Other formats

    Adobe Portable Document Format file (facsimile images)   TEI XML file   ePub eBook file  

Connect

    mail icontwitter iconBlogspot iconrss icon

Salient: An Organ of Student Opinion at Victoria College, Wellington, N.Z. Vol. 12, No. 5, June 8th, 1949.

Victory to Victoria

page 6

Victory to Victoria

A half-empty hall, gowned debaters stalking around, then finally the judges arrived, dinner-jacketed . . . wot no white ties?

Miss Alison Pearce, Vice-President of the Debating Society, confirmed our suspicions that the Australian team consisted of the best Australian debaters, Messrs. Roden, Hermes and Webster, for the affirmative, and for the negative, Messrs. O'Connor, O'Brien and Milburn, from V.U.C. (muffled cheering from the back of the hall, during which an old lady was removed, singing "We're the Girls from up the Hill").

Roden: "I have been here before . . . "His previous reincarnations, it appeared, had been spent at various universities (starting 700 years ago). There he discovered their greatest product was a challenging mind, which enabled the graduates to see further than his fellows, and know what was what in matters of politics and the like. Though today the professional, the specialist, bulked large in the university the same method of approach was still used, intellectual methodology. Students work in an atmosphere of knowledge, where the specialist can rub shoulders with the man who is getting a more general education. Lastly, technical learning can be obtained from the University, which turns out the specialists necessary to a civilised community. Sir Galahad Roden galloped from the lists with these words: "university sends forth intellectual knights, armoured with a conditioned mind, armed with the sword of knowledge, fighting the dragons of prejudice, protecting the maiden, society, who is unaware of what is going on." Once more unto the speech, dear friends . . .

Mr. O'Connor felt that if he had lived for 700 years he would have got a better idea of what the modern university was doing. Originally the university had searched for truth, but when the university in the 19th century broke from Christian methodology and putting nothing in its place, this became no longer true. Students were told to ignore the fundamental precepts by which the society around them lived. The fostering of opinions rather than facts, and the use of discussion for its own sake, produced men liable to be over tolerant, possessed of a permanently suspended judgment, believing sincerely in nothing. The students of Germany fell to Nazism, the doctors of Belsen committed atrocities because they had never been encouraged to learn their duty to society. Specialisation was justified only in research: free-will and determinism were taught at the same place: nothing taught is finally true. Graduates were no help in solving world social problems: and the materialist mind can create a system like Nazism, without a real protest in the name of intellectual freedom. If the university is to have a useful social function it must integrate, not speculate.

Mr. Hermes: accused Mr. O'Connor of being disconnected, and of advocating a return to the scholastic theology which went out with the University of Paris. It was replaced then by the wealth of knowledge brought by the Renascence. Students had spoken up in occupied countries. Why were universities always attacked first in totalitarian states? He followed Roden's lead and boosted the ideal scholastic conditions, the challenging mind, the broad training given the specialist. Functions like Procesh and Extrav, too, were good in the training of solid citizens. University provided an introduction to self-government and training in executive matters, both useful functions to the student. An example of university effectiveness in world affairs was the stout work done by World Student Reilef, surely a good example of a satisfactory social function.

Mr... O'Brien, remembering Mr. Roden, at first thought he was at a Drama festival. Then wondered if it might not be a Brahmin revival meeting. The "rubbing shoulders" argument is invalid, due to close college confines, as seen in the Engi neering and Medical Schools. Other grievances were that the universities are blindly following the society of today in over-specialisation, for example, theses on the "bacteriological content of an undershirt," and "1001 hints to secretaries." Perhaps another might be "what one finds in civil servant's satchels."

Grievances continued; The University is not leading to an understanding of social problems, nor is it showing how to use its knowledge. The University is largely dependent on public funds, and is therefore a liability. The University is not fulfilling a useful function and is therefore not appreciated by society. The University concentrates, nowadays, on specialization, not on finding new fields of knowledge.

Mr Webster said the affirmative had made a list of satisfactory functions, specially the spirit which can challenge society from within. The negative did not deny this to be a useful function. Mr. O'Connor's "permanently suspended judgment" was not to be found in practice: decisions have to be made each day. The University turned out men trained to enquire before judgment. Freewill and determinism are both taught because both are believed, who is to say which is correct? The negative wants static unchanged knowledge to be taught. The Belsen doctors did not come from Universities where freedom of thought was encouraged. Only in the University does the specialist come into contact with other learning while he trains. The University does not satisfy the community because the community does not want to appreciate its stringent criticism, but it is better that criticisms should come from within.

Mr. Milburn, poor fellow, came to the University with a greater motive than a desire for professional qualifications. He hoped for integration and crystalization of his knowledge but all he found was a round of terms—finals—terms—finals (abbreviated). Neither was there any attempt to teach appreciation of living nor even a philosophy in teaching. "We come up for lecture, go down for tea . . . absorb knowledge, regurgitate it for exams." Students as individuals are ignored, especially extra-mural students. The indifferent attitude to W.E.A. is atrocious.

When the two leaders, Mr. O'Connor and Mr. Roden, had recapitulated their main arguments each culminating in a flood of rhetorical questions, the judges were called on for a decision.

Of the three judges, Mr. Scotney had been delegated to speak first. He gave his usual opening, that he would perpetuate the tradition, that the audience should be kept in suspense about the decision for as long as possible. The first time he used this opening it was almost funny. Almost. To be brief, VUC won. Weaknesses in the debate were an abuse of rhetorical questions, and the attitude of heavy reverence with which the first part of the debate had been received. Some of the speeches were too discursive. The decision was very close. Rev. Gascoigne complimented all the debaters on their ability to debate, and seemed to think that to train debaters was a useful social function of the University. Doctor Kahn was on his feet purely to show that all the judges had in fact decided. It was simple to judge a debate. Debating was a good thing as it teaches people to be articulate.

The Debating Society would like to see a larger attendance at the next debate on the night of Saturday, June 11.