Analysis of EssayIndeed, the issue of academic freedom continues to elicit different reactions among institutional stakeholders and political individuals. On one hand, opposers assert that the respective tenet needs to have limitations in order to limit academic persons such as scholars, lecturers and professors from making contradictory and controversial assertions. Alternately, supporters of this notion allege that such personnel require expressing themselves since it is their right to exude their convictions and ideas irrespective of the implications they may pose. Nonetheless, is it possible for scholars to engage in such behavior under the context of academic freedom? The answer to that is blurry based on the actuality that most do not understand the true definition of academic freedom. Stanley Fishs article, , provides a platform for assessing whether academic freedom comprises the freedom to perform an academic occupation devoid of external interruption.In overview, the article involves understanding academic freedom based on expression. Fish attempts to provide his own definition of this particular ideology by using controversial scholar, Kevin Barrett, as an example. Accordingly, Barrett, one of the lecturers at the University of Wisconsin, surmised that the destruction of the World Trade Centers during the 9/11 Attacks was a result of the American government (Fish 1). As expected, the views exuded by the academic caused upheaval among individuals with each side generating argumentative concerns regarding the tenet of academic freedom. Irrespective of the statements propelled for and against academic freedom such as those advocating for limitation of academic freedom, Fish provides his own definition of academic freedom by correcting both sides of the argument. In addition to this, the author also provides a myriad of examples, which guarantee the validity of his claim concerning the respective issue.Foremost, Fish defines academic freedom as the right to engage in any academic activity without interference from outside parties. Simply, educational autonomy offers a platform for academics to express themselves in words as well as actions to their students without involvement from external groups. Accordingly, the definition provided by the author differs considerably from others provided within the article. This is because such delineations only concentrate on the protection of the academic content. For instance, supporters of Barretts hypothesis assert that the content disseminated should not be under restriction since it is the right of the academician to express his or her views (Fish 1). Dissenters, on the other hand, view academic freedom as a medium that requires limitations pertaining to the content conveyed, which may seem controversial among the majority.In addition to Fishs definition, academic freedom also comprises the autonomy that academicians possess in the research and study of anything that is susceptible towards academic investigation and assessment irrespective of its fallibility. Indeed, if the study offers an intellectual payoff, then that is academic freedom. For example, if an academic desires to research trivial subjects such as lingerie advertisements, golf tees, as well as convenience stores, then the doctrine provides him or her with the ability to do so without any intrusion (Fish). Furthermore, a theory, which may seem impulsive but offers significant academic contribution based on its assumed historical effect cannot be under restriction based on its content. Another illustration involves the theory of evolution, which even though perceived as exaggerated by several academicians, could not be restricted based on content.Still based on content, Fish alleges that a study is academic based on its accessibility to serious analysis but not based on the subject matter it provides. In support of this, the author uses the subject of astrology in order to illustrate the susceptibility of a study to academic analysis as an important factor. Indeed, Fish states that, The distinction I am making-between studying astrology and proselytizing for it-is crucial and can be generalized (Fish 1). Based on this assertion, the author alleges that it is possible to draw a line amid proper and inappropriate application of academic freedom. Undeniably, enacting a line for academic freedom involves severing the line between the dissemination of an idea and recruitment of students. In addition, the only point at which Barretts academic freedom should be under restriction is when he attempts to convert students into following the political thought that his theory may imply. Furthermore, it is important for a teacher, regarding an issue such as Iraq War, to set personal convictions aside in order to enable academic research.In conclusion, Fishs definition of academic freedom is far more convincing in comparison to others provided within the article. By focusing on recruitment rather than content, the delineation provided by the author offers a factual and convincing understanding of what entails academic freedom. For instance, it is appropriate for a teacher or a lecturer to study the Vietnam War regardless of the conflict it may pose in terms of opinions. However, when personal thoughts undergo application within the process of research, then academic freedom has surpassed its limits. In short, academic freedom does not entail the limitation or autonomy of academic content; rather it involves performing educational activities without interruption from external influences such as personal convictions.Work CitedFish, Stanley. Conspiracy Theories 101. , n.d. Web. 3 Mar. 2014.