A Take on Freedom of Expression at PEA
By JOSEPH KIM ‘26
In an academic setting such as that of PEA, curiosity, open-mindedness, and open discussion are treasured values we share. As Exonians, we are generally receptive to each other’s thoughts. After all, one of the most cherished Exeter ideals is the culture of Harkness discussions; we are often so accustomed to Harkness discussions that this style of open conversation bleeds into our daily discourse. There is a reason I value this type of open dialogue or group discussion: it allows for productive conversation in which a group can discuss many topics and address each one carefully. Individuals can share their thoughts on a topic and, through agreement and disagreement, happily express themselves and learn from each other. This is especially beneficial in a discussion involving complex, contentious topics such as politics, religion, and philosophy. The most essential precondition for such a discussion is a shared sense of liberty to express one’s thoughts.
Gratefully, it has become common sense—it is addressed in the syllabus of every humanities course. Yet, I’m sure you also understand the hesitance you feel when doubting the utility of your point in an English class; you understand that possibility of judgment that inhibits you from venturing into a taboo topic with a new friend. You know that you and your friend should be open-minded and able to discuss any topic of interest, yet you avoid touchy issues because you fear tension—worse, criticism—that would arise from introducing such a controversial topic. This seems to happen everywhere. Then what is it? Openness in theory but not in practice?
No, not exactly. Being afraid to express a viewpoint on a controversial topic is natural, and it is natural to avoid heated topics when unnecessary. However, we understand the importance of discussing politics and religion, among other equally difficult areas of discussion—that is, to learn. At least from my point of view, it seems that students of PEA are far more devoted and interested in learning about these topics than typical high schoolers. Students often ignore primary school teachers’ advice against discussing politics or religion and venture into the world of disagreement, and we should be grateful for the profound liberty in the PEA environment we have to sound our voices.
Private harkness-style conversations among students and sometimes including teachers are commonplace in PEA. Whether you are interested or not, you stumbled upon one in a dorm common room or spotted a philosophical debate in Elm Dining Hall. One thing you would be certain to note is the higher degree of freedom of expression in a casual conversation than in a classroom. I suspect this difference arises from the pressure to state a thought, even if half-hearted, in a classroom conversation, while casual discussions permit ease in sharing, challenging, and debating ideas. Closed-doors open conversations about contentious topics certainly improve the environment of free expression. Yet, discussions in a classroom are not entirely detached from intellectual inhibition that arises from over-self-consciousness or perceived judgment.
Freedom of expression is more than the ability to express an opinion—it demands freedom to speak and do as one wishes. It would be impossible to expect perfect freedom of expression—that is, a lack of any barrier to expressing one’s thoughts. The number of political clubs on campus, with the termly Dem Club-Pub Club dinners with the Principal, and the general welcoming attitude of religious clubs are testaments to the high degree of liberty in thought in PEA. Although I find delight in the out-of-class intellectual conversations, I often lament the inhibition of thought present more publicly, such as in some class Harkness discussions. That being said, I take pride in the openness of dialogue, of the freedom of expression, whether in accord or in the face of substantial resistance, which seems to be a unique asset of the PEA community.
