Slashdot Mirror


MIT Removes Online Physics Lectures and Courses By Walter Lewin

jIyajbe writes MIT is indefinitely removing retired physics faculty member Walter Lewin's online lectures from MIT OpenCourseWare and online MITx courses from edX, the online learning platform co-founded by MIT, following a determination that Dr. Lewin engaged in online sexual harassment in violation of MIT policies. For an example of Lewin's colorful style, see this YouTube video. MIT has also revoked Lewin's title as professor emeritus, after the school determined that he "had sexually harassed at least one student online."

45 of 416 comments (clear)

  1. Just wondering... by Frosty+Piss · · Score: 5, Insightful

    What does the professor's "on-line harassment" have to do with the quality and / or value of his lectures?

    --
    If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
    1. Re:Just wondering... by idontgno · · Score: 5, Insightful

      He isn't an unperson until all his work goes into the memory hole. That is doubleplusungood.

      --
      Welcome to the Panopticon. Used to be a prison, now it's your home.
    2. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Nothing at all. I'm sure a little Photoshop work will remove him from any official photos as well. We have always been at war with Eurasia.

    3. Re:Just wondering... by geekmux · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What does the professor's "on-line harassment" have to do with the quality and / or value of his lectures?

      Because of public scrutiny, which often makes about as much sense as arguments between a 3-year old and their stuffed animals during a tea party.

      Somehow the sharing of educational materials was acceptable yesterday, but today they are tainted because the school does not want to appear to support a sexual predator.

      So instead, an educational institution will censor their own educational materials.

      Makes perfect sense, according to the public.

    4. Re:Just wondering... by timeOday · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I suppose the point is to deter other would-be harassers by sending a message that MIT will not associate with them.

    5. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      At the expense of all the students who could learn from the materials that don't contain anything harassing.

    6. Re:Just wondering... by hey! · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What does the professor's "on-line harassment" have to do with the quality and / or value of his lectures?

      Nothing. The Institute apparently thinks he's a scumbag and doesn't want to be associated with him, which is their right.

      Looking at the lecture, it doesn't seem to be all that special by MIT standards. Everyone there takes at least two semesters of physics, and Physics 8.01, which almost everyone takes in their first semester on campus, is probably the largest course taught. There's a long tradition of lecture showmanship in 8.01, with varying degrees of success. A friend of mine once saw Henry Kendall almost knock himself out with a bowling ball pendulum. He was explaining how the pendulum would only return at most to the point it was released from, but because he was talking he didn't notice that instead of just releasing the pendulum, he'd given it a little push, which was supposed to be the *next* demo. Kendall had to dive out of the way at the last second.

      --
      Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
    7. Re:Just wondering... by pitchpipe · · Score: 4, Insightful
      Time to toss Richard Wagner's works seeing as how he was a racist.

      Or ... we could toss the people who makes decisions like this out on their ass, which is a much better idea. These fucking people are out of control.

      --
      Look where all this talking got us, baby.
    8. Re:Just wondering... by epyT-R · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Assuming the policies he was judged by are sane (doubtful in today's climate) and the accuser isn't lying (always questionable in guilty-until-proven-innocent systems), sure, but knowledge is knowledge. If the lectures are solid, they should stay up.

    9. Re:Just wondering... by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 5, Insightful

      That was my argument in the last discussion about the twin experiments. Schutstaffel scientists did a bunch of experiments on Jews and gained a lot of medical data; someone informed me that using such data would be unethical, as it is disrespectful to the victims and their survivors.

      My response was that we should just take the results of the experiments, and burn the people who actually performed the experiments in a giant oven. Anyone who suppresses life-saving knowledge should have those same experiments performed on them, so that they can experience what they have made others experience: if you have medical knowledge useful to stop some horrible disease, and you suppress it, someone is going to suffer that horrible disease because you are an asshole, and so you should be punished for bringing harm and suffering and death upon the innocent.

      It makes sense. Some people did bad things, and they should be executed for those bad things. We learned things from those bad things, but the things we learned are not the cause of those bad things.

      So this dude fucked some schoolgirls. So what? Fire him. Did his course material fuck any schoolgirls? No? Then keep that.

    10. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      What does the professor's "on-line harassment" have to do with the quality and / or value of his lectures?

      This is a modern university. Any charge by a female, minority, or homosexual/transgendered/multi-gendered/selective-gendered student that you did anything they find offensive automatically makes you worse than Hitler. No trial needed. No defense allowed. Straight to banishment, OPPRESSOR!

    11. Re:Just wondering... by NatasRevol · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to Godwin a discussion, but same argument for the research the Nazis did on twins. Some of it is good, useful information. But nobody will touch it because of its source.

      --
      There are two types of people in the world: Those who crave closure
    12. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Yes, at their expense. You can blame MIT, or you can blame the person who committed the crime.
      MIT does not want to associate with this person in any way.
      Leaving his material up, maintains that association.
      They have no interest in being associated with him and no obligation to maintain one.

      It's not like his course material is a unique and rare thing that can't be found someplace.
      Lots of physics material and lectures available all over the place.
      I'm certain the students can find alternatives with little effort.

      You want to host this guys material, well, get going and do it then.

      I have no idea when course materials suddenly become some sort of saintly historical document.

      Basically the guy committed a crime the University found so horrible they are tossing him and his stuff to the curb.
      I really don't see the complaint here. Should the University be forced to maintain a relationship with him?
      Who else should be forced to continue to interact with him?

    13. Re:Just wondering... by slinches · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The best thing MIT could do is release the lectures for free (i.e. remove a profit motive from themselves), eliminate their name being used in association with it, and step back. That's reasonable. Trashing the whole thing is silly.

      Maybe there needs to be a creative commons license that expressly forbids attribution, just for this circumstance. I suggest calling it CC-CYA

      --
      Knowledge Brings Fear
    14. Re:Just wondering... by Caesar+Tjalbo · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There's a difference between his questionable social behavior and his academic work (which doesn't seem to be in doubt). The problem with Mengele c.s. was that their scientific conduct was abhorrent and with it any scientific results.

      --
      "I'm not much interested in interoperability. I want substitutability. I want to be able to throw your software out."
    15. Re:Just wondering... by ColdWetDog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Well perhaps. We used Werner Von Braun's research after all. But the Nazi medical 'research' was uniformly terrible science. It was just plain old sadism.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    16. Re:Just wondering... by Xylantiel · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I would expect removing them would be to prevent anyone else being a victim. Rather than marking every page with him on it with a "warning this former faculty was found to have sexually harassed students," the prudent course of action is to shut it all down and sort things out later. While Lewin is no longer active in the courses, they are still active courses and a student might approach him if they didn't know about the issue. There are plenty of other physics faculty at MIT that can fill in the content.

    17. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because in our Brave New World, if anything you do offends somebody else, or God forbid, hurts somebody's feelings, you must be swiftly punished by your employer (since we can't seem to get the courts to punish people without evidence or due process).

    18. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Somehow the sharing of educational materials was acceptable yesterday, but today they are tainted because the school does not want to appear to support a sexual predator.

      Or it could be because they were supporting a sexual predator. According to the linked articles, he was harassing students that were taking classes and contacting him about his lectures. The last linked article said they removed him because they did not want to funnel any more students into contacting him and using trust they had for him agains them. This is more about not letting a teacher who is a sexual predator of his students be allowed to teach any more because as long as his lectures were up and students were using them, he was a teacher with a habit of using that position to gain their trust.

    19. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Feminists already hate Einstein and attribute all his amazing work to the bitch he had as a spouse, even though he still made amazing discoveries after he got rid of her, while she didn't do anything worthwhile in her whole life except being a woman. Feminists also idolatre Hipatia as the summum of science, a woman from which we know NOTHING and we learned NOTHING, because none of her works survived, but from which the feminists have invented an entire biography around her that you can see in fringe sites like Wikipedia.

      That's why if you believe in facts and science you have to oppose feminism and other marxists groups, because they only value women for what they are instead of what they do, and they will falsify story or censor whatever doesn't advance their demented cause. We are already living the dark ages, because we're attacking and destroying the lives of scientists and engineers for religious bullshit, and forcing them to publicly apologize and repent for things that any sane person would defend, like wearing a comic-book shirt, or voting what you believe is right.

    20. Re:Just wondering... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Keeping his videos online benefits him. He can point out to other employers that MIT host videos of his lectures. He can point to the number of hits they get on the site. It's thin but it's also quite real, and sometimes making a point or taking a stand is worth doing if it deters others.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    21. Re:Just wondering... by AmiMoJo · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Hardly comparable. Even in Turing's time there were many who thought there was nothing wrong with homosexuality. There was no victim, no-one was hurt by homosexuals forming consensual relationships.

      It is pretty unlikely that sexual harassment will ever be considered okay in the future. It's an assault on another person.

      --
      const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
      SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    22. Re:Just wondering... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The thing is, we did use Nazi research. Because genuine scientific research is valid regardless of whether the people that performed the work were nice or not. Jesus Christ, why does this need to be explained to anyone?

  2. Creating more victims by SuperKendall · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The only thing removing these lectures does is make it harder for others to learn physics without attending school in person.

    I would argue removing the videos does far more harm than he ever did, when you consider there aggregate effect on humanity.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Creating more victims by Fwipp · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It also sends a really clear message: "This behavior will not be tolerated." If sexual harassment causes your name and work to be disgraced - that's a pretty strong deterrent to people in academia.

      So if you're considering the aggregate effect, you've also got to consider the aggregate improvement in the lives of students who now face less harassment and can learn in a less hostile environment.

    2. Re:Creating more victims by ilparatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yet we continue to watch and revere films by Roman Polanski.

      So maybe the message should be ... "If you're a scientist, this won't be tolerated and we will disavow your educational merits. If you're an artist, bad boy, but hell if we didn't love and will continue to love your films!"

  3. Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by Saysys · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge. It's disgusting that we're loosing the benefits of this amazing pedagogue simply because someone was offended by something he said to someone online.

    This is total bullshit.

    1. Re:Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by AaronLS · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You don't own the content. You might have access to it under a CC license, but you don't own it. If MIT wants to take it down, that's their right. The fact that you think you should have some say in the matter is bullshit.

    2. Re:Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by pla · · Score: 4, Insightful

      You have to understand that a particularly vocal minority, and one endemic to academia at that, believes that anyone who doesn't actively fight for Social Justice(tm) has no value to humanity, in any capacity.

      For example, let's say you played a key role in discovering the structure of DNA, but then later said some things that could, if twisted juuust the right way, mean that some races potentially have attributes that others don't. You instantly become worthless, and to hell with what those stuck-up Ivory Tower fools on the Nobel committee has to say about it. If, however, you have no meaningful contributions for society beyond "first minority president", clearly the brilliant minds on the Nobel committee chose correctly in awarding you a Peace price, regardless of your stance on torture.

    3. Re:Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by AaronLS · · Score: 3, Insightful

      So your point is, if twisted juuust right, any slashdot article can somehow be an opportunity for someone to bitch about Obama.

    4. Re:Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by almitydave · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You don't own the content. You might have access to it under a CC license, but you don't own it. If MIT wants to take it down, that's their right. The fact that you think you should have some say in the matter is bullshit.

      He's not making a rights- or privilege-based argument, he's saying MIT should choose a different course of action that will better serve the greater good.

      Side note: I see this happen a lot - someone conflates the argument "entity X should do Y" with "entity X should be made to do Y". Read arguments carefully.

      --
      my, your, his/her/its, our, your, their
      I'm, you're, he's/she's/it's, we're, you're, they're
    5. Re:Sexual Harassment shouldn't cost us knowledge by AaronLS · · Score: 1, Insightful

      "shouldn't cost us knowledge"

      Oh I comprehend, that he thinks the content belonged to "us". If it does, then he his welcome to setup hist own host and host that content. Nothing is lost if you exercised your right to make a copy under the CC license, assuming it was licensed that way. If not, then it didn't belong to us.

      Who the fuck are you to say this or that entity is obligated to be your personal content host? It's not your fucking server. If I run a website, and I decide that an article is out of date and I take it down, that's might right as the owner of that server. Fuck you.

      Content and knowledge are related, but are not the same. If someone stops delivering content, that doesn't mean the knowledge is lost.

      What you don't comprehend is the distinction between having knowledge, and actually where it is hosted.

      This is not like we've taken every written record of physics and banned it. 1) You are still free to host the content at your own free will. 2) That "knowledge" exists in many other forms, so even if was not licensed the knowledge is not lost.

  4. Please by forrie · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This seems like a harsh knee-jerk reaction, ostensibly to protect the public image of MIT. Taking down this content, stripping someone of a title -- removing a man's body of legitimate work that benefits the greater masses is a ridiculously absurd measure. What does MIT think they will gain from this, other than saving face.

    And he allegedly harassed someone online -- that's all I've heard. Maybe he had a nip before bed and was just a little frustrated, we have no context -- who cares? Lots of people say a lot of things online that are far worse.

    Give us all, and this professor, a friggen break MIT.

  5. Re:can't find it by bobbied · · Score: 2, Insightful

    He crossed the event horizon, so now, any useful information he produced is now in the black hole of Political Correctness.

    --
    "File to fit, pound to insert, paint to match" - Aircraft Maintenance 101
  6. Perhaps we should throw out the transistor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    After all, the transistor was invented by William Shockley, a proponent of Eugenics.

  7. Sexual harrasment worse than murder? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Would they have retracted these articles had he murdered someone? I bet not.

    When did sexual harassments become worse than murder? This pc bullshit is way out of hand.

  8. P.C. hurts society and this is just an example by bussdriver · · Score: 5, Insightful

    So now we've become so extreme that the Universities that were guardians of free thinking have become the thought police and tools for censorship. Aiding vengeance of the political elite (corporations being some of the biggest but that's another topic) upon students it should be defending... I'm specifically thinking of Aaron Swartz where MIT was not an innocent party. Sounds far more governmental than like how a University should function, doesn't it??

    I don't care if he was a rapist or serial killer! Where is the philosophy department when you need it?? (The only practical thing they are good for is defending freedom; aside from teaching.) Lets throw out everything NASA ever did under Wernher von Braun because he was a Nazi! If you only forbid work done during the "crime" then you have to throw out all the rocketry work he did for Germany and that kind of thinking would have had him completely passed over for working for NASA at all (because they'd not know his credentials since that info would have gone down the memory hole.)

    People now are so fragile they can't even hear unpleasant news. I've been in hostile environments and was severely bullied so naturally most the stuff I see people complain about looks like pathetic wimps wanting attention as victims... appealing to the self righteous egotism of others looking to compensate / cover for their own hypocrisy which they are unable to face (because that again would be unpleasant... no wonder people want drugs over actual therapy!)

    Being gay was a crime and to most people it's still a horrible sin against god. That didn't stop computer science; but today one has to wonder if those attitudes prevailed today how much we'd be set back?

  9. Professor Harasses Student by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful

    The alleged victim was a female student in one of his online courses (and she claims he did the same to other students), so he could possibly have held a positifof power over her. Completion of the courses results in a certificate but zero academic credit, and MIT has bragged that thousands enroll in the courses, so the amount of leverage he could have had over her is questionable. But if he was using this MIT program at all to try to pick up women then that is wrong, and it makes sense for MIT to put a stop to it. We don't know exactly what he was doing unless we can read the correspondence in question.

    Most headlines make it sound like he "harassed" strangers online. No, it's a professor allegedly harassing one of his students, and it's not all that special if he did it "over the internet."

    1. Re:Professor Harasses Student by careysub · · Score: 3, Insightful

      The "online harassment" probably only exists in her head. The guy is a Nobel, that alone guarantees him enough tail for a lifetime.

      If he believes that it does then that would be ready explanation for harassment.

      --
      Starships were meant to fly, Hands up and touch the sky - Nicky Minaj
  10. Even more important questions exist! by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What ever happened to being innocent until proven guilty? Why with claims of sexual harassment and misogyny do Constitutional protections no longer exist? In fairness, it's been happening with racism as well but those charges don't tend to ruin as many people as sexism claims (though the consequences are more dire for the victims).

    Why won't the assholes that keep propping up this unconstitutional action bring up facts like the conclusion of the Duke LaCrosse team scandal? You know, the scandal that ruined the lives of more than a dozen people based on a completely false accusations. Not only was the accuser never charged with any crime from the false accusation, but the same person goes on to commit arson, attempted murder, and finally murder. Even today morons quote the Duke LaCrosse team as an example of misogyny.

    The problems are not just in the US either. A Canadian University last month suspended an entire Hokey team and prevented graduations based on a top secret internal investigation (no police). Institutionalized vigilantism. There was in reality an allegation that 2 players were involved in sexual harassment, and the rest of the team was suspended for not speaking out against those two players. So in Canada not only is every allegation a criminal event, but if you want to wait for proof for the allegations you are also a criminal.

    Welcome to your New World Order! Remain silent, it can only continue to get better.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

    1. Re:Even more important questions exist! by ColdWetDog · · Score: 3, Insightful

      You are 'innocent until proven guilty' only when you are arrested for a criminal act by a governmental entity. In the court of public opinion, you're toast.

      --
      Faster! Faster! Faster would be better!
    2. Re:Even more important questions exist! by DiamondGeezer · · Score: 3, Insightful

      What happened to being innocent until proven guilty?

      That was nullified when the accuser was a woman and the accused was white and heterosexual. Remember the entire justice system has been traduced by the idea that we should believe the victim without evidence as to who the victim is, and by the incredible idea that everyone except white males should be free from being offended by any means whatsoever. Things called 'microaggressions' are seriously discussed in classrooms when the prejudices of non-white, non-heterosexuals are challenged. .

      --
      Tubby or not tubby. Fat is the question
  11. Bullshit by s.petry · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Nothing. The Institute apparently thinks he's a scumbag and doesn't want to be associated with him, which is their right.

    Prove it! I spent over 30 minutes searching for any actual evidence of sexual harassment and found nothing but conjecture. So you have false accusations that result in life ruining decisions (Duke LaCrosse) and real issues that Universities cover up (Penn. State). Why would they treat this guy like the LaCrosse team? Oh, it suits an agenda... Connect the dots man, it's really not that hard.

    --

    -The wise argue that there are few absolutes, the fool argues that there are no probabilities.

  12. Choices. by TapeCutter · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Makes perfect sense, according to the public.

    I loved Rolf Harris, I grew up in the 60's watching his show on B&W TV, now he turns my stomach. I've laughed my arse off to Bill Cosby for 40yrs but now I look at him with suspicion. I came across the video in TFA earlier this year and reposted it to FB, now I want to unpost it. These people have made fools of all who applauded them in the past, they were "grooming" everyone, not just the immediate victim. It's human nature to want violent revenge, it's much more civilised to simply have nothing to do with them. So as a grandfather to 3 girls, I say publically ostracising sexual predators for their crimes makes perfect sense, they know the social and legal punishment, they know they will be a target in jail, but they still choose to do it.

    --
    And did you exchange a walk on part in the war for a lead role in a cage? - Pink Floyd.
    1. Re:Choices. by Pieroxy · · Score: 5, Insightful

      These people have made fools of all who applauded them in the past

      No they haven't. People applauded him because he was brilliant onstage giving physics lectures, not because they thought his sex life was exemplary. Nobody is perfect, and I'm sure we most of us have secrets that we wouldn't want anyone to know about. His were just worse. His physics lectures are still as good as they were yesterday.