Dr Jakub Łakomy
University of Wrocław
English abstract: Today, academic freedom is increasingly contested amid intensifying culture wars and political polarisation, both within and beyond university walls. Traditional liberal and critical defences of academic freedom—grounded in universal rights, public good, or transformative critique – appear conceptually fragile and normatively overstretched. This paper reconstructs and critically evaluates Stanley Fish’s deflationary and professionalist conception of academic freedom, as developed in Versions of Academic Freedom. Drawing on Fish’s neopragmatist and anti-foundationalist framework, the paper argues that academic freedom cannot be defended by appealing to abstract ideals or external social functions, but only by reference to the immanent logic of disciplinary practice. Fish’s model posits that academic freedom is the limited freedom to perform professional tasks – teaching and research – according to internal standards of scholarly rigour, not a licence for personal expression or political activism. While his approach offers a coherent and context-sensitive alternative to foundationalist accounts, the paper argues that it is insufficient to address the ethical and political challenges of contemporary academia. The paper proposes that defending academic freedom today requires both Fish’s realism about professional constraints and a critical awareness of the political forces shaping knowledge production – an uncomfortable balancing act on the tightrope of post-foundational thought.
Keywords: academic freedom, professionalism, neopragmatism.
Language: English
Published: Number 2(43)/2025, pp. 136-153.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36280/AFPiFS.2025.2.136
Download: Download
Number of downloads: 100
This text is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.