Putnam Says Dunlop Threatens Radicals

Hilary W. Putnam, professor of Philosophy, has been trying without success to meet with Dean Dunlop over the past week to discuss remarks by Dunlop which, Putnam says, "intimidate radical faculty." Putnam may be charged with participating in the disruption of the March 26 "Counter Teach-In."

Putnam first tried to bring along eight Harvard Faculty members and two Harvard employees to talk with Dunlop and then yesterday sought to bring seven Harvard Faculty members, two representatives from M. I. T., one from Boston State, and one from UMass. Dunlop refused to meet with employees or faculty from other universities, but he offered to see Putnam accompanied by up to four Harvard Faculty members.

Putnam refused to meet that condition, and he has now chosen not to see Dunlop at all.

Summer Worries

Putnam said last night that he took a statement by Dunlop in the CRIMSON of May 7 to mean that he "might be fired over the summer, without any Faculty committees involved, for simply being at Sanders Theatre." He added that he tried to bring representatives from other universities because "if I'm fired faculty elsewhere will figure that nobody's safe."

No Need to Wait

The CRIMSON article reported that an unnamed Faculty member may be brought before the University Governing Boards to face charges of participating in the "Counter Teach-In" disruption. Dunlop stated in that articlethat if he felt the case warranted consideration, he would not feel compelled to wait for the implementation of the proposed procedure for hearing charges against Faculty members before bringing the case to the Corporation.

The proposed Faculty discipline procedure calls for a two-part hearing by Faculty members with the power to throw out cases and advise the Corporation. Final disciplinary authority would rest with the Corporation and the President.

Dunlop said last night that he chose not to meet with the campus workers because "problems with the workers are handled by Personnel," and he chose to limit the numbers because, he said, "I thought it was clear that 10 or 12 persons is not the normal way of doing business in discussions."