From University to Multiversity to Monoversity

The complaint was once common, and justified, that the university had become the multiversity. The “uni” of “university” had evaporated; in its place was a gaggle and babble of unconnected disciplines, working from different worldviews. This was a far cry from the days when a theistic, and even Christian, perspective saturated and linked the departments with the conviction “that all branches of knowledge are connected together, because the subject-matter of knowledge is intimately united in itself, as being the acts and the work of the Creator.”¹

Those who have prayed for the return of the university seem to be getting their wish, but their dream has turned out to be a nightmare. A unified institution is reemerging, but this time the core principle is secular. Where respect for the Bible once reigned, indifference or hostility toward Scripture is the rule of the day. And while the contemporary public university may tolerate a few “heretics” (namely orthodox Christians), their voices are largely lost in the vain campus din.

The result is clear: According to The Economist, “Debating chambers are becoming echo chambers. Students hear only one side of the story on everything from abortion (good) to the rise of the West (bad).”² Accordingly, John Fund of The Wall Street Journal suggests that the national debate over media bias may shift to the topic of intellectual bias in the academy, “whose faculties are overwhelmingly liberal.”³ And columnist George Will observes, “American campuses have more insistently proclaimed their commitment to diversity as they have become more intellectually monochrome. They do indeed cultivate diversity—in race, skin color, ethnicity, sexual preference. In everything but thought.”⁴

Even the students have noticed: Columbia University’s student newspaper, The Spectator, recently bemoaned the absence of conservative professors in history, philosophy, and the humanities: “It should be self-evident that a faculty that speaks with unanimity on some of the most divisive issues of the day is not fulfilling its duty. Students across the ideological spectrum must demand that Columbia address this need.”⁵ And as Duke University freshman Stephen Miller told The Chronicle of Higher Education, “Our institutions of higher education have become institutions of indoctrination.”⁶

Shared ideology has generated shared politics. As The Economist put it, “If you loathe political debate, join the faculty of an American university.”⁷ A recent report surveyed six academic associations and discovered these Democrat-to-Republican faculty ratios: Economics, 3 to 1; History, 10 to 1; Philosophy, 14 to 1; Social Science, 7 to 1; Anthropology, 30 to 1; and Sociology, 28 to 1.⁸ And as historian George Marsden reports, the political agenda can be explicit: In 1966, the history department at the prestigious California Institute of Technology stepped back to consider its greater purpose. Unable to unite around a traditional answer, the faculty concluded that their “purpose was to teach the students to vote Democratic.”⁹

David Horowitz has proposed a countervailing Academic Bill of Rights,¹⁰ and it has caught the interest of some state legislatures.¹¹ The document prescribes, “No faculty shall be hired or fired or denied promotion or tenure on the basis of his or her political or religious beliefs,” and, “Exposing students to the spectrum of significant scholarly viewpoints on the subjects examined in their courses is a major responsibility of faculty.” This sounds reasonable enough, but not to the American Association of University Professors. They call it a “grave threat to fundamental principles of academic freedom.”¹² It is actually a grave threat to secular hegemony on campus.

In a pluralistic society, it is too much to hope for a reclamation of a tax-supported theistic university, but Christians and others of good academic conscience may certainly object to the secular monoversity, and call for true diversity of thought, including Christian thought, on campus.

Footnotes: