Princeton University President Christopher L. Eisgruber has been using his new book, “Terms of Respect: How Colleges Get Free Speech Right,” to address perceptions about free speech and academic inquiry on college campuses. In a recent conversation at the Princeton SPIA DC Center with NPR’s Ayesha Rascoe, Eisgruber challenged the idea that today’s students are overly sensitive or unwilling to engage with differing viewpoints.
Eisgruber shared an example from his experience at Princeton, describing how student groups encourage engagement across ideological lines. “When I talk to students, they’re interested in engaging with other ideas,” he told the audience in Washington, D.C. “I actually think they’re very strong and…in my view being valiant.”
He explained that misconceptions about campus free speech were one reason he wrote the book. According to Eisgruber, these claims did not match what he observed at Princeton. He has since used “Terms of Respect” as a platform to highlight the role research universities play in American democracy and society.
Eisgruber has discussed his views through various national media outlets including CBS Sunday Morning, PBS NewsHour, CNN’s Fareed Zakaria GPS, Financial Times, The Atlantic, and Time Magazine. He has also spoken at events in several cities and recently addressed faculty, staff, and students at the new Princeton University Art Museum.
During one event sponsored by the University Center for Human Values, Eisgruber said: “The principal reason that American universities are being attacked is not because they have departed from their mission but because they are faithful to it.” He continued: “They’re being attacked because they protect the independence and academic freedom of their students and scholars. They’re being attacked because they pursue ideas and theories unsettling or unwelcome to those in power. They’re being attacked because they have pushed hard to achieve a diverse, equal and inclusive society that the United States Constitution envisions and that justice requires.
“We should take great pride in these universities, in these institutions that are at once marvelous and upsetting and we should defend them zealously,” Eisgruber added.
In his talks, Eisgruber often points out that challenges around free speech on campus reflect broader civic issues facing America today rather than isolated problems within academia. At a recent event at Princeton Public Library, he read from his book: “Today’s young people are much like the rest of us. They want to engage with diverse viewpoints, and when they fail to do so, it’s usually because of characteristics they share with the rest of American society,” most notably political polarization and social media influence.
He referenced studies indicating a rise in self-censorship among Americans compared to previous decades. For example, he cited polling data showing about half of Republicans and Democrats view members of the opposing party as “downright evil.” This polarization can discourage open dialogue due to fear of negative judgment or viral social media backlash.
Eisgruber argued that protests on campus can be signs of civic distress but also represent active engagement with societal issues: “Protest, agitation and dissension are — on campuses or elsewhere — signs of civic distress… They are instances in which people are speaking up rather than remaining silent.”
He also criticized current methods for ranking free speech on college campuses used by organizations such as the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE). He noted cases where schools ranked highest simply had fewer controversial discussions rather than more robust debate: “That’s not a free speech success story… The whole point of free speech is that you should be having conversations about controversial topics.”
Instead of measuring tranquility or comfort on campuses, Eisgruber suggests evaluating controversy, creativity, disagreement, discovery—indicators that difficult conversations are taking place.
In classroom settings at Princeton, Eisgruber credited faculty for fostering respectful debate among students from different backgrounds. He recounted an instance where a conservative student felt welcomed by a professor known for left-leaning views—a gesture Eisgruber said makes a significant difference.
Students like sophomore Elaine Gao echoed this perspective after attending one of Eisgruber’s talks: “To me, respectful listening starts at recognizing one’s interlocutor as a person,” she said. “Only then can genuine dialogue and the search for common ground take place.”
