Self-censorship is widely practiced in university communities, under-discussed though it is. One suggestion for dealing with self-censorship is that universities and professors post rules of conduct designed to facilitate free and open discussion of sensitive topics. Rules are good for solving coordination problems, but self-censorship stems from the realities of university culture. In this article, the author argues that rules would likely make things worse. The problem of academic self-censorship has its source in how highly participants in academic projects value academic engagement and the academic mission. The author provides two suggestions for raising the level at which students and professors value for itself the academic mission of engaging intellectually with the things of the world: (1) Disentangle academic purposes from the various functions, however laudable, that are unreflectively included among the aims of higher education. The confusion of academic aims with social goals is ubiquitous; and (2) Professors and students need directly and exclusively to engage in the academic projects at hand. When professors and students participate in academic discussion, as part of the academic mission to fashion an understanding of some aspect of the world, they open a civil and collegial space in which participants feel free to speak their minds. This is how self-censorship is defeated.