It is difficult to know what to say about this debate. The subject, "That the University should produce technicians rather than philosophers" was both hackneyed and ill-defined. The student team had apparently prepared their arguments carefully enough, but the staff, although brilliant in their own way made few attempts to deal with the subject. In the face of this what could the students do? They could be exasperated with their opponents for two minutes and then go on to their eight-minute prepared speeches .... but the whole impression was not that of good debating. And then nobody would agree with anyone else about what the subject meant. It was all very confusing.