "means" , or "to achieve"
A good start. When conservatism abandoned morality, left values dominated public debate. And it was even worse when left started to embrace values without any substance. A generation has been nearly lost.
Conservatives values should go back to basics: family, truth, merit, effort, discipline, generosity, respect...etc. These values are inherent in all human beings. We should avoid ambiguity and defend strong values.
Well, this is a well written and pleasantly contemplative piece describing, I assume, the general purpose of the Harvard Salient, in its new incarnation. It touches on important, albeit somewhat abstract philosophical concepts. I will remain interested to see what comes next from this minority publication at Harvard.
When it comes to impact on the Harvard Community, however, the writers at the Salient will have to do more than wander in a field of daisies contemplating the morality of the philosophers on a sunny summer afternoon, as this piece seems to do.
To impact the world, or even just the Harvard Community, requires a much more significant journalistic effort. Fox News, for example, has succeeded in influencing the world towards more conservative ideas, and it's news coverage is decidedly less contemplative and more practical, not to mention more voluminous than the Harvard Salient.
If this meandering piece somehow helps to lead some deep thinkers in the Harvard Community towards more conservative thinking, that is to the good, but it strikes me as too ethereal to have much impact. In my experience, deep thought is better applied to the physical, chemical, and biological sciences where it can be put to more practical use than it can in politics and philosophy. In retrospect, that is why I chose, back in 1985, to concentrate in Biology as opposed to my other option, which was Government.
In any event, I do applaud the small conservative gains made recently at Harvard, including certain changes in the faculty. Of particular note, I wholeheartedly endorse President Garber's statements about Harvard being an institution of education, not activism. The development of the young mind is better served by objective teaching of all sides of an issue, followed by an opportunity for students to come to their own conclusion(s) and to express them without fear of retribution from activist professors.
Indeed, a highly activist faculty turns Harvard into an institution of indoctrination rather than an institution of education. The faculty activism and intimidation must end, and perhaps this would be a somewhat more tangible and practical issue for the Salient to focus on.
Jonathan L. Gal
AB Biology '89
This philosophical babble has caused me to yearn for the previous, and much more relevant Salient. Bring back the former editors, this mealy-mouthed stuff is painfully boring and ineffectual. Booooooo……
"But freedom of discourse is only valuable as a means to achieve moral clarity: an understanding of right and wrong that derives from an individual’s self reflection."
what a load of shit. Freedom of discourse has value in itself. there is no such thing as "only" , "means" , or "to achieve"
A good start. When conservatism abandoned morality, left values dominated public debate. And it was even worse when left started to embrace values without any substance. A generation has been nearly lost.
Conservatives values should go back to basics: family, truth, merit, effort, discipline, generosity, respect...etc. These values are inherent in all human beings. We should avoid ambiguity and defend strong values.
https://danafharbaugh.substack.com/p/why-does-socialism-require-a-secret
Short answer: because socialism contradicts human nature and economic reality—so it must be enforced when consent runs out.