This is a good question. I think a starting idea might be that it's a subset limited by what you teach. It should also be clear that academic freedoms usually include doing the research and getting closer to some objective truths, where that's possible. You are also somewhat constrained by an employment contract and the capacity/desire of an institution to support teaching and research in a given area of interest.

Sorry, as I said, I am an idiot. I do not understand why you as a professor have the right to think and say that the US 2020 election was stolen without being contradicted, but I do not. I would think the opposite, namely that I, as an idiot, have the right to say that (I don't, but I have the right to) without contradiction, but that you, as an academic, do not because you are held to a higher standard where you need to produce actual evidence of that fact. If you are referring to hypotheticals, namely, what are the implications if the 2020 election was indeed stolen, then you would probably not need to produce evidence in the same way as in the preceding example, but I would still expect your peers to evaluate your reasoning. My reasoning can be dismissed out of hand as not worthy of consideration. But since this platform is for science and technology, perhaps I digress. Perhaps this only applies to something like the promotion or demotion of the concept of racial superiority if and only if one is an anthropologist. Still, if you pronounce that the Jews are God's Chosen People based on anthropological evidence, I would expect you to be held to a higher standard than if I utter that remark. I use controversial examples because a government might be motivated to silence a person proclaiming such things. But if we go into pure science, are you saying that a person on KZbin does not have the right to criticise the quality of microchip A without contradiction, but you, as a computer hardware engineer do? Or is the keyword 'peers'? Do you as an academic, have the right to be criticised only by your peers whereas I, as a generic idiot, may be criticised by anyone, regardless of their intellectual superiority or inferiority compared to my own? I attended a very poor university, which means I have failed in life, but the concept taught there was that students were expected to question everything, to not accept what their betters told them as set in stone with no room for improvement, alteration, or contradiction. Thus students were expected to question the establishment in a way that the professors were not allowed to do because the professors were held to a higher standard. It was not that the students were considered right or correct, but that the road to wisdom led through the valley of error, i.e., you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs, or at least one. But perhaps I have simply outlived my era and need to pass quietly into oblivion. On the other hand, considering the lack of peer review I have witnessed in my career, such as it was, perhaps the current age is defined by its lack. Instead of providing criticism of texts generated by their peers, what I have witnessed is peers simply saying, 'Great job' and not examining anything in detail, at least not to the person's face. The daggers are reserved for their backs. @@tomspoors768

I apologise for the inscrutability of my ramblings. In short, I understood, perhaps incorrectly, from your reply that you state that you, as an academic, do have an academic freedom, nay right, that your students and ordinary idiots like myself do not. I still do not understand what that exclusive right is, esp. in the fields of science and technology. (Sorry, I would question the scientific nature of political science. I would put it more in the realm of inexact studies like philosophy, economics, and logic, rather than the hard sciences like computers and metallurgy, which the platform's second name 'technology' evinces in me.)

@@aSnailCyclopsNamedSteve A cogent response indicating that you hide your erudition poorly! As for me, I am something of a demi-academic, being what is euphemistically called an adjunct professor (for which read low-paid, temporary and totally disposable). I am always clear to my students that what I say should always be challenged, evidence bought and logic employed. Some of the best lessons come about when the students take over and my lesson plan takes a running leap out the window. I am still, however, constrained to teach the broad outlines of the course curriculum...

And I have a meaningless BA from a small, unknown university. It allows me to live abroad and that is about it. And I edit documents written by PhD's who are not used to hearing any opposition or criticism whatsoever, no matter how egregious the error. Now I am pretty much too sick to work, the result of the deadlines I needed to meet. But I still do not see an answer to my question. @@tomspoors768

Vlad, since you said it was important to watch this posting, could you answer the question I have posted under the video since I clearly do not understand the author's/poster's reply. Thanks.

Hello Om

@@adityamaheshwari6697 Oh Hi Aditya

ayo ???

Lol

Team etlv on est là xD

what are you on ?????? did you even paid atencion to the video is not about children is about the fact that there is about 70 million fat asses in usa and there is over 9 million deaths by hunger all around the world which is absurd and it should not be that way but its never going to change until we extinct