This just appeared In The Humanist magazine
As a long-term academic before I retired, I often served on the College of Charleston’s Tenure and Promotion Committee. For faculty who apply for tenure (lifetime appointment), usually in the sixth year of teaching at an institution, the committee looks at the candidate’s vita, teaching evaluations, and letters of recommendations. They make decisions based on research, teaching, and service to the academic community. The committee discusses the candidate and formulates questions. They then hold an extensive interview with the candidate, followed by more deliberations. Finally, the committee makes a recommendation for or against tenure. If the candidate fails to receive tenure, he or she is permitted to teach at the institution for one more year. All these discussions are held in strictest confidence.
Hear is my fantasy, along with a decision.
God is a faculty member who has just applied for tenure. The committee sees on his vita that he lists only one (possibly two) publications. These publications have not gone through the normal process of being refereed by an outside expert. They contain many unsupported scientific claims and incorrect statements. God has also repeatedly violated the “informed consent” standard when performing psychological experiments on human subjects. We illustrate with one particularly egregious example. God gave his subject Job boils from head to toe and killed his children just to see if Job would become disloyal. Job, amazingly, remained loyal to God, which helped God win his little bet with his pal Satan, who understandably thought Job would abandon God because God was responsible for causing such tragedies. God never told Job about his bet with Satan. God was so pleased with the success of his experiment that he restored Job’s health and gave him new children. God claimed that these new children were better than the ones he had killed.
Some members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee were originally supportive of God’s book, believing it to be an interesting work of fiction. After all, there were some well-written and moving passages. God, however, claimed that his book was not fictional. He said the book was historically and scientifically inerrant, much to the amazement of the committee that easily found countless factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies.
God also listed a follow-up publication, which some on the committee attributed to his son. God can’t count as his own publication anything his son or anyone else had written. God then said the second book was also his because he is his own son. When the committee appeared skeptical, God displayed his wrath and said he was also a third person and he (they?) would make sure that all members of the committee would burn in hell for doubting him. At this point, there was some sympathy by the committee for postponing a tenure decision until a psychiatric evaluation could be completed. Unfortunately, God refused to be evaluated for what appeared to be his delusions of grandeur.
God’s teaching credentials are decidedly mixed. While some of his students praise him daily, it appears that they are motivated to do so primarily out of fear. God requires them to follow unquestioningly his many arbitrary and seemingly outdated rules and threatens them with incredibly cruel punishments for disobeying. God’s most devoted students, those few to whom he takes the time to speak directly, claim that fewer than 1% understand his teachings. Even these top students fare no better, frequently contradicting each other and themselves. Is this the sign of a competent teacher? Faculty members are often denied tenure when their students fail to understand the basics of their teachings. And these faculty haven’t been given thousands of years to improve their teaching techniques, either.
Finally, we look at service to the academic community. Service for faculty members is about things like serving on committees, mentoring students, building programs, editing journals, and being on shared governance boards to help improve the institution. God partook in none of these service areas. Further, on the downside, every academic institution contains intolerant and jealous colleagues. Some, like God, think they are perfect and try to lord it over everyone else. But there is no place in a college or university for a faculty member who is so opposed to critical thinking and reasoned debate that he abuses his position of power by continually threatening and intimidating those who refuse to worship the ground he walks on.
For these reasons and more, the Tenure and Promotion Committee votes unanimously to deny tenure to God.
As a long-term academic before I retired, I often served on the College of Charleston’s Tenure and Promotion Committee. For faculty who apply for tenure (lifetime appointment), usually in the sixth year of teaching at an institution, the committee looks at the candidate’s vita, teaching evaluations, and letters of recommendations. They make decisions based on research, teaching, and service to the academic community. The committee discusses the candidate and formulates questions. They then hold an extensive interview with the candidate, followed by more deliberations. Finally, the committee makes a recommendation for or against tenure. If the candidate fails to receive tenure, he or she is permitted to teach at the institution for one more year. All these discussions are held in strictest confidence.
Hear is my fantasy, along with a decision.
God is a faculty member who has just applied for tenure. The committee sees on his vita that he lists only one (possibly two) publications. These publications have not gone through the normal process of being refereed by an outside expert. They contain many unsupported scientific claims and incorrect statements. God has also repeatedly violated the “informed consent” standard when performing psychological experiments on human subjects. We illustrate with one particularly egregious example. God gave his subject Job boils from head to toe and killed his children just to see if Job would become disloyal. Job, amazingly, remained loyal to God, which helped God win his little bet with his pal Satan, who understandably thought Job would abandon God because God was responsible for causing such tragedies. God never told Job about his bet with Satan. God was so pleased with the success of his experiment that he restored Job’s health and gave him new children. God claimed that these new children were better than the ones he had killed.
Some members of the Tenure and Promotion Committee were originally supportive of God’s book, believing it to be an interesting work of fiction. After all, there were some well-written and moving passages. God, however, claimed that his book was not fictional. He said the book was historically and scientifically inerrant, much to the amazement of the committee that easily found countless factual inaccuracies and inconsistencies.
God also listed a follow-up publication, which some on the committee attributed to his son. God can’t count as his own publication anything his son or anyone else had written. God then said the second book was also his because he is his own son. When the committee appeared skeptical, God displayed his wrath and said he was also a third person and he (they?) would make sure that all members of the committee would burn in hell for doubting him. At this point, there was some sympathy by the committee for postponing a tenure decision until a psychiatric evaluation could be completed. Unfortunately, God refused to be evaluated for what appeared to be his delusions of grandeur.
God’s teaching credentials are decidedly mixed. While some of his students praise him daily, it appears that they are motivated to do so primarily out of fear. God requires them to follow unquestioningly his many arbitrary and seemingly outdated rules and threatens them with incredibly cruel punishments for disobeying. God’s most devoted students, those few to whom he takes the time to speak directly, claim that fewer than 1% understand his teachings. Even these top students fare no better, frequently contradicting each other and themselves. Is this the sign of a competent teacher? Faculty members are often denied tenure when their students fail to understand the basics of their teachings. And these faculty haven’t been given thousands of years to improve their teaching techniques, either.
Finally, we look at service to the academic community. Service for faculty members is about things like serving on committees, mentoring students, building programs, editing journals, and being on shared governance boards to help improve the institution. God partook in none of these service areas. Further, on the downside, every academic institution contains intolerant and jealous colleagues. Some, like God, think they are perfect and try to lord it over everyone else. But there is no place in a college or university for a faculty member who is so opposed to critical thinking and reasoned debate that he abuses his position of power by continually threatening and intimidating those who refuse to worship the ground he walks on.
For these reasons and more, the Tenure and Promotion Committee votes unanimously to deny tenure to God.
