Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: Apple Podcasts | RSS
Rick Anderson is Associate Dean for Scholarly Resources & Collections in the J. Willard Marriott Library at the University of Utah. Rick Anderson is the author of the article in the Interpreter entitled Mormonism and Intellectual Freedom.
Themes Rick Anderson addresses in the episode:
Discussing some of the critiques that some have regarding the doctrines, practices, and culture of Mormonism as restricting intellectual freedom.
The quest for dovetailing intellectual pursuits in a spiritual or religious context. And the role of scholarship in religious endeavors.
Nick Galieti
Nick Galieti is the host of the Articles of Faith Podcast, The Good Word Podcast, Good Thinking Podcast and records with the Mormon History Guy Show with Russell Stevenson. Nick is the author of Tree of Sacrament and director and producer of the documentaries Picturing Joseph and Murder of the Mormon Prophet.
All posts by Nick Galieti
I enjoyed much of what Rick had to say in this podcast, and think that people do often accuse the LDS church of having less room for thought or differences of belief than it really does, but he seems to have overlooked entirely the key point of academic intellectual freedom.
In the academy, intellectual freedom means the right to actively disagree with pretty much everyone at the institution you belong to and still be protected in your right to belong to that institution. You can teach what you want, and as long as it is legal and you are doing your job you are protected in your job at that institution. You can’t be fired, legally.
Of course this ideal is never met anywhere (nor should it be unbounded), but there are clear ways in which this type of intellectual freedom is violated. The very limit that “you can’t publicly disagree or call for change” is by definition limiting this type of intellectual freedom. Whether that is a moral ill, or is justifiable, is a separate and (I believe) complex topic.
I don’t know that the perception of Mormon anti-intellectualism stems from our dietary restrictions or sexual boundaries more than it has to do with frequent incorrect characterizations of scientific theory (i.e. explosions in a clock factories or monkeys on typewriters). It is far more complicated and beautiful, and when individuals come to appreciate that, it frequently leads to questioning the faith truths which those same leaders taught.
And while it is regretable when outsiders view our choices as idiotic, let us not forget the frequency where we paint those who do live as we do as not only as lacking an understanding of deeper gospel principles, but as being evil.
*we paint those who do *not* live as we do..
Johnathan presents an interesting thought, however, I wonder if we view the word “freedom” differently. I came across a quote from a book by LeGrand L. Baker entitled Joseph and Moroni. While the passage and the text isn’t focused on intellectual freedom, it has a passage, talking about freedom with respect to choice and knowledge that I felt like sharing:
“Freedom to choose can be a reality only when we can distinguish between our choices. If we do not know the source of our ideas, then we cannot know which idea we can trust, because unless we know the source of the ideas from which we may choose, we cannot accurately predict the consequences. If we do not know the consequences, then we are able to exercise no more real freedom of choice than one who is asked to choose when he has been blindfolded. Freedom to guess and freedom to choose are not the same thing. Freedom to guess is being given the right to choose while being denied the criteria upon which one may judge. That is only pretended freedom. It may look like freedomwe may even accept it as freedombut in reality it is a kind of slavery instead.”
When speaking of intellectual freedom, it isn’t so much about freedom of consequence from our acts or the choices we make relating to the consumption and dissemination of that information. To assert that one is not intellectually free based on the idea that we are free from the consequences of that information seems incomplete. Rather I think that intellectual freedom is speaking more to the idea that we are free to learn whatever we want to learn, we are free to do with that information whatever we choose, but we are not free to do whatever we want with that information and not be somewhat culpable for the results of such a choice. One is free to dissent, to question, to doubt, but one is not free to say or do whatever with no such consequence.
This would be akin to saying that my first amendment right to freedom of expression is not free because I can’t yell fire in a crowded building. You still have the right to yell fire in a crowded building, but there must really be a fire (not just something that appears to be smoke) and if there isn’t a fire, you aren’t free to answer for the consequences of what might result of ensuing panic.
So, in order for their to be true intellectual freedom, we do need to study, we do need to learn, but as LeGrand L. Baker also states in his book quoted above, “Because the Holy Ghost can be trusted, his influence and the information he gives increases options, and enhances agency.” When we look at developing a rational faith, the only way to fully embrace that concept is to seek for intellectual freedom through the spirit, not in opposition to it.
It is pretty clear that I was using “intellectual freedom” differently than you used it in your reply. I was pointing out that you were using it in a way that differed from how it is more typically used in the academy, and thus that your arguments were largely orthogonal to the issue of intellectual freedom as many would understand it. That is all. The freedom to question privately and not lose your job is not “intellectual freedom” as used in university policies which claim to protect such freedom.
You appear to be making the argument that LDSs are more free because they are taught to listen to and trust the Holy Ghost than they would be otherwise. I believe that is true insofar as we are really hearing the Holy Ghost and correctly understanding and implementing that knowledge.