On Academic Activism

How To Be Objective When Subjective

D. H. Kang

THE WORLD IS IN A TUMULTUOUS ERA. With Trump poised to perhaps take the next election – someone who has previously expressed his support for Neo-Nazi and white supremacist groups – as well as the rising tide of the far-right in Europe, and imminent issues like climate change and immigration, such heated topics have become the source of debate and protest worldwide. But where does the role of academics lie in these times? Surely they can and should openly express their opinions, right? They’re one of the world’s most trusted people who have spent their entire lives investigating particular subjects and separating fact from fiction, so that the world can gain ground on understanding our lives, society and everything that we know of. But therein lies the problem. Such activists have credibility from the very fact that they remain objective or neutral in any problem. If they do decide to voice their opinions, which they certainly have the right to do, it could put their work and credibility at stake, chipping away all that they have built up in their lives. 

Hence, the vast majority of academics prefer to refrain from commenting on subjects that their research does not concern. I’m not saying that all academic activists have clouded judgements; indeed, it is oftentimes not academics (in the true sense of the word) who become activists. Instead, it is the activists who become academics who can be the problem. It certainly is not an issue for a belief to be grounded in what you research for yourself. For example, voicing conclusions that the earth’s temperature is rising and we should care about climate change. However, twisting facts and searching for scattered details to attempt to piece together a shadow of your beliefs is a dogmatic approach to research. In the words of the legendary detective Sherlock Holmes: “It is a capital mistake to theorise before you have all of the evidence. It biases the judgement.” And this too is a lesson for us: refrain from making conclusions before all the pieces of the puzzle are present before us. Keep an open mind, as the truth is often unexpected. As an audience, we must henceforth beware of what we receive from the media. 

So at the end of the day, where do we draw the line between activism and academic research? There’s honestly no real answer to that question (unfortunately). At the core of this whole topic, it is imperative that we realise that everyone is human, prone to subjective viewpoints and biases developed from a lifetime of experiences and interactions. For those who claim to have no opinions on any of these matters must be called ChatGPT or one of its AI brethren.  There is nothing inherently bad about academic activism, as long as those academics remain open to discourse, dialogue and the changing of opinions when new evidence is presented. We too can learn from how well-regarded academic activists like Charles Milles take their stances.  

Listen, think and reply.