Martin Peterson, a very prominent philosopher at Texas A&M (an expert in decision theory and cognate topics), is slated to teach “Contemporary Moral Issues,” a standard undergraduate course. Here is his syllabus:

Texas A&M, engaging in a kind of anticipatory obedience in response to laws enacted by the Texas Taliban in the legislature and executive orders by the Governor, came up with rules that guaranteed there would be a massive violation of the academic freedom rights of faculty. And, indeed, there has been. Professor Peterson kindly shared the response to the syllabus from his Chair, philosopher Kristi Sweet:

Greetings Dr. Peterson, 

Thank you for your email. The College leadership team and I have discussed your syllabus and the Provost office’s requirements for compliance with the new system rule 08.01. You have two options going forward:

1. You may mitigate your course content to remove the modules on race ideology and gender ideology, and the Plato readings that may include these. 
2. You may be reassigned to teach PHIL 482 501-514. Lecture times for this course are T/Th 8:00 – 9:15. 
3. Please let us know by end of business tomorrow how you would like to proceed. 

“Mitigate” your course content? Professor Sweet will not get any awards for “profiles in courage,” but I have no doubt she is responding to orders from above by other academic cowards.

Here is what Professor Peterson wrote when he submitted his syllabus:

Dear Dr. Sweet,

I hereby submit my S 2026 syllabus for PHIL 111, Contemporary Moral Issues, for mandatory censorship review.

The syllabus has not changed much since I last taught the course. I have made some minor adjustments to the module on Race and Gender Ideology and to the lecture on Sexual Morality. These topics are commonly covered in this type of course nationwide, and the material is discussed in depth in the assigned textbook (Fiala and MacKinnon, 10th edition). I also ask my students to read a few passages from Plato (Aristophanes’ myth of the split humans and Diotima’s Ladder of Love).

Please note that my course does not “advocate” any ideology; I teach students how to structure and evaluate arguments commonly raised in discussions of contemporary moral issues.

Professor Peterson also pointed out, correctly I should add, that any restrictions on his syllabus would violate both academic freedom and the First Amendment.

FIRE and AFA readers: this case is coming your way. Kudos to Professor Peterson for standing firm.