Learning How to Speak

In the college philosophy courses I teach, students are encouraged, if not expected, to participate in discussions. Lectures are conversations, not dictates, and questions, problems, confusions and objections are always welcomed. This method of pedagogy requires organizational vigilance on my part so that we stay on topic, and also openness on the part of the students to critically evaluate their own ideas. On the best of days, discussion is like a bronco ride. The worst days feel to me like pulling teeth, and the result is that I have no idea how things are going for the class. This latter problem is important, for it reveals at least two things about free speech in the form of discussion.

First, when a public body is silent, there is no telling what and how its members are thinking. People tend to be silent when, among other things, they believe their ideas are not taken seriously, when they are precluded from participating in public discourse, or they do not know how to present their ideas and may not be clear about what they think in the first place.

Through the process of articulating their views and their confusions, students learn how to organize and present their thoughts. More often than not, they realize that they’re not sure how to express what they mean, and find themselves running into the contradictions of incoherent thinking. They also learn that discussion among the group requires each member to work hard to understand and be understood. There are some who love to speak and actively try to sort out what they’re thinking, and others who speak rarely, but when they do, work to speak well. This dimension of learning is all-too-often a skill unrealized, and many students prefer to make like baby chicks and have material that has been digested by their professor merely regurgitated in an easy to absorb format. Though the path of learning with discussion is arduous and painful, if neglected, it will grow over with the weeds of one-sided and stunted thinking. Students certainly don’t have models of discussion in their everyday lives, so this difficulty in class is not surprising.

One need only look to the fare on various media outlets to see how little actual discourse there is. What passes for discourse, be it on television or radio "talk" shows, on campuses when visitors come to speak, or in public protest, is mere shouting. Sometimes people take turns shouting at each other, or they simply shout simultaneously, sounding more like stuck pigs than thoughtful conversationalists. The result, in either case, is the same: people remain entrenched in their opinions.

Moreover, college students are not prepared to engage in dialogue. Elementary and high school curricula by and large do not engage in thinking that is philosophical (the majority of my students never read any philosophy before college) and are practiced only in taking notes later to be memorized. There is much debate in this country about "putting education first," but no real debate about what it means to be educated.

Finally, taking people seriously is difficult. This is partly the case because people often don’t know what they’re saying, and partly because we’re no longer used to taking each other seriously. Instead, we pretend to listen until the other person stops shouting, and then we open up our own floodgates of vitriol.

Even political texts are exercises in WWF-style rhetoric. Everyone from Bill O’Reilly to Ann Coulter to Al Franken seem less concerned about examining their ideas than presenting stone tablets of quasi-political ad hominem attacks. People who are practiced at discussion won’t stand for such spectacularly unproductive displays. I can only hope students I meet throughout my career find themselves willing to practice with me, and won’t be already inured to the real joys of free speech.