Watching the Class of 2023’s Commencement, I felt grateful, nostalgic, and pensive. Liminal periods implore us to consider our place within the world and the decisions we’ve made at each stage. Speaking before the graduating class, President Eisgruber offered his own commentary, praising the work of political activists for their commitment to Princeton’s motto, “In the Nation’s Service and the Service of Humanity.” He emphasized the importance of freedom of speech to pursue such activism and lauded prior honorary degree recipient Harry Belafonte for his bravery and outspokenness. But Eisgruber’s departing message was misguided for its substantial focus on political activism and its departure from the core purpose of Princeton and universities like it: truth-seeking and the production and dissemination of knowledge. Moreover, though he extolled freedom of speech, he crucially neglected how freedom of speech ought to operate within the University’s mission.
President Eisgruber opened his remarks by commenting on the 2023 honorary degree recipients, telling listening graduates and their loved ones that the University’s “purpose in awarding those degrees is not only to recognize the extraordinary achievements of the recipients, but to offer them to our new graduates as inspiring examples of the many ways that one might live a life of leadership and service to others.” But for all five degree recipients, save one outstanding biologist, the “ways that one might live a life of leadership and service” were almost exclusively focused on political activism, with truth-seeking sidelined in favor of intersectionality.
In the main portion of his remarks, Eisgruber discussed the importance of freedom of speech in accomplishing important social justice goals. Citing the 1964 Supreme Court Case New York Times v. Sullivan, which strengthened freedom of speech and press, Eisgruber fused the value of freedom of speech and equality, framing modern American free speech jurisdiction as historically based in, and a tool for, directly attaining a diverse, equitable, and inclusive society.
Discussing one queer University of Florida student, he lamented that current Florida state “censorship” laws prevent her from feeling “liberation” on campus. Eisgruber urged the Class of 2023 that they: “must stand up and speak up together for the values of free expression and full inclusivity for people of all identities.” In his view, the alleged lack of freedom of speech in Florida was so egregious because it hindered activist pursuits such as inclusivity.
When Eisgruber discussed Florida, he used it as an opportunity to offer encouragement for Princeton graduates eager to embody the University’s motto and devote themselves to being “In the Nation’s Service and the Service of Humanity.” But if “In the Nation’s Service” means political activism alone, could I not obtain it more efficiently through campaign volunteering or serving in the armed forces? Why sacrifice four years of potential activism in exchange for delving into my professors’ rigorous syllabi? To put it bluntly: what is the purpose of a University education?
I consulted Princeton’s Bible: its Rights, Rules, and Responsibilities. This formal contract, binding upon students, faculty, and staff alike, opens with strong words: “The central purposes of a university are the pursuit of truth, the discovery of new knowledge through scholarship and research, the teaching and general development of students, and the transmission of knowledge and learning to society at large.” To attain this ambitious goal, Princeton protects expansive freedom of speech for its university community, giving its members “the broadest possible latitude to speak, write, listen, challenge, and learn.”
Eisgruber’s Commencement remarks were misguided, valuing freedom of speech as useful only insofar as it enables the University to produce activists in service of particular causes. According to our University guidebook, however, that’s not why we’re here, and it’s not why freedom of speech exists here. Freedom of speech at Princeton is only valuable inasmuch as it allows us to accomplish our goals as a university in the pursuit of truth-seeking.
As two fellow Princeton Open Campus Coalition (POCC) members, Myles McKnight and Matthew Wilson, recently argued, our “Service to Humanity” as a Princeton community is through truth-seeking and scholarship, not activism. As McKnight and Wilson correctly noted, “while activism can be an important part of your college experience, your commitment to any cause must never come at the expense of your fidelity to the truth-seeking process.”
Expansive freedom of speech ensures that the winding road to truth is without stumbling blocks. As fallible human beings, we are always moving incrementally, learning and correcting each other in pursuit of truth – with freedom of speech standing as the cornerstone of that pursuit. But when Eisgruber prioritized activism over truth-seeking, he cheapened the resulting activism. Advocating for one’s convictions, while important, can only be as meaningful as the truth on which those convictions are based. Without truth and the Universities that pursue it, activism will forever ring hollow.
(photo courtesy of Princeton Office of Communications)
Copyright © 2024 The Princeton Tory. All rights reserved.