Defending the Academic Market

In his fifth open letter to the Harvard community, President Bok this week added a new dimension to his view that universities should seldom consider ideological or moral beliefs when making policy and personnel decisions.

The letter, which confronts philosophical issues raised by the recent consideration of Chicago economist Arnold C. Harberger to head the Harvard Institute of International Development (HIID), argues that an individual's ideological views should not bar his appointment to an academic position unless those factors would affect his ability to perform his job.

"In institutions whose overriding purpose is to discover and transmit knowledge it has often seemed best to tolerate unpopular opinions and questionable behavior for the sake of giving the most talented individuals the opportunity to publish and teach," Bok wrote.

Bok argues that if universities resort to ideological or doctrinal tests in making appointment decisions they risk:

* making grievous mistakes by imposing orthodoxies that will not stand up over the course of time;

* losing able teachers and scholars whose views or past behavior are condemned;

* and distorting the appointments process and weakening the University since "acceptable" beliefs could vary as much as the individuals involved in the selection process.

Despite the tension which Bok's announcement of the offer to Harberger earlier this year produced, Faculty members responded favorably to the letter.

"I totally agree with the president. I support him 100 per cent," Orlando Patterson, professor of Sociology and a critic of Harberger, said. "I'm quite sure the president is as concerned about conservative members of the Faculty objecting to Marxist professors as radical members opposing conservatives," he added.

Burton S. Dreben, professor of Philosophy and Dean Rosovsky's special assistant on forming ad hoc tenure committees, also agreed with the views Bok expresses in the letter.

Dreben said the letter is "realistic," adding, "If there's anything at Harvard that could stand the most serious scrutiny, it's this system."