Talk:University/Archive 2

Archive 1

Archive 2

Religious and political control of universities

The paragraph has been censored to the current unsourced short version. Does it make this Wikipedia any better?Xx236 (talk) 10:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean by "has been censored". The section has had much that form for a long time. But I agree the section isn't useful, so I have just deleted it for simplicity. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 12:00, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

By censored I mean the removal of the main part of the paragraph related to Nazi and Soviet universities. If you don't like calling them universities say para-universities or terror-universities but ignoring them? Nazi and Soviet academicians published, participated in international conferences and boards. Some of them died because they believed in science, not because they ate too much. Cuban and North Korean Universities continue the Soviet tradition in different ways. Xx236 (talk) 12:50, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

History of European research universities has a fuzzy ending, Nazi and Communist regimes are ignored.Xx236 (talk) 13:03, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure when that material was removed: could you provide a diff? But in any event if you have relevant material to add and sources that back it then you should of course feel free to add something. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 13:07, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

There exists the article University education in Nazi Germany, de:Universität im Nationalsozialismus being much better. Xx236 (talk) 13:25, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

See also User:Xx236/Soviet university.Xx236 (talk) 07:19, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

There exists the book A History of the University in Europe, I don't have it.Xx236 (talk) 13:35, 21 November 2012 (UTC)

As I said, if you have relevant material to add and sources that back it then you should of course feel free to add something. Nobody else is likely to do it for you. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 12:20, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

I think this article falls into the class of article which are written from the perspective of a specific group

I mean, what the article is talking about is "European style universities that started in the middle ages" just because the word "university" is derived from this and that in Latin. I think this is narrow minded and also Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Add to this the fact that Wikipedia has no article for "Institute of higher education" and you see a kind of contempt for those institutes from other cultures. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gypscholar (talk • contribs) 21:31, 27 January 2013 (UTC)

Classification Section

The example given for states is Massachusetts. However, most of the state colleges in Massachusetts just received university status (Bridgewater State, Fitchburg State, Framingham State, Salem State...), and few if any have doctorate degrees available. I work for one of the above schools, and I can tell you, they have no doctorate program at this time. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 207.206.236.100 (talk) 14:01, 26 March 2013 (UTC)

Why is this list so incomplete?

There are other universities completely overlooked by this article.

Here is my source which even links to Guiness Book of World Records and other sources with universities not mentioned in this article which are much older.

http://collegestats.org/articles/2009/12/top-10-oldest-universities-in-the-world-ancient-colleges/

--KRaZyXmAn (talk) 04:23, 6 August 2013 (UTC)

Academic freedom

Those who claim that Constitutio Habita is the origin of academic freedom confuse between legal autonomy and freedom from ideological control. This document concerns the former and says nothing whatsoever about the latter. It is simply naive to suppose that institutions founded and protected by the Catholic Church were free in their scholarly pursuits.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 89.191.241.225 (talk) 22:11, 23 August 2013‎ (UTC)

Interesting problem. The medieval universities did not have the range of freedom that the modern universities do; yet their institutional autonomy contributed to their claims of academic autonomy. As church-supported institutions, they could claim autonomy from governmental control (their members had the privilege of clergy) and as organized guilds, they could contest their rights in relation to both church and governmental institutions. Historically, the Church occasionally restricted what could be taught at medieval universities, but the medieval universities' institutional autonomy did contribute to the concept of Academic freedom, in a way similar to the influence of medieval urban charters on the development of political freedom. The Middle Ages wasn't modern, but it did provide the seeds of later developments. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:29, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

House of Wisdom (I have added this to the article just want ever one to know)

The House of Wisdom, considered to be the first university in the world, was established in Abbasid-era Baghdad, Iraq. It is considered to have been a major intellectual center during the Islamic Golden Age. In the later medieval period, as science in Byzantium and the Islamic world waned, Western Europeans began collecting ancient texts from the Mediterranean, not only in Latin, but also in Greek, Arabic, and Hebrew. Knowledge of ancient researchers such as Aristotle, Ptolemy, Euclid, amongst Catholic scholars, were recovered with renewed interest in diverse aspects of natural phenomenon. Teaksmitty (talk) 15:06, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

References

I removed the text as the cited source doesn't appear to say anything about this being "considered the first university in the world." Did I miss something or make a mistake? ElKevbo (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2014 (UTC)

Evolving definition of the University

The article contains the following wrong claim "The original Latin word referred to degree-granting institutions of learning in Western and Central Europe, ..." In fact, the etymology of the term "university" originates from "universus" in Latin, which means "whole, aggregate, entire". It has nothing to do with the geographical regions of Western and Central Europe. Hence, the contents should be reconsidered in this context to include examples outside Western and Central Europe as well! --212.73.146.73 (talk) 04:01, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

In 2007 I quoted the Oxford English Dictionary's definition of a University (from the Second Edition, 1989):

university, n. The whole body of teachers and scholars engaged, at a particular place, in giving and receiving instruction in the higher branches of learning; such persons associated together as a society or corporate body, with definite organization and acknowledged powers and privileges (esp. that of conferring degrees), and forming an institution for the promotion of education in the higher or more important branches of learning; also, the colleges, buildings, etc., belonging to such a body.

This definition, with its focus on the organizational structure of the university has a long historical tradition, but has given rise to a series of edit conflicts on Wikipedia. I recently looked again at the OED and find that it has replaced that with a new definition (from the Third Edition, November 2010):

university, n. 1. a. An institution of higher education offering tuition in mainly non-vocational subjects and typically having the power to confer degrees. Also: the members, colleges, buildings, etc., of such an institution collectively. In later use also in prepositional phrases without article, as at university, to university, etc.

In the Middle Ages: a body of teachers and students engaged in giving and receiving instruction in the higher branches of study (cf. trivium n. 1, quadrivium n. 2) and regarded as a scholastic guild or corporation; an organized body of schools (see school n.¹ 12a). Later: an institution offering degree courses and research facilities, typically providing some accommodation and other amenities for its students.

This new definition seems to reflect the historical reality that the focus on the corporate structure of the university no longer reflects the status of many modern universities, although it did reflect the situation in medieval Europe. Perhaps this evolving definition offers a way out of some of our recent controversies. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 14:53, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Having thought a while on this definition, one crucial phrase seems to be "offering tuition in mainly non-vocational subjects". This appears to exclude professional schools such as schools of law, medicine, and theology (which can be traced back to the middle ages) and autonomous schools teaching engineering, architecture, musical performance, and (perhaps) the productive aspects of painting, sculpture, drama, and the other fine arts. The word "mainly" seems to include institutions which taught those subjects in a broader pedagogical context (as medieval universities had advanced faculties of law, medicine and theology and modern universities have schools of engineering, architecture, and performing and fine arts). SteveMcCluskey (talk) 20:21, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

I don't think it's a good practice to rely on a simple dictionary definition of any topic to guide an encyclopedia article when there are much more comprehensive, nuanced, and informed definitions available from scholars who studied and written about the topic in great detail. ElKevbo (talk) 22:26, 23 August 2013 (UTC)

Useful point, but the changing definition in what is widely recognized as the authoritative scholarly source on the English language is a useful sign that the meaning of the term "university" is undergoing a conceptual change. The fact that it is undergoing a change means that we should be especially cautious in using older sources. Finding exactly what that change is and what it implies for Wikipedia can best be found by consulting recent reliable sources on the university and its history. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 15:19, 26 August 2013 (UTC)

It's a preliminary indication of shifts in popular usage, and not really more than that. People might find it helpful to read Wikipedia:Dictionaries as sources. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 06:18, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the link; which discusses the Oxford English Dictionary as a reliable secondary source (in Wikipedia's sense) and also discusses the issue of changing meanings from older editions of dictionaries. This essay's advice is definitely worth considering. SteveMcCluskey (talk) 13:36, 27 August 2013 (UTC)

Can I add this to the Medieval universities section?

University of al-Qarawiyyin is the oldest existing, continually operating and the first degree awarding educational institution in the world since 859 founded by Fatima al-Fihri according to UNESCO and Guinness World Records and is sometimes referred to as the oldest university. Moorrests (talk) 13:54, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

References

No Verger, Jacques: "Patterns", in: Ridder-Symoens, Hilde de (ed.): A History of the University in Europe. Vol. I: Universities in the Middle Ages, Cambridge University Press, 2003, ISBN 978-0-521-54113-8, pp. 35–76 (35):

"No one today would dispute the fact that universities, in the sense in which the term is now generally understood, were a creation of the Middle Ages, appearing for the first time between the twelfth and thirteenth centuries. It is no doubt true that other civilizations, prior to, or wholly alien to, the medieval West, such as the Roman Empire, Byzantium, Islam, or China, were familiar with forms of higher education which a number of historians, for the sake of convenience, have sometimes described as universities.Yet a closer look makes it plain that the institutional reality was altogether different and, no matter what has been said on the subject, there is no real link such as would justify us in associating them with medieval universities in the West. Until there is definite proof to the contrary, these latter must be regarded as the sole source of the model which gradually spread through the whole of Europe and then to the whole world. We are therefore concerned with what is indisputably an original institution, which can only be defined in terms of a historical analysis of its emergence and its mode of operation in concrete circumstances." J8079s (talk) 19:01, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You forget to write down were it says University of al-Qarawiyyin is the oldest University :) Moorrests (talk) 20:30, 1 February 2015 (UTC)

You make it hard to WP:Assume good faith. The sources do not justify an entry here. The subject is disscussed at length at the talk page. J8079s (talk) 20:35, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

Note that you can find this previous discussoion in the archives, linked at the top of this page. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 22:11, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The paragraph you have provided does not prove anything. On the other hand I have provided 3 reliable and notable sources. Moorrests (talk) 22:29, 2 February 2015 (UTC)

The quote is from the source you provided. None of the sources say that this was a "University" in 859 WP:Verify the burden is on you to show that this should be included even though the source says it should not. You may be on the wrong wiki. J8079s (talk) 00:40, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

I am not sure what sources are you looking at but source 1 says Founded in the 9th century and home to the oldest university in the world, source 2 says University of Karueein and source 3 says University of al-Qarawiyyin. Moorrests (talk) 14:14, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

References

The first two sources don't establish what you claim they do (hint: read carefully what they actually say), even if they were reliable sources on which substantial weight could be placed for the history of universities (which they're not). For the third source (which is at least superficially a good source) please quote the exact text you think is relevant, and explain why it doesn't contradict the text quoted by J8079s, or, if it does contradict this text, why the contradiction should be resolved in the way you suggest. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 17:29, 3 February 2015 (UTC)

Oldest university?

IT is false that the oldest university is the university of Bologna. It is well known that University of Salerno came before. http://www.cwrl.utexas.edu/~bump/OriginUniversities.html In fact, it is also reported on the wikipedia page in many other languages. Only in english there is this mistake — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:7E8:C064:C501:E5BD:A25:4519:32E1 (talk) 22:26, 24 February 2015 (UTC)

according to the source you provided Salerno is not a degree granting "University" We we would need better sources to include it. J8079s (talk) 02:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Discussion at List of oldest universities in continuous operation

The old issue of the definition of a university has been reopened at Talk:List of oldest universities in continuous operation as a call for expert attention. The discussion so far has drawn on some recent publications; people who have edited here might be able to contribute something to the discussion. --SteveMcCluskey (talk) 01:43, 31 May 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2015

The edit that caused the semi-protected status was my restoring an addition I made. My edit was precisely sourced in a respected book by an established historian and, at the same time I added a qualifier about the extent recognition of that view. The user who undid my contribution claimed that it was a "fringe" view. When I asked in what sense a documented, referenced statement by a famous scholar can be a "fringe" view, the user responded that "fringe" view means a view not held by the "majority of scholars." I do not know if this is the Wikipedia definition of "fringe view" but I know that, in practice, most Wikipedia articles of course allow disputed views or views held also by a minority of scholars. Even if only the majority opinion were allowed to be mentioned, there should be evidence that the given opinion is indeed the view of the majority of scholars. 78.150.175.105 (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

I think you have the onus of showing that the view you're trying to add is shared by an important number of experts in the fields, not other editors to prove it's not. Also, the wording you were adding seemed to suggest that your proposed view was the mainstream one, but it wasn't shared by all historians; in fact, there are grounds to believe it's the reverse. Fringe views can sometimes be exposed in articles, but only as such, and while being given due weight. LjL (talk) 18:52, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the {{edit semi-protected}} template. Sam Sailor ^Talk! 19:45, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

American English Article

The article is mainly in American English. I recently changed 'specialised' to 'specialized', returning what happened with this user. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/81.155.70.156

All of their edits are specifically to change American English to British English. This was just a restoration. Cheers. If you want to argue the english variant, please, go ahead and make an RFC, but alas, the article was in American English.

Comment. I have put this here for discussion. One user has gone ahead and deleted this discussion. I have just restored it. I assume it was in good faith that he deleted a discussion from a talk page, as opposed to adding to the discussion. Perhaps a quick undo accidentally did it, it happens to us all. Please, if you have a comment, add it here! Have a wonderful day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:CA0D:8C00:E0E2:B78F:F573:E377 (talk) 08:13, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

• There's no established version of English used in the article, it's about a universal topic, and both UK English and American English have been used since the first real "non-stub" version of the article, with about equal share in the article for both varieties. And the IP editor does nothing on Wikipedia other than promoting US English... Thomas.W ^talk 08:37, 26 May 2016 (UTC)

Lead

I like to add this statement at the end of lead, "Though according to UNESCO and Guinness World Records, the University of Al Quaraouiyine located in Fes, Morocco is the oldest existing, continually operating and the first degree awarding educational institution in the world and is sometimes referred to as the oldest university.". Any problem with that? 119.157.213.42 (talk) 08:05, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

References

• Yes, we don't go by what UNESCO or Guiness WR say, we go by what the long-established mainstream definition of (mediaeval) university says, which since Al Quaraouiyine was founded as a madrasa, a type of educational institution that weren't, aren't and never have been universities (no more than Christian cathedral schools, a type of school that predate madrasas by several centuries, were) means that your proposed changes don't belong in this article. - Tom | Thomas.W ^talk 10:29, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Sri Lankan

change ((Sri Lankan)) to ((Sri Lanka))

Done JTP ^{(talk • contribs)} 16:07, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

This page is nonsense

I was just thinking about a philosophy lecturer who came along to the Dan and told us a lot of bullshit about the University of Paris (the Sorbonne) being started by Abelard. Actually Abelard was just one particularly brilliant figure studying at Notre-Dame college, which later became the University of Paris. That was commissioned after Abelard's time by king Phillip II, who was inspired by the university of Bologne, which was inspired by the great Muslim universities who first offered paper degrees, which were inspired by the string of great Buddhist universities that stretched across Asia from 200 BC onwards. They in turn came out of the city of knowledge that was Taxalasila, just as the Imperial Academy in China at the same time grew out of the great welter of knowledge in Chang'an. That concept kept China the most advanced culture in the world for 1800 years. That model of learning has now been replaced by the Westernised type of university, which is more refined simply because it went through more hands, more cultures. The less formal library at Alexandria - only one of the great libraries of the ancient world, and not the greatest - came out of broil of Middle Eastern, Greek, and North African civilisations. And Buddhist and Hindu scholars from the Indian universities constantly brought knowledge there, and took it back. The Christian monastic orders who (much later) would start Notre Dame College, came from the Buddhist monastic orders at Alexandria, who left their cemeteries there. This is fact. It's all there on other pages here at Wikipedia. Research it. If Jesus wanted to meet Buddhist monks, all he would have had to do is go to Jerusalem.

So this page is nonsense. There's an incremental change in what we consider a university, and it makes no more sense to make the division at Medieval Europe than any other place. In fact, places like the early University of Paris were less advanced, in modern terms, than many of those that preceded them.

I am too old and too tired now to edit this into something that approaches the current state of knowledge. But this stupid racist page is nothing but bullshit and should be re-written.

```` — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indigocat (talk • contribs) 07:01, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

• I agree. The history part is missing mentions of the oldest known universities, for example this: Nalanda. Keskival (talk) 19:34, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Agreed. The article has a clear bias towards medieval Europe. Just now I re-arranged the text in chronological order, moving the paragraphs on the earlier similar Middle-Eastern institutions which some scholars argue to be universities before the medieval European universities, and it was immediately reverted by User:Yopie without explanation. The article also notes that the modern definition of a university as a degree-granting institution is distinct from the medieval European definition of a corporate body, thus earlier institutions in the Middle East meet the modern definition, yet this article is restricted in scope to the outdated medieval European definition. This article fails to provide a global context, but gives the false impression that only medieval Europe had universities and nothing else before it. 195.214.214.141 (talk) 20:18, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

Mali

The material about Mali added by Kwesi Yema and removed by me seems better suited to Ancient higher-learning institutions#Timbuktu than to this page, as the principle links actually lead to Sankore Madrasah, Sidi Yahya Mosque, and Djinguereber Mosque. I note that much of this material is very similar to a January 2020 Twitter thread [1], although that's perhaps more likely to reflect a common source than direct copying. Jonathan A Jones (talk) 11:01, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

The people on Twitter copied from the source as the source itself is genuine and older than a post on Twitter which seems similar to the source. That is very silly because none of the sources themselves are Twitter. It could be possible that what you saw on Twitter could have been people who were inspired by the source. You found it similar to a post on Twitter? Come on.

Antecedents are antecedents. They are the same as Ancient higher learning institutions.if you delete the Mali section then delete all those long Madrassas as well as the Encyclopedia part in the beginning. Kwesi Yema (talk) 12:37, 2 September 2020 (UTC)

Al-Qarawiyin: higher-learning institution vs university

Could we argue about this mosque founded in 859 AD? --Opus88888 (talk) 16:48, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

Lede image

The current photo in the lede is of the University of Bologna, with a caption stating that it is the oldest university of the world. I changed it to a picture of the Alma Mater statue, with a caption explaining the concept of the Alma mater. I believed that it would better symbolically represent the concept of the university, and that the picture of the University of Bologna would better serve its purpose in the history section, alongside an existing photo of Oxford that stated that Oxford was the oldest university in the UK (I also removed some puffery from the caption).
User:Filetime has undone my edit several times, apparently having followed me to this page from my edits on Daniel Chester French (he has also undone several of my other edits on unrelated articles). His rationale for doing so was that "The university of Bologna is more than 600 years older than Columbia." That is completely unrelated to the reason why I changed the photo. This is not the first time Filetime has engaged in disruptive editing and edit warring, a quick look at his talk page will show, and this is not the first time he has stalked a user to undo one of their edits on an unrelated article. However, despite the fact that Filetime was the one to have placed the image up there in the first place (clearly there is no consensus photo), and despite the fact that the photo has not been removed but moved to a more appropriate section, I choose to believe that his edits have been done in good faith. If any one else has any thoughts on this issue, feel free to comment. alphalfalfa<sup>(talk)</sup> 22:14, 18 July 2021 (UTC)

• What a long and accusatory paragraph to type out before clarifying that you assume good faith. If we're airing out dirty laundry, I'd like to make clear that User:Alphalfalfa engages in a pattern of editing best described as shoehorning references to Columbia University (often tinged with boosterism) where otherwise unrelated or even inappropriate. While this doesn't necessarily rise to the level of an ostensible COI, I do question your motivation for replacing the current lead image. Articles relating to higher education, like most of those on English Wikipedia, systemically over-represent the United States and Anglosphere more broadly. Using this photo as the initial representation of establishments more than 900+ years in the making is a simple manifestation of this bias. If you really don't like Bologna, I suggest arguing for the Sorbonne or Salamanca or Oxford or Cambridge as more appropriate replacements. Filetime (talk) 01:04, 19 July 2021 (UTC)

Oppose Columbia image. I agree with Filetime. I came across Alphalfalfa on another unrelated article (Frankfurt school) where they attempted to insert unjustified references to Columbia as well. Replacing the current image to yet another reference to Columbia just looks suspect. The current picture (Bologna) is also by far the better lede image here and is NPOV and just makes sense in the context. It is a bit small though and looks weird on my monitor, maybe we can make the image bigger? (I'm not terribly good with picture markdown here I have to admit) -- Mvbaron (talk) 06:40, 20 July 2021 (UTC)

Rediscovery of aristotle?

The rediscovery of aristotle claim is vague, we have aristotle manuscripts pretty much continuously fro the seventh century. So who was rediscovering it? The article also claims a scholar is claiming this but links to a book that isn’t by a scholar (and isn’t a historian) i suggest removing that claim 210.165.162.56 (talk) 10:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)