OPINION Page 4 Saturday, March 31, 1984 The Michigan Daily The myth of all-powerful principles By Barry Witt Every couple of months, the Daily receives a letter from a man in Ohio who claims he is God. He expounds for a page or two on some political issues in hopes that the paper wouldn't possibly reject the chance to print God's opinions. With little reverence for this fellow's work, the editors of this page regularly toss his letters into the trash can, never to see print. Out of curiosity, one Daily staffer several years ago tried to find. something but about this correspondent and discovered that he is a former men- tal patient, who apparently hasn't recovered. The Daily feels no obligation to print the ramblings of a deranged individual, and Mr. God is not the only such person from whom the paper regularly receives mail. Oddly enough, this obscure little story leads me to a more pressing issue on campus - that of military research - and if you'll bear with me for a moment, Lthink you'll see why. According to University President Harold Shapiro, academic freedom is the fundamental issue in the campus debate on military research. At last month's forum on the topic, Shapiro went to great lengths to caution against undue infringements upon academic freedom, though he didn't go so far as to say that respect for such freedom necessarily overrides the possibility of restricting military research. But Shapiro did present a rather narrow view of academic freedom, stressing that the University must be wary of attempts of one group to stifle the work of another. Unfortunately, the president failed to explore very deeply what the notion of freedom means, and I'm left believing that his - and many other's - consideration of the issue is still rather shallow. The problem with Shapiro's analysis is that he considers freedom in absolute terms, rather than with regard to its in- constant nature. Researchers are not free to do ab- solutely anything they wish under anyone's conception of freedom. They are bound, at the very least, by the laws of society, which place any number of restrictions based on propriety. They also are restricted by the resources to which they have access. If they can't find sponsors, they can't af- ford to pursue an interest. In a similar vein, the concept of academic freedom is meaningless to most people - especially to those outside academia. For if you're not an academic, you lack not only financial resources, but also -perhaps intellectual and professional resources as well. A parallel argument could be drawn for First Amendment freedoms. Freedom of speech and of the press means much more to a newspaper columnist than to the man on the street because the writer has greater access to vehicles of expression. Just as many faculty members are fighting to protect academic freedom in the debate on military research, I would be likely to take a strong stand on an issue of press freedom, as it is of extreme importance to me. Which brings me back to the man in Ohio who thinks he is God. I never did mind very much denying this guy space in the newspaper, though I'm undoub- tedly inhibiting his freedom of ex- pression. If the Daily can restrict this person on the grounds that his writing is inap- propriate for publication, then why can't the University restrict certain professors on the grounds that their research is wrong? The faculty mem- bers wouldn't be denied their freedom to do the research they preferred; they just couldn't do it in Ann Arbor. They Freedom, then, can be measured as a function of resources. At the public forum, President Shapiro responded to one question by saying that the military research debate is not a financial mat- ter because few dollars on campus come from the Pentagon in relation to the total volume of research done at the University. But Shapiro fails to see the broader implication that money - as an impor- tant resource - has on freedom. In the particular instance of academic 'Whether it is the federal administration shifting money from one scientific foun- dation into the Pentagon, or the University administration shifting money from one social science department into some technical institute, freedoms are being restricted.' has a certain arbitrary nature about it. Just because a majority of the public - if in fact that's what national policy represents - has established a certain set of priorities at a certain time, does that make those values correct ones for all? In speaking of freedoms, the national agenda rather arbitrarily defines what it will support or won't support. A professor conducting military-related research might not find the funding he needs as available in a country just as democratic as the United States but less interested in national defense. As resources shift - as a matter 'of policy - a researcher's ability to work in a given area can be affected dramatically. Whether it is the federal administration shifting money from one scientific foundation into the Pen- tagon, or the University administration shifting money from one social science department into some technical in- stitute, freedoms are being restricted. Certainly geography professors feel they are less free to do research at the University today than they did three years ago before the department was eliminated. And likewise, the genetics engineer or computer scientist feels more free today than several years ago. Like it or not, external forces will continually have an impact on resear- chers' ability to do their work. The distinction between a researcher who is 'free" to do his work, even though he is prohibited from doing it by a lack of resources, and the researcher who is physically prohibited, regardless of finances, is insignificant. Not only is the net effect the same, but the intent is also. In 1981, President Shapiro and the regents of the University specifically said they wished to limit research' in geography on campus when they axed the department. In 1983, they said they couldn't limit military-related work because it would inhibit academi freedom. In contrast to Shapiro's statement last month that the issue is not finan- cial, rather it appears that when University pocketbooks are at question, academic freedom can be swept aside. Nowadays, when students take over research labs, Shapiro and many others on campus invoke the "principles' of academic freedom" to denounce the ac- tion. Professors have the right to pur- sue their legitimate research interests they say, and no protest should be allowed to prohibit that. But one must imagine that if the faculty on campus were unionized, and they voted to strike over some wage or other issue - "as other faculties have done - criese of academic freedom would not be soun- ded while just about everybody's scholarly activity was shut down. No, research itself is not sacred;and the issues surrounding it tak precedence. If one looks at militar)W- research as a contribution to Athe world's tendency to destruct itself through World War III, a paltry cry of academic freedom hardly rings, as significant. And this, I suppose, brings me back to the fellow in Ohio who says he is God, because I think I'd prefer him these days to some of the politicians who want that role for themselves. Witt, an LSA senior, was th* Daily's 1983 editor-in-chief. could set up their own research shop, or much simpler, go work in a place more sympathetic to their views. I myself feel less "free" to express my views today than I did only a few months ago. As editor of the Daily last year, I had the ability to get in print just about anything I wanted when I wanted it. But now that my term has ended, I'm at the mercy of the new editors to accept my work, or I'm left to standing on a Diag bench screaming my lungs out to get my point across. freedom and military research, money plays a very large role. The primary reason professors on campus can work on military-related projects is that the federal government is willing to pay for it. And the gover- nment is wiling to pay for it because its policy calls for a strong national defen- se. But relying on national policy to define what research will be supported financially and what won't be presents its own problems. National policy itself Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Sinclair FIASTy HARTWU '(R9 COIl/Trl? TE MON PALE SURG&E. WITH A 5TIRRING CHALLENGiE1.. , rVHEfiRC, iTHE QUIGNE!? I Vol. XCIV-No. 144 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 0 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Soime better ADVICE %%( WHElEt THE QUi[CHE! WHRES "EQU1CHt ANYTHING TO MAKE life a bit easier around this time of year is much appreciated. The term drags on, finals approach, and the long lines and short tempers of CRISP are just around the corner. During times like these, partial relief is spelled A-D-V-I- C-E. ADVICE, the Michigan Student Assembly's instructor and course evaluation guide, is published once a term and presents student evaluations of LSA teachers and courses. Last term's ADVICE didn't make anyone's life easier: it arrived after registration had already begun, and published old data rather than more relevant current data. The problems arose largely because of a shift to in- class data collection from student sur- veys in registration lines and a bit of poor planning. This term's effort, while .far from perfect, marks movement toward an extremely valuable student tool. The booklet, time schedule, and course guide arrived simultaneously for the first time in recent memory. The importance of the early arrival cannot be underemphasized - after all, what good is advice if it comes too late. Even those able to register during the coveted first days of CRISP will be able to comfortably plan ahead. The shift to in-class data collection that caused so much difficulty with last term's issue payed off in much more meaningful statistical samples. In- stead of 10 to 20 percent of a class com- pleting the evaluation, this issue routinely provides samples of 90 to 100 percent. ADVICE has succeeded in providing a much more meaningful compilation of data - that is where data is provided. The problem with the latest issues is that some departments have not in- stitutionalized the in-class collection procedure. While 104 courses and sec- tions in the English department are evaluated, only one in art history managed to get reviewed. This is a major difficulty. It is a difficulty, however, that will probablf be solved in subsequent issues as departments implement the evaluation procedure. Another improvement is the addition of "Actual Grade Data" which allows one to measure past performance against the rest of the class, and provides the grade-conscious with the facts about a course's curve. It shouldn't matter, but unfortunately it does. It also makes you wonder about how strenuous a course like "Inter- mediate Tagalog" can be if it's got an average grade point of 3.925. ADVICE is definitely moving in the right direction. All of the data collected is more relevant, there just needs to be more of it. Departments and individual professors need to conscientiously im- plement an evaluative -system that provides such needed and appreciated information. 0 V4F , ' ; , II : T . .......... 1: i 6 LETTERS TO THE DAILY: MSA elections: A complete farce To the Daily: After reading the Daily this morning, I pinched myself to make sure I wasn't dreaming about Guatemala or El Salvador. This year's MSA elections have been a complete farce from beginning to end. "Voting snags mar first day of MSA race" (Daily, March 28). For starters, the election dates were moved up several weeks (unconstitutionally) to "increase voter turnout". This move took many potential candidates by surprise. Campaign violations have been plentiful in the past few weeks. MSA election guidelines ex- plicitly forbid adhesion campaign stickers and the posting of cam- paign materials on glass (i.e., window panes in the Fishbowl). The MSA'selection coordinator, Dave Surovell, was excessively lax about enforcing these rules. I fNnWi hi racial C itwip nnnilin wearing IOU stickers. In my view, this amounts to less than a conspiracy, yet more than an ac- cident. IOU's ties to the current MSA should not have interfered with the election. What most people do not realize is that Surovell gets paid $500 (five-hundred dollars) as, MSA Annual, To the Daily: Each year at this time, another senseless mass slaughter of baby harp seals occurs. Many hunters, mainly from Canada and Nor- way, take their sealing vessels and conduct the search for their innocent victims. Once the hun- ters reach their destiny, they proceed to club the seal pups. The carcasses are then stripped of their pelts; and all in the name of BLOOM COUNTY election director. It is abundantly clear that he has failed in his duty. Regardless of the election results, I think that Surovell should be fired (with no pay) and that a new election should be held in the Fall. I call on any and all members of the student community to protest this invalid, ridiculous election. We deserve, at the very least, a legitimately elected student government. Jonathan Koenig March 2 Koenig was a candidate on the RAP ticket. slaughter of seal pups 'AtN IN tAE NECK- -30T 't4 1 , 60 WVC T© CPR\-WoQW I , --... . -- - '' WkAu. ET TO fashion. Greenpeace, a nationwide organization, is fighting to stop this cruel act. Greenpeace volun- teers from all over the world work around the clock during the yearly hunt, protecting the seal pups from devastation. The magnitude of the hunt has decreased somewhat in recent years, but more work needs to be done. It has been proven that thousands of the seal pelts are not even needed; they are stored in warehouses, unable to be sold or used. Also, many economies n( longer depend on seal furs as their main source of income. So why must the hunt continue? Nancy Hawker March 21 Hawker is volunteer. a Greenpeace by Berke Breathed 50 TW W , OF" THE I M R. PALLAS...YOU (COST YOU1R CLCAM v, &PWA01ci7 Vci C UMC WhiPNe& T rnY rat t FDn,,cr Vnr,,,A