At the end of last month, a petition was launched to move the Board of Officers of the American Philosophical Association (APA) to issue a statement about Gaza that would, “Unequivocally condemn the ongoing atrocities and war crimes against Palestinians” and “Express solidarity with Palestinian scholars, intellectuals, and students who are enduring immense suffering under war crimes, siege, and mass starvation.”
You can read more about the petition itself here.
The APA Board stated that it would consider the petition at its next meeting. It has now done so, and today, the APA’s Board Chair, R. Lanier Anderson, and Executive Director, Amy Ferrer, issued a statement about the Board’s decision.
They said that the Board was “united in its dismay at the violence that has erupted in Israel/Palestine since October 7, 2023, at the resulting losses of life and freedom, and at the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza.”
However, in light of the discussion at that meeting, the likelihood of the APA membership being “deeply divided” on the issue and the petition, and the APA’s policy on board statements, the Board “concluded that no board statement on the substance of the current war in Gaza or its effects would be appropriate.”
They add: “It is… right that our policies and practices defer to the membership at large, rather than the board, when it comes to taking positions on such issues. Should members of the APA wish to pursue a member-voted resolution related to the war in Gaza, we invite them to contact us for guidance on how to begin that process.”
Below is the full statement:
Several weeks ago, the APA board of officers was made aware of a petition calling on the board to make a statement about the ongoing war in Gaza; the petition was shortly thereafter publicized on Daily Nous.
Although the petition organizers have not directly contacted the board or APA staff, we (the chair of the board and executive director) made the decision to include the petition on the agenda of the board’s summer meeting last week. Additionally, a draft statement relating to Gaza was submitted to the board through the formal statement request process by two APA members who were not party to the petition. At its meeting, the board undertook a thorough, lengthy, and probing discussion of both the petition and the draft statement.
The board was united in its dismay at the violence that has erupted in Israel/Palestine since October 7, 2023, at the resulting losses of life and freedom, and at the deteriorating humanitarian situation in Gaza. In addition to these grave moral concerns, the complete disruption of educational activity in Gaza is deeply regrettable. But the board’s discussion exposed deep disagreements both about the petition itself and more generally about whether the APA ought to make statements relating to the current conflict, or what sort of statement would be consistent with our mission as an association.
The APA’s policy on board statements provides both that the board should speak for the association only on a limited set of issues (academic freedom, funding for the humanities, threats to philosophy departments, professional working conditions of philosophers), and that even about those issues, the board should not presume to speak for the association as a whole when it judges that the membership is likely to be deeply divided on the issue in question.
In light of that policy and the tenor of the discussion at the meeting, the board concluded that no board statement on the substance of the current war in Gaza or its effects would be appropriate.
In the past (and often in times of war), the APA has taken positions as an institution concerning politically controversial issues of the day. These positions have been established not by the board, but by the members of the association through the member-voted resolution process outlined in the APA bylaws.
The board of officers is selected through processes focused on the advancement of philosophy as a discipline and profession, with little or no attention to candidates’ views or expertise on issues of wider social concern. It is therefore right that our policies and practices defer to the membership at large, rather than the board, when it comes to taking positions on such issues. Should members of the APA wish to pursue a member-voted resolution related to the war in Gaza, we invite them to contact us for guidance on how to begin that process.
R. Lanier Anderson, Chair of the Board of Officers
Amy Ferrer, Executive Director
The statement is on the APA’s website.
The episode raises questions about the conditions under which it is appropriate for the the leadership of an academic organization to make public statements about current events and issues that seem to fall outside the organization’s official mission—and questions about how to interpret that mission. The mission statement and list of principal activities of the APA can be found here.
