Letters: Why ‘Harm’ Can’t Anchor a University’s Mission - The Chronicle of Higher Education

In a recent discussion published in The Chronicle of Higher Education, a series of letters argue against the idea that "harm" should serve as a foundational principle for a university's mission. The letters emphasize that defining a university's purpose solely through the lens of harm could lead to a restrictive and detrimental approach to education and intellectual discourse. The contributors express concern that prioritizing harm may stifle academic freedom and the pursuit of knowledge, which are essential to the mission of higher education institutions. The letters highlight the importance of fostering an environment where diverse ideas can be explored, even those that may be uncomfortable or controversial. The authors contend that universities should not shy away from challenging discussions or the exploration of complex topics, as this is integral to the educational experience. They argue that the mission of a university should encompass the promotion of critical thinking, open dialogue, and the development of well-rounded individuals capable of engaging with a variety of perspectives. Furthermore, the contributors assert that the focus on harm could lead to an overly cautious atmosphere, where students and faculty may feel constrained in their ability to express themselves freely. They advocate for a broader understanding of a university's role, one that embraces the complexities of human experience and encourages resilience in the face of differing viewpoints. The letters collectively call for a reaffirmation of the core values of higher education, which include inquiry, debate, and the pursuit of truth.