If we didn't hate UW-Madison enough already

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

Lol, the comments on this thread are absolutely ridiculous.

[GGGG]

Most engineering curricula have very little room for elective courses.

But that isn't my point. Nor is it that anyone is forced to take such a course.

I am asserting that these types of classes are very thin on legitimate intellectual discourse and discovery. Compare it with a course on Homer, Shakespeare, Augustine, the teachings of Buddha, or Statics and Fluids. A student is much better served with any of those than what this UW course is dishing out.

Hold on.

You are the dude that went on and on about how you were so embarrassed to hang out with your Seattle friends because Marquette rescinded a job offer to Jodi O'Brien.  Have you seen the descriptions of the courses she taught at Seattle University?  Did you compare those with "a course on Homer, Shakespeare, Augustine, the teachings of Buddha, or Statics and Fluids?"  How are those fundamentally different than what UW is teaching here?

[GB Warrior]

My two cents is that this absolutely represents a click bait title, but the discourse and discussion is one that is valid and important to have.

That being said, a university sanctioned course may not be the most ideal place for it. There are any number of forums (like this one) that could be university-supported/protected in which this discussion could be had with equal or greater value to the academic community.

[rocket surgeon]

My two cents is that this absolutely represents a click bait title, but the discourse and discussion is one that is valid and important to have.

That being said, a university sanctioned course may not be the most ideal place for it. There are any number of forums (like this one) that could be university-supported/protected in which this discussion could be had with equal or greater value to the academic community.

ummm...inflation put that at about ten cents worth but good stuff!

[jsglow]

I think the one benefit here is at least confronting something uncomfortable. Very rarely are people willing to speak about their own faults. It's hard to acknowledge one's own prejudices. My wife and I were recently discussing someone we know whose family suspects is battling depression. When my wife asked those family members about it, they said they didn't want to bring it up for fear of embarrassing the individual. I mean, if a person is seriously, clinically depressed, NOT talking about it could be one of those things that in a year, or two years, or ten, you find yourself in a conversation at the person's funeral saying "why didn't we talk to them sooner?"

Things that are hard to talk about, like mental illness, like our personal prejudices, like sexism and racism and homophobia, not talking about them doesn't make those problems go away. If anything, it makes them worse when you are afraid to confront them. I'm not saying this course is the answer, and I think Eng92's suspicion that it will not be taught in an unbiased way is a very realistic concern, but clearly there is a massive divide in our country right now and one of the biggest problems is the people at the furthest ends of both spectrums absolutely refuse to talk to each other about it.

The course title choice is definitely designed to attract attention, but I think it's a viable topic and likely touches on the kind of discussions that we as a society NEED to have in the long run before we destroy ourselves from within.

That's kind of how I see it.  But one must be VERY careful in these types of situations not to let it evolve into something it shouldn't be.  My genuine worry is that many (most) professors choosing to teach it would likely have fringe political beliefs and have trouble avoiding the obvious pitfalls.  We've seen that too much in recent times under the pretense of 'academic freedom'. I'm talking about guys like Ward Churchill, for example.  Dr. O'Brien might not have been a good fit for MU and I personally agreed with Fr. Wild's ultimate decision but I wouldn't put her in that same fringe category.

[muwarrior69]

That's kind of how I see it.  But one must be VERY careful in these types of situations not to let it evolve into something it shouldn't be.  My genuine worry is that many (most) professors choosing to teach it would likely have fringe political beliefs and have trouble avoiding the obvious pitfalls.  We've seen that too much in recent times under the pretense of 'academic freedom'. I'm talking about guys like Ward Churchill, for example.  Dr. O'Brien might not have been a good fit for MU and I personally agreed with Fr. Wild's ultimate decision but I wouldn't put her in that same fringe category.

It's most likely true for the students who would elect to take such a course as well.

[brewcity77]

It's most likely true for the students who would elect to take such a course as well.

In all honesty, the ones most likely to teach it and take it would probably gain the least from it.

[rocket surgeon]

  "My genuine worry is that many (most) professors choosing to teach it would likely have fringe political beliefs and have trouble avoiding the obvious pitfalls."

     very well stated! seriously loved how you "tip-toed" thru the political minefield here
 
  madison just may have found a guy to teach the class for them...as soon as drexel allows him to go free agent, hein'er?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/drexel-university-professor-under-fire-for-white-genocide-tweet/

[forgetful]

I am asserting that these types of classes are very thin on legitimate intellectual discourse and discovery. Compare it with a course on Homer, Shakespeare, Augustine, the teachings of Buddha, or Statics and Fluids. A student is much better served with any of those than what this UW course is dishing out.

Interesting, as someone who has taken classes in most of the areas you list above (including statics/fluids), or worked/published in those fields, I would disagree with you.

The classes you list (with the exception of Statics and Fluids), are all equivalent to the course proposed by the UW professor.  They are all fabulous classes in theory, that can be useless if the professor does not adequately perform their job.  Homer, Augustine, Shakespeare, and Buddha are profoundly interesting, but only if the professor can open up dialogue and let the students learn from each other with direction.  If the professor does not properly integrate those works within the context of the era and motivate discussion, those classes are useless and nothing but a reading exercise. 

Same for the class proposed at UW, except that class is infinitely harder to navigate as it deals with topics that are explosive and controversial. 

In either case, much can be learned by looking at ideals/morality/society in the context of an era and its people. 

The least useful, at least to me, is a course like statics and fluids.  Personally, I'll teach it to myself (and did) and there isn't much a professor can do to make it more meaningful.

[jsglow]

  "My genuine worry is that many (most) professors choosing to teach it would likely have fringe political beliefs and have trouble avoiding the obvious pitfalls."

     very well stated! seriously loved how you "tip-toed" thru the political minefield here
 
  madison just may have found a guy to teach the class for them...as soon as drexel allows him to go free agent, hein'er?

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/drexel-university-professor-under-fire-for-white-genocide-tweet/

I'm actually serious about this statement rocket.  I think it could be an interesting, eye opening discussion and learning experience for all.  I can also easily imagine walking out after 15 minutes when anyone could figure out where it was really going despite all the well worded course descriptions.

[rocket surgeon]

I'm actually serious about this statement rocket.  I think it could be an interesting, eye opening discussion and learning experience for all.  I can also easily imagine walking out after 15 minutes when anyone could figure out where it was really going despite all the well worded course descriptions.

I fully believe you and appreciate your response. I hope my statement did not come across such that I was making light of it. In fact,  au contraire.  To say it is a HOT button issue is like saying the packers are kinda popular in Wisconsin.  There are only a few here on this board who could have said what you said without getting slapped around a little.  I'm glad you took the reigns and walked us into the subject as you did.  As a few have stated here, certain subjects, unless talked about, become misunderstood or misrepresented. 

[muwarrior69]

I fully believe you and appreciate your response. I hope my statement did not come across such that I was making light of it. In fact,  au contraire.  To say it is a HOT button issue is like saying the packers are kinda popular in Wisconsin.  There are only a few here on this board who could have said what you said without getting slapped around a little.  I'm glad you took the reigns and walked us into the subject as you did.  As a few have stated here, certain subjects, unless talked about, become misunderstood or misrepresented.

Please explain to me how this topic can be misunderstood or misrepresented as explained in the course topic.

[MU82]

Viola! The advantage of choice. If students were forced to take the class, the outrage may have a slight basis in fact.

To each his own.

This.

I am far more taken aback by the knee-jerk response of the elected official: BAN IT!

Yes, and let's burn some books while we're at it!!

[Jay Bee]

This.

I am far more taken aback by the knee-jerk response of the elected official: BAN IT!

Yes, and let's burn some books while we're at it!!

So anything goes as far as course offerings? Surely you believe there is some redeeming value to this particular course.

[GGGG]

I am biased, but I generally think it is best for an accredited public university to decide what is best in regards to course offerings and not an elected political body.  And calling for him to be fired is just another step beyond that. 

[Jay Bee]

I am biased, but I generally think it is best for an accredited public university to decide what is best in regards to course offerings and not an elected political body.  And calling for him to be fired is just another step beyond that.

Tax dollars, YES! Opinion, NO!

[GGGG]

I didn't say they didn't have a right to do it.  Just saying that public universities know better how to set its curriculum.  Plus that doesn't address the threatening the job status of the public employee.

[MU82]

So anything goes as far as course offerings? Surely you believe there is some redeeming value to this particular course.

I don't know enough about it to make such a declaration. Neither does the elected official, I'm guessing.

[tower912]

If I was college age at a university that offered it, I would seriously consider taking the class.   

[muwarrior69]

If I was college age at a university that offered it, I would seriously consider taking the class.

What would you gain from taking such a course?

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

What would you gain from taking such a course?

Many things but it can generally be summed up with "a different perspective on race than the one I was raised with."

[tower912]

Another perspective.    When we become locked into a single myopic perspective and don't attempt to look at big issues from different angles, we fail.     Before I go into a fire, as an officer, before I commit resources into a life threatening atmosphere,  I do a 360 of the building, to apply what I have learned about architecture and fire behavior to try to have a better idea of where the fire is, where it has been, and where it is going.    If I don't do that, I put myself and my co-workers at unnecessary risks in an already chaotic situation.   

I try to do that in my life.   I started learning this at MU from the Jesuits.   Trying to see and understand something that I may take for granted or assume I know from different perspectives is how I get better as a person.     

Do I think I would agree with everything presented in this course?   No.    I didn't agree with many of Dr. Wolfe's perspectives in the Poli Sci courses I took from him.    I don't value them less because I sometimes disagreed with the prof.    I do think that to have my point of view challenged, to experience a different blind man's experience of the elephant, to be reminded that my world view is not the only world view, is a good thing.   

Or, to put it another way, why do replay officials at NFL games examine multiple camera angles?

[muwarrior69]

Many things but it can generally be summed up with "a different perspective on race than the one I was raised with."

What perspective would that be?

[muwarrior69]

Another perspective.    When we become locked into a single myopic perspective and don't attempt to look at big issues from different angles, we fail.     Before I go into a fire, as an officer, before I commit resources into a life threatening atmosphere,  I do a 360 of the building, to apply what I have learned about architecture and fire behavior to try to have a better idea of where the fire is, where it has been, and where it is going.    If I don't do that, I put myself and my co-workers at unnecessary risks in an already chaotic situation.   

I try to do that in my life.   I started learning this at MU from the Jesuits.   Trying to see and understand something that I may take for granted or assume I know from different perspectives is how I get better as a person.     

Do I think I would agree with everything presented in this course?   No.    I didn't agree with many of Dr. Wolfe's perspectives in the Poli Sci courses I took from him.    I don't value them less because I sometimes disagreed with the prof.    I do think that to have my point of view challenged, to experience a different blind man's experience of the elephant, to be reminded that my world view is not the only world view, is a good thing.   

Or, to put it another way, why do replay officials at NFL games examine multiple camera angles?

So how can "the problem of whiteness" not be locked into a single myopic perspective?

[tower912]

It is a perspective that is not mine.  To be challenged is to better understand my own perspective.  To be forced to examine things I take for granted is an opportunity for growth. 
Again, why do NFL officials use so many camera angles when reviewing a play?