Camp is one of those ambidextrous words that has helped to make English into the world’s most versatile language. The word can refer to camping, in the tent and sleeping bag sense; base camps, a la Jack London or Sir Edmund Hillary; or different camps, as in various sides or groups in a debate or conflict. And in an interesting twist, camp can also be used to label someone or something as flamboyantly theatrical.

For our purposes, however, it is perhaps most appropriate to note that the word comes from the Latin “campus,” which means level field. This is richly relevant, not only for the obvious reason that the original Latin word is now used to describe a university’s physical space, but because a level field is exactly what Heterodox Academy is striving for when it argues for universities to embrace open inquiry, viewpoint diversity and constructive disagreement.

In his excellent review of former Columbia University president Lee Bollinger’s new book, University: A Reckoning, John Mac Ghlionn applauds the author for eloquently reminding us that, at their best, universities provide this level field, a place where “ideas are proposed, tested, refined, and eventually either proven or discarded.” But Mac Ghlionn also takes the author to task for not fully acknowledging that the reason many universities fall short of this ideal is not, as Bollinger claims, largely because of political interference and other external threats; it also is due to internal shortcomings, such as campus social dynamics that pressure faculty and students to self-censor rather than openly question accepted orthodoxies.

Such orthodoxies are also the subject of an essay by McKay Stangler, in which he contends that understanding ancient Zen teachings on nonattachment can help us to stay open to new ideas and discoveries, even when they contradict long-accepted beliefs. Strangler argues that Zen can help us push back against our natural tendency to remain in one camp or, as he puts it, “to overemphasize the importance of fixed positions.”

A different sort of camp is the focus of an enaging essay gifted to us by Athena Aktipis. In it, she argues that using the campy trope of the zombie apocalypse as a framework makes it easier to address difficult and even dangerous topics. “Academia has a problem dealing with scary futures, such as institutional failure [and] existential risk,” she writes. Examining these and other difficult topics with irony, playfulness and just plain zombie silliness, can help us overcome our fears and tackle tough issues.

Finally, a wonderfully thoughtful essay by Dan Rothschild looks at the past, present and future of the social compact between higher education and the rest of society. Whereas the 20th century history of the university was about bundling together an ever-greater number of roles and responsibilities, the future is likely to involve “a great unbundling.” Thanks to a growing number of non-academic alternatives, he argues that in the future universities are less likely to be at the forefront of everything from policymaking to research and development.

If you enjoy this issue and haven’t already done so, please subscribe to inquisitive. And consider going on to the magazine’s website and pitching us an article idea for an upcoming issue.