On the Ethical Responsibilities of a University--
Universities are designed to achieve particular purposes. Their special mission is the discovery and transmission of knowledge...their institutional goal is not to reform society in specific ways. Universities have neither the competence to administer foreign policy, set our social and economic priorities, enforce standards of conduct in the society, or carry out other social functions apart from learning and discovery...
...Learning and suffering are plainly matters of grave concern. We may justly feel impelled to give our time and effort as individuals to the struggle against these evils. We may also expect the University not to act deliberately to increase the suffering of others. But the principal issue before is whether we should go further and use the University as a means of expressing moral disapproval or as a weapon in our fight against injustice even if we threaten to injure the academic functions of the institution. --Open Letter, March 9, 1979
On Academic Freedom--
In recent weeks, we have witnessed an active debate over a candidate proposed as Professor of Economics and Director of the Harvard Institute for International Development IIIID)... Despite the opposition. I have supported the search committee's decision that its candidate was the person best qualified for the position. Nevertheless, the candidate has informed us that he cannot accept our occer for reasons unrelated to the recent controversy. Thus. the relevant issue for Harvard now is not whether his behavior was morally right or wrong or whether his economic views were correct or not but whether such economic, political, and moral judgments are ever appropriate matters to consider in making an appointment of this kind... In principle, almost all universities have come to oppose efforts to apply such...judgments to decisions involving academic employment... To put the point affirmatively, academic institutions are dedicated to the discovery and transmission of knowledge and are committed to the view that suchj efforts will proceed best in an atmosphere of intellectual freedom where teachers and scholars need not fear that their careers will be endangered by embracing controversial opinions or ideas...
By now...most thinking people recognize that a university does not necessarily endorse the views or the behavior or its professors and that any academic institution dedicated to freedom of thought will include faculty members whose opinions seem unwise or irresponsible even to its own administration and trustees. --Open Letter. April 11, 1980
On Accepting Gifts
All universities depend heavily on donations--from individuals, foundations, corporations, and even governments. Such gifts rarely present a moral problem. But disputes occasionally airse, either because donors seek to achieve improper objectives through their gifts or because they have previously acted in ways that seem reprehensible. Although such controversies have occurred over many decades, little effort has been made to consider the subject with care....
In one group of cases, however, the lines have become reasonably clear. This category consists of situations in which donors seek to attach conditions to their gifts that invade what Justice Frankfurter once termed the "four essential freedoms of the university"--"to determine for itself on academic grounds who may teach, what may be taught, how it shall be taught, and who may be admitted to study."
...In and of itself, the act of accepting a donation does not imply an endorsement of the views or actions of the benefactor. --Open Letter, May 4, 1979
On Boycotts
A number of student groups have urged the University in the past five years to stop buying goods from firms embroiled in public controversies--Gallo Wines, J.P. Stevens, and the Nestle Corporation among others.
Several objections can be made against refusing to buy from firms on social or ethical grounds. Because of the infinite variety of corporation activities and practices, it would be difficult to develop consistent standards to determine when a company's behavior was sufficiently objectionable to merit this treatment. Such an effort would also raise extremely difficult and divisive questions. If an university health service purchases abortion services from a neighboring clinic, some people may claim that it is subsidizing murder while others will insist that the practice is legitimate, and perhaps even obligatory...
If universities claim the right to pressure others to do what they believe is morally right, we must acknowledge that all sorts of organizations and groups may likewise feel impelled to turn the screw in behalf of standards that they consider to be important and just... The risk of abuse is so great that it seems wiser for private organizations to leave to public agencies the task of imposing standards of corporate behavior. For all its impertections,' the government is at least responsible to the voters and subject to the procedural requirements and all the other safeguards that our constitutional system provides. --Open letter. May 18, 1979
On Curriculum Reforms--
There is wide agreement today that the General Education program lacks a clear sense of purpose and permits students to sample from too large and varied an assortment of courses... To remedy this problem, faculty committees have urged that the General Education program be replaced by a core curriculum... Some critics may attack the core curriculum for restricting freedom of choice. In discussions both in Cambridge and around the country. I have found a noticeable difference of opinion on this issue. Undergraduates often argue that they should have the right to choose for themselves and that no single set of requirements can fit the needs of such a diverse group of students. Parents and alumni are more likely to feel that students lack the experience to assume full responsibility for selecting their course of study and that the College should take steps to insure that they are exposed to subjects of fundamental importance. This is a perennial debate, and the proposal strikes a judicious balance. Although the new curriculum provides more structure than the existing General Education program, the core itself will take up only a quarter of the entire undergraduate program, and students will be free to choose among several courses in each required category. --Annual report for 1976-77, March 17, 1978