Reply to The party of free expression has banned the teaching Plato at Texas A&M

Forum Index » Political Discussion

Reply to "The party of free expression has banned the teaching Plato at Texas A&M"

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]Insane. Unimaginable.[/quote]

Let's find out from the philosophy department what their rationale is, and let's also find out what exactly was being taight. But I suspect you don't want to, do you?[/quote]

The article has the syllabus and it states specifically what was being taught: Plato, excerpts from Symposium: 180c –185c, 189c –193d, 210a –212b.  https://www.platonicfoundation.org/translation/symposium/

The Platonic Foundation translations mean that the text follows Plato’s original structure, marked by Stephanus numbers (e.g., 180c, 189c, 210a). Each claim is tied to specific passages, not blended across speeches. Ideas are presented in the order Plato gives them, even when they repeat or develop slowly. Language tends to be literal and philosophical, preserving ambiguity and nuance.

These excerpts from Plato’s Symposium represent three of the most famous speeches in the dialogue, each offering a distinct theory on the nature and purpose of Love (Eros). The excerpt that is most likely controversial is most likely 180-185C.

Pausanias: The Dual Nature of Love (180c–185c)
Pausanias argues that Love is not a single entity but is split into two types, Common Love ( purely physical, directed toward both women and men, and values the body over the mind) and Heavenly Love (the relationship between an older man and a youth, provided it is based on virtue). He argues that this love is honorable only when the older lover seeks to improve the younger's character and wisdom, and the younger seeks to learn.[/quote]

Once again, let's wait and see what the philosophy department's rationale is before being hysterical. I'm not connecting dots and getting political without hearing the whole story. I have read Plato's Republic several times so that's why I'm curious. [/quote]

No one is getting "hysterical".  :roll:

The philosophy dept isn't behind this change. It's being driven from above for political purposes, not academic.

A&M Board of Regents: "According to the revised text, “no system academic course will advocate race or gender ideology, or topics related to sexual orientation or gender identity,” with a narrow exception for certain non-core curriculum or graduate courses. Those exempted course materials must first be reviewed, show that they serve a “necessary educational purpose” and be approved in writing by the campus president."

https://www.texastribune.org/2026/01/07/texas-am-race-gender-courses/
"Professor Martin Peterson submitted his syllabus for PHIL 111, Contemporary Moral Issues, for review Dec. 22. On Tuesday, his department head told him he had two options: remove the modules on race ideology and gender ideology, including readings from Plato, or be reassigned to teach a noncore philosophy course. The email, obtained by the Tribune, gave Peterson until the close of business Wednesday to decide."

The course content clearly violated the regents' politically-motivated guidance.

Read for yourself. Here is the guidance: 
https://www.texastribune.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/12/08-01-Exhibit-ADOPTED-VERSION.pdf

[/quote]

" Conducting trainings, programs, or activities about race, color, ethnicity, gender identity,
or sexual orientation, other than those expressly authorized by OGC in accordance with
state law."

TAMU classes are forbidden from mentioning heterosexual marriage!
[/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics