OSU Navbar

onCampus Home

The fundamentals of civil conversation

Posted on | June 2, 2010 | 2,772 views |

webcover

By E. Gordon Gee

Editor’s note: President Gordon Gee’s semi-annual address to the faculty in May was part celebration of the excellence of this year’s faculty award-winners and part discussion of Ohio State’s broader potential. He focused in part on the unique opportunity the institution has in fostering civil discourse  and “setting a new cultural standard, committed to civility and to service for the greater good.” The following is excerpted from the speech:

We have to assume a central role in reestablishing civil national discourse. And we have that opportunity because of the strong and growing quality of the university’s intellectual life and our aggressive approach to collaboration.

President Gordon Gee called for a return to civility during his semi-annual address to faculty May 4 at the Ohio Union.

President Gordon Gee called for a return to civility during his semi-annual address to faculty May 4 at the Ohio Union.

The need for a national common conversation has never been more acute. The signs are all around us. The profusion of fractious talk radio and bias disguised as cable news. Costume parties that provide great televised spectacle, but reflect a poor understanding of our country’s history. And national leaders spouting violent metaphors instead of well-reasoned dissent.

The danger in all of this is great: More heat than light, more bite than right.

I want to be clear that I see this as a pervasive problem involving the entire political spectrum. The bilious, the vitriolic and the false choices do nothing but inspire more of the same. Nothing of consequence is said, and no one could be properly heard if it were.  As a result, the frustration and the volume escalate, perpetuating an echo-cycle of sound bytes and cynicism.

Out of that din, we who are engaged in the business of ideas must have the clarity of purpose to understand both our possibilities and our responsibilities. We must be mindful of our public universities’ central role in a democratic nation founded upon the wholly connected ideals of individual accountability, collective action and informed debate.

We cannot sit idly by and bemoan the baleful effects of a society that does not discuss issues of importance. We cannot passively wait for the system to be remade. That is not democracy.

One of our roles as a great public university, set in the middle of this country, is to foster a robust national dialog. In recognizing the great need — and our unique ability to fill it — we can set a new cultural standard and become the most prominent resource for serious, multifaceted discussion.

What I am suggesting is not about sanctimoniously capturing the moral high ground. It is about taking the initiative to create here the epicenter of the nation’s new intellectual infrastructure, one that is committed to civility and to service for the greater good.

As always, the university’s breadth is its signal strength. You possess immense expertise in your own right, and you are connected with people of like talent and wisdom around the globe who could contribute to discussions as well.

Think about the incalculable value of a public forum on immigration that incorporates historic, economic, legal, demographic, business and sociological perspectives. And how might our nation have profited from a real-time symposium on health care that included experts in clinical care, politics, economics, finance, insurance, law, psychology and other pertinent fields?

Assuming national leadership in reviving civil conversation is a nearly Augean task, to be sure.  (and, yes, to my friends in Classics and Greek history: The comparison with Heracles’ fifth and filthy labor is fully intentional).

My point is this: We cannot allow the diatribe and venom to shackle our nation’s progress.  Our university was founded to enlarge individual opportunity, improve our communities and sustain democracy through expanded understanding. Given that starting point, doing nothing is — to my mind — an abdication of our institution’s noble purposes.

At this most important point of inflection, one of our nation’s greatest needs is true dialog. And I would argue that Ohio State is ideally suited to meet that need.

Read it, watch it

The full text and video of the president’s speech May 4 at the Ohio Union can be found at president.osu.edu.

Comments

3 Responses to “The fundamentals of civil conversation”

  1. Gary Stoner
    June 3rd, 2010 @ 9:14 am

    President Gee is right on target! A great speech that, hopefully, will move OSU forward toward restoring civility to the current mess we are in. The task is daunting, but definitely worthy of our efforts.

    Gary Stoner
    Professor Emeritus
    Department of Internal Medicine

  2. E. Riedinger
    June 3rd, 2010 @ 5:04 pm

    I hope, Mr. President, you can take your arguments to the talk show and media pundit programs, and their audiences, who so critically need to hear them. Al-Qaida could hardly imagine a proportion of damage to this country equal to that achieved by Goldman Sachs, Lehman Brothers, Bernie Madoff, GM, AIG, BP, Exxon, Aetna Health, a filibuster Senate…

    Amid an urgent need for an existential examination of the economic, political, social, international, and environmental mores of this country, there is not dialog but an echo-chamber din of verbal slur, simplification, sensationalism, and bullying — an aural terrorism. This din, this brawl of faux dialog, camouflages the very perpetrators of our dilemmas.

    President Obama and TV Commentator Rachel Maddow seem genuinely substantive and reasoning models of dialog. I very much hope you can join them in conveying your message of civility. It is so vital for effectively examining, discussing, and addressing our current crises.

  3. The Foundation of Civility « Leadership Insights–Inciting Leadership
    July 5th, 2010 @ 9:34 am

    [...] part of his semi-annual address to the faculty this spring, President E. Gordon Gee provided a vision for academia in his statement, [...]