answersLogoWhite

0

In September of 1951, Martin Luther King began doctoral studies in Systematic Theology at Boston University. He also studied at Harvard University. His dissertation, "A Comparison of God in the Thinking of Paul Tillich and Henry Wieman," was completed in 1955, and the Ph.D. degree from Boston, a Doctorate of Philosophy in Systematic Theology, was awarded on June 5, 1955.

During the 1980s, archivists associated with The Martin Luther King Papers Project

uncovered evidence that the dissertation King prepared for his Ph.D. in theology from

Boston University, "A Comparison of the Conception of God in the Thinking of Paul

Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman," was plagiarized, and the story broke in the national

media in 1990. King included in his dissertation a good deal of material taken verbatim

from a variety of other sources without proper attribution (or any attribution at all),

an act which constitutes plagiarism by any reasonable academic standard.

The Martin Luther King Papers Project addressed the issue in Volume II of The Papers

of Martin Luther King, Jr. (and reproduced a statement thereform in the FAQ on their

web site):

The readers of King's dissertation, L. Harold DeWolf and S. Paul Schilling, a

1/10/2011 snopes.com: Four Things You Didn't Kn…

snopes.com/history/…/mlking.asp 2/8

professor of systematic theology who had recently arrived at Boston

University, failed to notice King's problematic use of sources. After reading a

draft of the dissertation, DeWolf criticized him for failing to make explicit

"presuppositions and norms employed in the critical evaluation," but his

comments were largely positive. He commended King for his handling of a

"difficult" topic "with broad learning, impressive ability and convincing

mastery of the works immediately involved." Schilling found two problems

with King's citation practices while reading the draft, but dismissed these as

anomalous and praised the dissertation in his Second Reader's report ...

As was true of King's other academic papers, the plagiaries in his

dissertation escaped detection in his lifetime. His professors at Boston, like

those at Crozer, saw King as an earnest and even gifted student who

presented consistent, though evolving, theological identity in his essays,

exams and classroom comments ... Although the extent of King's plagiaries

suggest he knew that he was at least skirting academic norms, the extant

documents offer no direct evidence in this matter. Thus he may have simply

become convinced, on the basis of his grades at Crozer and Boston, that his

papers were sufficiently competent to withstand critical scrutiny. Moreover,

King's actions during his early adulthood indicate that he increasingly saw

himself as a preacher appropriating theological scholarship rather than as an

academic producing such scholarship ...

In 1991 a Boston University investigatory committee concluded that King had

plagiarized portions of his doctoral dissertation but did not recommend the revocation

of his degree:

A committee of scholars at Boston University concluded yesterday that Rev.

Martin Luther King Jr. plagiarized portions of his doctoral dissertation,

completed there in the 1950s.

BU provost Jon Westling accepted the panel's recommendation that a letter

be attached to King's dissertation in the university library, noting that

numerous passages lacked appropriate quotations and citations of sources.

The letter was placed in the archives yesterday afternoon, a BU spokesman

said.

Westling also accepted the committee's statement that "no thought should

be given to the revocation of Dr. King's doctoral degree from Boston

University" and the assertion that despite its flaws, the dissertation "makes

an intelligent contribution to scholarship."

The investigatory committee, comprising three professors in the BU School

of Theology and one from American University, was appointed by Westling

last November after researchers at Stanford said they had discovered

numerous instances of plagiarism in King's work as a graduate student.

While there was general agreement that King acted improperly, Clayborne

Carson, head of the King Papers Project at Stanford where the plagiarism

initially was uncovered, noted that King made no effort to conceal what he

was doing, providing grounds for a belief that King was not willfully engaged

in wrongdoing.

Westling said in a prepared statement yesterday that it was "impractical to

reach, on the available evidence, any conclusions about Dr. King's reasons

for failing to attribute some, but not all, of his sources. The committee's

findings, although important from the point of view of historical accuracy, do

not affect Dr. King's greatness, not do they change the fact that Dr. King

made an unequalled contribution to the cause of justice and equal rights in

this nation."

John H. Cartwright, a member of the committee and Martin Luther King Jr.

Professor of Social Ethics at BU, said the committee had examined King's

dissertation independently of the King Papers Project and "we did find

serious improprieties."

1/10/2011 snopes.com: Four Things You Didn't Kn…

snopes.com/history/…/mlking.asp 3/8

The chair Cartwright occupies was created by the Boston University

trustees after King's assassination. Cartwright was entering BU as a

seminary student when King was finishing his doctorate.

"We had many of the same professors, we worked in the same atmosphere

during our graduate studies," Cartwright said, and "under no circumstances

would the atmosphere under which he did his work condone what Dr. King

did. It's incredible. He was not unaware of the correct procedure. This

wasn't just done out of ignorance."

The committee found that King "is responsible for knowingly misappropriating

the borrowed materials that he failed to cite or to cite adequately." It found

a pattern of appropriation of uncited material "that is a straightforward

breach of academic norms and that constitutes plagiarism as commonly

understood."

The letter to be attached to King's dissertation, Cartwright pointed out,

"indicates there are serious improprieties and points readers to sources

where they can find chapter and verse."

The committee found no grounds for charges raised last year that King drew

his organization and chapter headings from another person's dissertation.

The plagiarism, the panel said, was of passages from the works of

philosophers whose concepts of God King was comparing in his work. The

dissertation is titled "A Comparison of the Conceptions of God in the Thinking

of Paul Tillich and Henry Nelson Wieman."

The committee also found no evidence that the professors reviewing King's

dissertation had a double standard for African-American students and

examined their work less critically than the work of whites. "Standards were

applied with equal strictness to black as well as to white students," the

panel concluded. "Black as well as white students failed out of the program."

Even though faculty supervision of King's work "failed to detect the large

number of uncited borrowings that breached academic norms," the

committee also found, the examining professors were not negligent

"according to normal standards of supervision."

*Snopes

User Avatar

Wiki User

14y ago

What else can I help you with?