Page 2
Summer Session Kansan
Tuesday, June 29,1965
The People Say.
Ideas for the Future
Editor:
The sobering editorial by "anonymous" which appeared in the June 18 Kansan has provoked the following comments by this observer.
The unfortunate individual known as "anonymous" may have been told by his doctors that he has one chance in four to live; but in one sense he is fortunate; he has been pointedly warned and forced to think about it. If the "doctors" who guide the intellectual currents of our society were more interested in analyzing the probable outcome of our current arms build-up and adventuresome foreign policy, then they were in keeping up a bravely optimistic facade, they would force all of us to realize that our own odds may not be much better, unless we begin to think seriously about survival.
TWENTY YEARS ago, in one of his novels, C. P. Snow suggested that we have about twenty years. Last month, after a talk with the leaders of the Kremlin, Cyrus Eaton suggested that we have about a month. It is only because I assume that these perceptive gentlemen may not be absolutely faultless prophets that I take time out from my concern over target areas and fall-out shelters to write this letter. By the way, although the city's fallout shelter preparations are inadequate, those at the University itself are not bad.
If university students are to engage in legitimate kinds of protests—and I think they should—it seems to me that they could well protest the fact that by and large, today's university is not giving its students the ideas they need to move successfully into the future. I don't refer to the intellectual and moral framework of the society which must be built by those who successfully weather the probable results of the arms race.
OUR NATION has a great tradition, and so does the western university. But how often have you heard that tradition genuinely upheld in recent conversation? Which of your friends has recently explained that he is attending KU in order to contribute to the intellectual strength of his nation, or because he is genuinely fascinated by the advancing front of knowledge in a given field? Instead, we usually hear that "my degree will give me financial security." And what else, in view of the way our ideals and ideas are often presented (incidentally, my study of American history has been carried on entirely at other universities; I don't intend to make a local case on this point)? The past too often appears merely as a prelude to the establishment of present material comforts; the search for new knowledge is rarely encouraged outside of the framework of what is considered "safe" or "profitable." No wonder that young minds tending towards idealism soon become cynical. No wonder that our most vocal "patriots" are often no more than anti-intellectual special-interest defenders.
The trouble with trying to appreciate the really valuable elements of our tradition is that an excess of material comforts and gadgets tends to leave one jaded to appreciation of true relative values, to make him forget that the first loaf of bread on the table is vastly more significant than how fancy is the table or how exquisite is the cake which comes later for dessert, and that this loaf is just as important to any other human being as it is to him, and furthermore that the really important elements of what we call culture and civilization depend much more on this first loaf than on fancy tables or well-iced cakes. The strength of our civilization is built not on the banquets of Caesar or Nero, but on the five loaves and two fish which Christ used to feed a multitude.
WE READ EVERY day of the challenge to our way of life by a godless ideology known as Communism. And yet why has this ideology been successful? Is it because we are truly living in a postChristian age, and because "scientific socialism" can offer the world's poor and starving more than a nation founded on Christian princi-
plies and holding sacrosanct the idea of private property?
One might suspect that this is the case, judging by the reaction to Communism in the typical American university. On the one hand we find those whose sense of taste is offended by the mere mention of Communism, by the hint that it contains important ideas or is really a threat to our existence. But from this attitude the impression conveved most clearly to the disinterested observer is a feeling of guilt, of desire to escape a judgment on what might prove to be a legitimate complaint. On the other hand we have been told for years that all students must learn about Communism in order to deal with it, and so our universities are full of Soviet and Chinese experts who are so professionally immersed in their material — admittedly fascinating material — that their students and even they themselves tend to think that its ideas are more original and its specific purposes more formidable than they really are.
1905 HERBLOCK
THE WASHINGTON POST
HOW OFTEN HAVE we been reminded that it was Captain John Smith who declared that a man shall not eat unless he also works? Or that Benjamin Franklin concluded that the value of a product is determined chiefly by the labor that is expended in its production? Of course these ideas were expressed before the industrial revolution, the challenge of which was answered by Marx. But who has heard of the answer to the miseries of industrialization which was given by a Kansas minister 70 years ago in that decreasingly popular art form known as the religious novel? In this novel, "In His Steps," Charles Sheldon portrayed the growth of Christian spirit in a self-satisfied little congregation which was shocked by the sudden appearance in its midst of a man driven to starvation as the result of automation in the printing industry. Because it has stylistic flaws, this novel is rarely studied in American literature courses any more. Nevertheless, despite the efforts of our university English departments to consign it to obscurity, and of our publishing industries to top its sales with such degenerate junk as the adventures of James Bond, it has been translated into dozens of languages and has sold over 20 million copies—more than any other book except, of course, the Bible.
MELBOURNE EVANS of the University of New Mexico published in "Dialectica" of 1962 a proof that rigid application of the postulates of relativity yields absolute simultaneity, not relative simultaneity as widely believed. I have heard Evans lecture. He appears to differ from the run-of-the-mill college professor in that he is not inclined to ignore the findings of earlier ages just because his superiors or immediate predecessors tell him it is safe to do so. He thinks things through for himself, concentrating on solid logic rather than on sophistication or on personal prejudices, and gives a verdict in favor of Descartes and Newton, and against the authors of relativity. (Quantum theory, to which Einstein contributed, is much less vulnerable to criticism.) But our universities contain far too few men who think as clearly or as cogently as does Evans.
AS A RESULT of the breakdown of traditional values and the rather vague application of the world "relativity" to every kind of comparison, it is now thought that there is scientific support for the idea that in every sort of endeavor, one theory is as good as another, depending on how you look at it. The poverty of this point of view is revealed by an examination of the logical basis of relativity theory itself. In nearly every country in the world except the U.S., leading physicists and philosophers are engaged in demonstrating the fact that the theory rests on a logical contradiction.
The pieces of a new theoretical approach are slowly fitting together even in the ranks of our own scientists, preoccupied as they are with applications of science to the conquest of space and the waging war. In Jan., 1965, "The American Journal of Physics" carried an article by J. G. Fox showing that evidence given in 1913 supposedly invalidating the Ritz emission theory is no longer held to be adequate. The Ritz Theory was introduced in 1908 as an alternative to the Maxwell-Lorentz-Einstein approach.
IF THE university is not the key to the values we need, what is? Few can deny that the Christian religion has been taught almost as uninspiringly as has any secular theory, by most ministers and priests. Enormous effort has been expended in making more accurate translations of the Bible, but almost none on revising it so that its message is clearer, more consistently presented, and — perhaps — made a little more relevant to the specific problems of the industrial world. I cannot imagine that after all the mighty achievements of Biblical scholarship in verifying the historicity of this part of the Bible and defending the allegorical or figurative meaning of that part, that any real danger of losing the intent of the original authors would be incurred by an actual revision of the text, obviating the necessity for the ordinary reader to be an expert in Biblical commentary as well as merely to be literate.
These are my thoughts on what might be done to turn the restless protests among students, here, at Berkeley, and across the land, into something useful and positive. What are yours?
- John Chappell.
THERE WAS a time in the Middle Ages, in northern Italy, when students hired their own teachers and set rules for them to follow. The teachers, in response, organized themselves, and thus was born the university. This is not to imply that the younger generation always knows best; for the first students hired teachers, they didn't teach each other. The main thing is that a university is nothing without a bunch of students who come to learn, not to be duped or doped by a lot of relaxing sophistry.
Topeka graduate student, history and geography
If we would completely ignore sentiment in favor of education, we should produce people as cold, impersonal, and completely unbeautiful as the new Fraser Hall. "But we must be reasonable," retort Fraser razers. "We only want to do what is best for the people." Evidently these people do not realize what is best for people (not that anybody does). Man is, however, much more of an emotional, passionate animal than a reasoning machine. He must not let passion rule him, but neither should he strait-jacket and stifle it until man becomes a strange, aborted creature. Man cannot be programmed to work like a computer. He is a warm, sensitive, living creature, and he feels an urgent need for emotional satisfaction. I do not believe that Fraser razers wan sentiment completely, but I do believe that they fail to realize its true importance in human life. In fact, they and others like them have so underrated sentiment that I gasp to find myself in a cold, ruthless world, peopled, can I say, with callous, practical, impersonal men and women. Yes, just as you are thinking, why not call them machines? Furthermore, it will finally be this mechanical unconcern and indifference to warm human feeling which will destroy man. One building is relatively minor, but how much more sentiment can man bury before a world will seem minor to him?
Fraser Hall or the World?
Editor:
The fact that we cannot save Fraser Hall for merely sentimental reasons is a flagrant indication that a deadly malady is paralyzing our world. The Journal-World quotes Governor Avery as saying, "... if the matter were simply one of sentiment, I would support you in your effort to retain and restore Fraser Hall." However, the future ex-governor clearly explained that the Fraser Hall problem is also a matter of practicality. In view of the high costs of restoring Fraser and possible delay of federal grants if new Fraser is relocated, the urgent need for the education dollar renders any attempt to save Fraser impractical and unwise. I must retort emphatically that, yes, more than sentiment is here involved, but sentiment alone is reason enough for saving Fraser!
Think it's a silly comparison? Look at the people around you. How often do you see a natural, spontaneous reaction of real sympathy when someone sees or learns of another person's trouble? How many incidents have you read about in which people have stood idly watching while some criminal attacked and injured a helpless victim? Ask yourself what kind of people could be so outrageously indifferent to their brother's trouble; then ask yourself what kind of people could destroy an entire civilization. I am not blaming anyone, however. Our world with its pressures and racing timetable requires machines to meet its demands. Few of us find it easy to remain human and perform efficiently under the strain. We are simply humanly incapable of this feat, so we are quickly assimilating ourselves to our implements in order to keep pace with them.
Even the education which demands a new Fraser seems incapable of ameliorating the situation. (This in itself may indicate the relative importance of preserving sentiment.) As a student I am surrounded by educated people highly capable of reasoning, who are yet blind and unaware. Devoid of lifegiving sentiment, they are as stagnant pools of water which become green, putrid, and dead. They are indifferent to the refreshing rains of life which produce the infinite shades of color in life's experiences. Their eyes, like those of a poor dog, see neither black or white, nor green, red, or violet; only gray. They never, for instance, slacken their blind, mechanical pace to exchange witticisms with a squirrel or to glimpse a tuff of red feathers whiz into a protective bush. They say, "That's bad business," but they never really hear the agonized scream of a Vietnamese patriot who dies in a gulp of furry, fear, and blood! They miss all of this because they are completely caught up in the practical routine of living. They do not feel; they only act and react as does any properly operated machine.
To such a people, a dream, a memory is a "pretty thing" but highly impractical and unrealistic. What is human feeling compared to something as practical and useful as money? Fraser must be destroyed regardless of the shattered memories (useless things) which will remain in the rubble; but how could anyone, however inhuman,
really consider destroying a monument so significant and sacred as Fraser? What is KU without Fraser? What is KU without its hill? Consider, too, individual, private sentiment. Think of the beautiful memories of learning experiences which lie smouldering in minds of KU'ers everywhere and inflame inspiration at every glimpse of old Fraser. How can anyone dare to so crucify these feelings? The outrage can never die. Oh, laugh and scorn if you will, but first listen to what a building can mean.
To me Fraser is a place of beauty, spiritual beauty because there angels walked. There I listened with awed admiration and devotion. There I worshipped wisdom; and there, above all, in the teachers of this wisdom I found warmth and understanding, fire in an arctic world. These teachers loved man and thus enabled him to love. When I see Fraser, this once-felt joy fills me again, my heart opens, and I feel kind, considerate, and tolerant; I want to help; I want to love. In short, I felt all of man's highest qualities, qualities which endear him to his brother and promote, yes, peaceful co-existence. Within a week machines will destroy Fraser and its miracle. Within 20 years other machines will destroy another building, and there will be no crying then.
Bonnie T. Hill Lawrence junior
Summer Session
Kansan
111-112 Flint Hall
University of Kansas Student
Newspaper
Telephone UN 4-3198, business
office
UN 4-3644 newsroom
University Daily Kansan (regular session) founded 1889, became biweekly 1904, triweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Jacke Thayer ... Managing Editor
Tom Magur ... Business Manager
Member of Inland Daily Press Association. Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising Service, 18 East 50th St. New York 22, N.Y. News service: United Press International.
Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $5 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan., every afternoon during the University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays and examination periods.
Published Tuesdays and Fridays during Summer Session. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas. Accommodations, goods, services, and employment advertised in the University Daily Kansan are offered to all students without regard to color, creed, or national origin.