UvA-rector: “Academic freedom requires the courage to doubt”
Demonstrating is a great thing at universities, UvA Rector Peter-Paul Verbeek stated in his Academy Lecture at the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences (KNAW). But as soon as demands are made without the possibility of discussion, academic freedom is lost.
In the past, academic freedom was always about “distant foreign countries where scientists are oppressed,” said Verbeek at the beginning of his lecture Tuesday afternoon at the annual Academy Lecture of the KNAW, the Royal Netherlands Academy of Arts and Sciences. “This image has changed signifantly in recent years.”
Verbeek chaired a committee that examined academic freedom for the KNAW in 2021. In his Academy Lecture, the philosopher and rector magnificus of the University of Amsterdam (UvA) pointed out new challenges. With all the discussions about “wokeness,” knowledge security, and climate activism, there is suddenly every reason to rethink academic freedom and its meaning in our own country as well.
Climate activism
Many universities and colleges have been occupied in recent months by action groups demanding that universities sever all ties with the fossil industry, particularly Shell. Universities, according to Verbeek, are faced with a difficult question: Should they indeed curtail academic freedom for ethical reasons, or is it unethical in this case to curtail the academic freedom of scientists who want to work with the fossil industry on sustainable energy?
Verbeek's main point is that academic freedom presupposes the courage to doubt. “Demonstrating is part of driving that doubt and is therefore a great asset of universities. But demonstrations themselves must also respect room for doubt. As soon as demonstrations turn into demands on a university with no possibility of discussion, academic freedom is lost.”
“Wokeness”
Academic freedom thus requires that the scientist not impose his own scientific or moral rightness on others but be willing to participate in debate at all times. The university must facilitate space for scientists to doubt and establish ethics committees to ensure the free exchange of knowledge.
For those who fiercely engage in the discussion around “wokeness” (“for some, a movement for ‘equality and justice,’ for others, ‘an exaggerated focus on gender and ethnicity’”), the same applies, according to Verbeek. “Holding on to unshakable truths does not help.”
Knowledge security
The third challenge Verbeek mentioned is the growing concern about knowledge security, causing scientists to no longer feel free to work with just anyone.
KNAW president and biophysicist Marileen Dogterom shared this concern in her annual address. According to her, open science - the ideal of scientific knowledge being accessible to all - and protecting knowledge are at odds.
She welcomes government initiatives such as the knowledge security desk that help scientists make the right trade-offs when engaging in international cooperation. But she is less positive about the prospect of having to review cooperation with scientists outside the EU for a large number of research areas. “Especially if the goal seems to be to protect not just national security but also our economic interests.”
Indeed, Dogterom does not believe in the latter. “We can only remain at the forefront of science and thus technology if we share knowledge and facilitate the exchange of scientists, including outside the EU. This is what has made Dutch science and innovation power strong in the past. There is no reason to believe that it will not work that way in the future as well.”
