Higher Ground: Truth, Power, and Responsibility

Report from the Heterodox Academy Conference 2025; and a "Four-Point Agenda" for Improving Open Inquiry in Academic Libraries.

Introduction

After ten years, the Heterodox Academy has rapidly matured as a professional association of faculty, academic administrators, donors, and community members dedicated to the success of higher education institutions—but a particular kind of success, one based in academic freedom and the core values of open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement.

But the Heterodox Academy now finds itself at an inflection point, as do other higher ed associations. This challenge involves supporting the historic purposes of colleges in universities: in truth-seeking in scholarship, research, and teaching. Forging a better pathway for colleges and universities means insisting on academic quality, by shedding the corrosive impact of identity politics, groupthink, tribal epistemologies, monocultural demands, political and ideological agendas, and corrupted scholarly practices. All of these developments have caused the public to lose much trust in higher education, and have created divisions within higher ed institutions themselves that cause questions about their core missions.

The Heterodox Academy is now undertaking these challenges while some colleges and universities are, at the same time, facing the assaults of the Trump administration on federally funded grant programs, scientific research, public health research, the enrollment of international students in American universities, the pressures to eliminate any vestige of “DEI” (in a vastly overreaching way), pressures to change curricula, and even pressures on governing boards to remove university Presidents. The accelerating effects of defunding scientific research are especially acute in the loss of promising academic researchers and scientists, many of whom are leaving the United States, migrating to industry, or changing careers. The blatant interference in academic and intellectual freedom, on multiple fronts, from an administration that claims to believe in free speech, is now one of the grotesque and crude ironies in public life in the United States.

With these challenges as backdrop, the Heterodox Academy Conference 2025, held June 23-25 in New York City (Brooklyn), offered ample opportunities for debate, discussion, reflection, connections with colleagues, and opportunities at the grassroots to re-energize and imagine pathways forward in an extraordinarily fraught moment for higher education, and for the civil society and democratic norms that make it possible for higher education institutions to flourish as key knowledge-producing institutions.

In effect, the Heterodoxy Academy is searching for “higher ground,” a new plane of amplified strategy and deeper involvement for all of its members in order to advance the cause of reform and reconnect with a broader public and rebuild trust. Renewing communities of trust, based on the best evidence from the field, and the best thinking and action from all the membership, will be necessary to advance the new Four-Point Agenda for “Open Inquiry U” presented by HxA President John Tomasi at the conference:

1. Commit to Open Inquiry

2. Unleash the Free Exchange of Ideas

3. Insist on Viewpoint Diversity

4. Invest in Constructive Disagreement

In addition, a new scholarship on collective intellectual humility may offer avenues for HxA members to engage in more productive ways on their campuses and to assume greater leadership roles on and beyond them.

Signature Events of “Higher Ground” for HxA

The HxA conference gave participants multiple opportunities to engage with colleagues, with speakers, and with sponsoring organizations who presented materials as exhibitors. Among those organizations were BridgeUSA, FIRE, The American Council for Trustees and Alumni, the Jack Miller Center, the Academic Freedom Alliance, the Institute for Humane Studies, and publishers such as Heresy Press and Liberties Journal.

But the tone-setting event was HxA President John Tomasi’s memorable keynote address on the first day, “Donald Trump, Henry VIII, and the Dissolution of the Monasteries.” Tomasi discussed a recent article by John Carter which recounted Henry VIII’s war on, and destruction of, the monasteries of 16^th Century England—centers of learning, wealth, and privilege which failed to live up to their ideals. The apt parallels with today’s universities loom large in Carter’s article and Tomasi found them striking, but he also pointed out the dissimilarities with today’s universities, which have capacities within themselves for self-reflection and reform—if only universities activate those capacities thoughtfully and strategically. Tomasi concluded his keynote with a call to action to build on those capacities—embodied in HxA’s Four-Point Agenda.

Some of the keynote panel discussions featuring university Presidents, scholars, and “heterodox” conversations were provocative and illuminate some of the key challenges facing university administrators: especially the exchange between Michael Roth of Wesleyan University and Sian Bielock of Dartmouth on how best to respond to the Trump administration’s assault on universities, with their sharp disagreement between Bielock’s advocating a parallel two-track approach of cooperation on some issues, and contestation on others, and Roth’s clear defiance in the face of what he considers an authoritarian power grab to undermine the core purposes, or the very existence, of higher education institutions.

Jeremy Haefner of the University of Denver and Brian Casey of Colgate University spoke of the challenges of the current moment for interacting with a wide range of university constituents to preserve academic freedom, with Haefner offering an optimistic assessment of his institution’s dedication to viewpoint diversity and academic quality through its governing Board, and evidenced in its Center for Free Expression and Pluralism.

Another signature session was the “Heterodox Conversation” between Mark Bauerlein and Steven Brint, on legislative actions taken by the Trump administration that affect academic freedom and open inquiry, with Baurlein espousing a generally Trump-friendly viewpoint on the corrective actions taken by the Trump administration, and Brint presenting a detailed litany of executive orders and other actions that infringe on academic freedom, the defunding of grant programs supporting scientific research, and deportations or other actions against international students who are crucial to intellectual vitality of American higher education and many economic successes of the country at large. Baurlein offered a defense of the corrections taken by the Trump administration and suggested that they will not be long-term. He also offered a robust defense of the humanities disciplines, which have seen long-term declines in enrollments, as a necessary part of renewing and rebalancing colleges and universities.

The final signature panel, on “Duties and Responsibilities of Scholars,” featuring Jerry Coyne, Jennifer Frey, Louis Menand, and John McWhorter, offered a range of perspectives about the practices of scholarship, within, and across, disciplines. Particularly telling with this group was the debate about how “truths” in scholarly life get established and how credibility for disciplines is sustained. As a rigorous empiricist admitting only to truths established about matters in the physical universe through scientific methods, Coyne argued that the troubles of humanities and some social sciences are due to their focus on values or valorized “feelings” that cannot be studied empirically. Frey, McWhorter, and Menand offered counterpointing perspectives about what matters in their disciplines as “truth”, with Frey taking an especially strong line against Coyne’s perspective on only one kind of “truth,” through scientific methods only, against philosophical inquiries of the best thinkers from humanities and other disciplines.

Higher Ground from the Grassroots

Throughout the conference, specific sessions were organized into panels, symposia, and workshops, and many HxA members presented on a wide range of topics with special expertise, knowledge, experience, and perspective. Topics included:

· The leftwing case for core HxA values in the academy

· Sociopolitical biases in medical and mental healthcare

· Data-informed approaches to understanding self-censorship

· Increasing viewpoint diversity and intellectual humility in social work

· Undergraduates’ intellectual journeys and heterodox perspectives

· Student-led initiatives that promote free speech and pluralism

· Differing perspectives on DEI assumptions and practices

· Legal and institutional constraints on academic freedom

· Faculty recruiting and hiring practices

· Diversity of perspective in gatekeeping and peer review

Three members of the Heterodox Libraries group, Ed Remus, Chris Younkin, and one of the current authors, Craig Gibson, presented in different panel sessions during the conference, demonstrating the HxLibraries community’s commitment to the Heterodox Academy and to promoting open inquiry and viewpoint diversity within the library field, and to collaborating with colleagues in higher education.

The impressive range of issues identified for presentation and discussion in these sessions created numerous opportunities for conversations between sessions, and follow up inquiries among participants to stay in touch after returning home—the best kind of outcome for an academic conference.

The Open Inquiry Awards

The superlative work of HxA members was acknowledged at this conference, as at previous conferences, with the Open Inquiry Awards, held at a special dinner event on the opening night of the conference. Award winners are recognized for their contributions in advancing core HxA values of open inquiry, viewpoint diversity, and constructive disagreement through courageous individual or group action, community building, and contributions in teaching and scholarship. This year’s winners were: Joseph Yi (Courage); Anna Krylov (Leadership); Western Michigan University (Community Excellence); Abigail Saguy (Teaching Excellence); and Musa al-Gharbi (Exceptional Scholarship).

Future Directions for HxA and Academic Libraries

The through lines for HxA 2025 can best be expressed as:

· Reforming the academy creatively and generatively, with initiatives undertaken with thought, care, and responsibility;

· Insisting on open inquiry and viewpoint diversity to counter external assaults on core missions of institutions, and the continuing monoculture within;

· Creating and supporting leaders a multiple levels within higher education to advance reform initiatives; and

· Reconnecting with a broader public to restore trust.

The Heterodox Academy’s new Four-Point Agenda for “Open Inquiry U.”, presented by President John Tomasi, is now before the association and it members—with the intention to build on such initiatives as the current Campus and Heterodox Communities, the Center for Academic Pluralism, and engagements with a wide range of other organizations, and thought leaders in academy. While we fully support this Agenda, we were struck by a lack of any mention of the role of academic libraries in furthering its goals, despite its reference to “teaching, research, admissions, campus life, and governance” as exemplifying the academy in “all campus domains.” To address this gap, we would like to propose the following as a sort of “appendix” to the Agenda:

1. Commit to Open Inquiry in Academic Libraries

· Enshrine the role of the academic library in knowledge-seeking as the university’s non-negotiable purpose;

· Establish open inquiry as the foundation for all institutional planning and decision-making as they relate to library services to faculty and students;

· Contribute to a culture of open inquiry within the library as a campus domain;

· Embed the principles of open inquiry in library instruction, research assistance, and collections.

2. Unleash the Free Exchange of Ideas in Academic Libraries

· Ensure that the university library is committed to and a part of a campus-wide commitment to the free exchange of ideas;

· Educate library Deans and administrators, librarians, and library staff about the principles that support free expression on campus, including the difference between speech and conduct, and the academic freedom rights of faculty, librarians, and students;

· Ensure that institutional neutrality regarding contested public issues is reflected in library collections, spaces, and displays; and that library leadership refrains from taking official positions on topics unrelated to the university’s core mission, in order to instead elevate the diverse voices of individual students and faculty;

· Defend the intellectual freedom and autonomy of student and faculty library users;

· Protect the academic freedom rights of librarians in teaching, research, publishing, and public expression.

3. Insist on Viewpoint Diversity in Academic Libraries

· Expand the range of perspectives on campus by ensuring that multiple perspectives on course-relevant topics are included in library collections;

· Support efforts to expand open inquiry in curricula, research agendas, and campus events;

· Eliminate ideological litmus tests for librarians, whether formal or informal;

· Address systemic incentives toward intellectual conformity;

· Reform systems and norms that encourage self-censorship or discourage dissent in the library or on campus;

· Make clear to campus communities that academic librarians share with teaching faculty members the right to act as independent scholars engaged in their own search for truth, regardless of the extent to which that search adheres to any received doctrines or viewpoints held by either their colleagues or the faculty members in the academic departments for which they act as collection liaisons; and that, just as the scholarship and extramural speech of teaching faculty are explicitly understood not to represent the positions of their respective academic departments, so too should those of academic librarians not be presumed to represent the views of the institution’s libraries.

4. Invest in Constructive Disagreement in Academic Libraries

· Model scholarly virtues in all professional contexts;

· Encourage curiosity, humility, evidence-based reasoning, and charitable engagement between library workers, students, and teaching faculty;

· Make the ability to engage in constructive disagreement a core professional skill in librarianship;

· Incorporate structured disagreement into library events, classrooms, research collaborations, and campus life—through co-teaching, public debates, and adversarial inquiry;

· Explain the value of pluralism in the library setting;

· Educate library Deans, administrators, librarians and library staff about the role of heterodox thinking in the expansion of human understanding—past, present, and future.

Conclusion

One of the great strengths of the Heterodox Academy, and of its conferences, is the grassroots leadership, energy, and vision, and the collective learning made possible through this association. This energy is interdisciplinary, multi-perspective, viewpoint-diverse, and capitalizes on the open-mindedness and curiosity of its members. Role-modeling the scholarly virtues, along with basic norms of charitable listening and exchange of ideas, was evident through this conference—and the same combination of humane attributes runs through all HxA events and interactions. Strongly held views are sometimes, even often, expressed, but in the spirit of learning which should be an aspiration for all members of the academy at their best.

These scholarly virtues and practical imaginations of HxA members can be a powerful lever for change on their campuses, through Campus and Heterodox Communities, participation in the growing panoply of HxA virtual events, contributions to the journal Inquisitive, or many informal discussions and conversations among members.

The Heterodox Librarians’ community within HxA offers an elaborated response to the Four-Point Agenda above to extend its possibilities, because we believe that librarians are partners and essential colleagues in the academic enterprise—in teaching, scholarship, service, and community engagement. We believe that our programs and services, and the talents of our staffs, can be a force-multiplier in creating intellectual pluralism and scholarly virtues in all of our campus communities. Our dedication to principles of neutrality and openness to the widest range of perspectives in our collections and programming, as well as upholding the academy’s epistemic norms, are our foundation stones. We believe they are necessary to preserving liberal democracy itself in fraught and uncertain times.

At a time when new and disconcerting threats arise almost daily against the nation’s colleges and universities, as well as its civil society institutions in general--through what Jonathan Rauch calls “epistemic authoritarianism”—the demand for conformity, groupthink, and obedience—the Heterodox Academy and its conferences offer a compelling alternative in civility, spirited discussion, and a reimagined future. That future will involve correcting their own “epistemic authoritarianism”, whether created by scholar-activists, overweening bureaucracies, or a climate of peer pressure that chills freedom of thought and expression. Reforms need to come, led by senior leaders on campuses, as well as faculty in their scholarly roles. Only those reforms will have staying power—not the mandated reforms imposed by the current federal administration, which are often at odds with the prospects for a healthy and humane future for colleges and universities in their contributions to a flourishing society of citizens who need to trust their higher education institutions again.

The Heterodox Academy is moving onto “higher ground” with its new Four-Point Agenda, its energetic and thoughtful members and leaders, and its clearly charted path toward open inquiry, between the illiberal forces of Right and Left. Geoffrey Kabaservice of the Niskanen Center describes the challenges now for all of higher education:

Tendentious and illiberal ideology, whether it comes from the left or right, corrodes the independence of mind that is essential for teaching and learning. The universities allowed themselves to drift so far to the left that they all but invited a counter-revolution from the right. The Trump administration’s assault is unlikely to produce anything but destruction, but this perilous moment has given both the universities and the new civics and classical learning centers an opportunity to demonstrate the kind of reform that can win back some measure of public trust in higher education. Let’s hope that they don’t squander their chance.

---

To promote viewpoint diversity, Heterodoxy in the Stacks invites constructive dissent and disagreement in the form of guest posts. While articles published on Heterodoxy in the Stacks are not peer- or editorially-reviewed, all posts must model the HxA Way. Content is attributed to the individual contributor(s).

To submit an article for Heterodoxy in the Stacks, send an email with the article title, author name, and article document to hxlibsstack@gmail.com. Unless otherwise requested, the commenting feature will be on. Thank you for joining the conversation!