Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Sept. 15, 1966, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
ft i 4 Page 2 THE DAILY TAR HEEL September 15, 1966 In Our Opinion . . . Typical And Atypical A Year Of Action Ahead "I've Stood In This Line For Three Hours Thinking It Was . . . Soh . . . Drop-Add!' 'plW IE ROOM It rained yesterday afternoon. It rained and it was a very quiet afternoon. Yesterday afternoon was a typ ical, a nd at the same time atypi cal, Chapel Hill afternoon. The rain played the typical role. For the new students, a word of warning. It rains a great deal in Chapel Hill. Thunder showers have been scheduled for several, big party weekends this fall. Icy rain drops also may be expected on a great number of, winter class days. Then, of course, there should be a fine selection of -cloudbursts in time for Jubilee weekend next spring. , j The rain was typical. The quiet was atypical. For, whatever a year at UNC especially this year might hold in store quiet doesn't describe it. Naturally there will be plenty of noise in the next three months over Tar Heel brand football. Then, too, there is the ' -noise that college - age people just seem to make from weekend to weekend. There's more than a fair share of excitement surrounding the court test of the Speaker Ban Law The parking problem is far from being solved. There's some unquiet for you. Student Body President Bob Po well, addressing the freshmen and transfer students Tuesday night, made it obvious that he has a few ideas that might well stir up a little fuss over just what a college education should be. Changes in the Honor System have yet to be solidly formulated. Women's rules are hazy in some places, archaic in others. Here's some action. The 1976 North Carolina legis lature will apparently have to do something with the state's liquor laws after last spring's brown bag gins crusade. Not meaning to in sinuate that UNC students are di rectly affected by liquor laws, but this could be a matter of campus interest. Student Body 'Vice President Bill Purdy seems determined to hang in there and fight for resi dence hall improvements. This is not quiet. Or what about the rumored trasportation system from south campus? And the list goes on, covering nearly every conceivable facet of university life. It rained yesterday afternoon. It may rain again soon. It was quiet yesterday after noon. It shouldn't be quiet around here too often this year. State's Amusing Defense The Chapel Hill Weekly ,CQe4ft4t,aQtidly JiOanous 3 ,about4iie -State's reliance jorioxm er Communists to help defend the Speaker Ban Law . ;j The Attorney General's Office has waved the flag, rolled the drums, flared the tumpets, pointed to our boys in Viet Nam, wrung its hands raw over the Communist Threat, sounded the tocsin with numbing monotony, and generally worked itself into a state over the Red Meance. j One of the greatest bastions I against the insidious Communist ; influence, the 'Attorney General's : Office insisted, was North Caroli ; na's Speaker Ban the law that prohibits Communists and Fifth Amendment pleaders from speak ing on State campuses. The Attorney General's Office Briefly Editorial It is not uncommon for The Daily Tar Heel to find itself, from time to time, at a point of disagree ment with the administration. This varies in degree from mild misun derstanding to violent printed at tack. And certainly in the history of the DTH, some of the most excit ingly violent battles have been with the Office of the Dean of Men more specifically with Dean Wil liam G. Long. But, fight as we might, we ra ther like the good dean. Sometimes, in fact, we approach the point of understanding that the very na ture of his job often forces him to play the role of Student Enemy Number One. We were sorry to learn, when we returned to school, that Dean Long had just undergone surgery in Memorial Hospital. We're hap py to hear reports that he is up and around now and should be back into full action soon. Our best get well wishes for a complete and speedy recovery. has always maintained that Com munists can not be believed, they bend,-the, truth. to serve; their own evil ends, and they are a clear and i . present danger to-young,; impres sionable minds. So, what does the State At torney General's Office do to try to justify the Speaker Ban: Call upon a soldier freshly returned from Viet Nam? Seek witness from an FBI agent? Take depositions from students who have actually seen and heard Communists in the flesh? Why, of course not. The State Attorney General's Office decides to take sworn tes timony from a couple, of form er Communists, both of whom have been anathema to the State if they had tried to speak on one of North Carolina's campuses. To paraphrase Barry Goldwat er, extremism in defense of the Speaker Ban is not a vice. 74 Years of Editorial Freedom Fred Thomas, Editor Tom Clark, Business Manager Scott Goodfellow, Managing Ed. Kerry Sipe Feature Editor Bill Amlong News Editor Ernest Robl ., Asst. News Editor Sandy Treadwell .. Sports Editor Bob Orr . Asst. Sports Editor Jock Lauterer Photo Editor Steve Bennett Staff Writer Lytt Stamps Staff Writer Lynne Harvel Staff Writer Judy Sipe . .. Staff Writer The Daily Tar Heel is the official news publication of the University of North Carolina and is published by students daily except Mondays, ex amination periods and vacations. Offices on the second floor of Gra ham Memorial. Telephone numbers: editorial, sports, news 933-1011; bus iness, circulation, advertising 933. 1163. Address: Box 1080, Chapel Hill N. C. 27514. ' Second class postage paid at the Post Office in Chapel Hill, N. C. Subscription rates: $4.50 per semes ter; $3 per year. Printed by the Chapel Hill Publishing Co., Inc., 501 W. Franklin St., Chapel Hill,, N. C. The Associated Press is entitled ex clusively to the use for republication of all local news printed in this news paper as well as all AP news dispatches. J. m i. m- TnTuirW- Professor Defines Role dent In University Of Stu (Editor's note The fol lowing are excerpts from a paper written by Dr. George J. Stigler, Walgreen Profes sor of American Institutions at the University of Chicago.) By GEORGE J. STIGLER The turbulent movements among American college stu dents are persuading some of us to reconsider the na ture of the university, and the rights and durites of stu dents in universities. I offer a few thoughts. The American university is both a social, residential in t stitution and an intellectual. ' community. These two func-: tions are related only in that ; . the housing and feeding and ., surveillance of students is an unmitigated nuisance in the conduct of the intellectual en - terprise. I do not know much about the dormitory life of a university and do not care much except to the extent that it interferes with the in tellectual life. In our own irreverent age, we continue to provide dor mitory life because parents hope we will raise their chil dren more porpoerly than they would be raised at home, and because commer cial food and housing would not be tax exempt and other wise subsidized by the state. I favor an absolute mini mum of intervention by the university in this dormitory life. If a student sees knowl edge each day from beer, in stead of books, give him the grade which his knowledge whatever the source earns in the examination. If a fe male student finds sexual pro miscuity attractive, let her have the pleasure and any other byproducts thereof. Qn university property the uni versity must insist upon obed ience to civil law and the ob servance of the minimum standards of decency of the community, but ' that is all. Undergraduates should be treated as much like adults as their parents and the so ciety will allow; graduate students should be treated as adults without these provisos. Before I complete my de tour about the dormitory life, an explanation is due for this laissez - faire attitude. Af ter university, the student be comes a full -fledged, inde pendent citizen. He is nor mally flung into a large city, told by society to make his way. He is ill - prepared for this sort of urban life by a convent - barracks existence in a university. It is a re grettable fact that many ele mentary things can be taught with words but learned only with experience. The univer sity should not stand in the way of the process of grow ing into adult society. Let us now move on to the intellec tual life of the community. Unlike other levels of edu cation, the final product of tha university is considered the equal (in formal educa tion) of his teacher in fact in some of th2 more rapidly evolving fields. This matur ation reaches downward: the brightest college senior is surely more able, today, than the dullest recipient of th2 doctorate. So the student body is a highly heterogeneous mixture, ranging from callow and ig norant but not stupid fresh men to professionally mature graduata students, from bons vivants (of which we need a few more) to grey stones grinding books into exam inations. To treat them as a single type would involve in tolerable . insults, to distin guish them into classes of wisdom or ability or knowl edge would involve (beside large costs) intolerable in sults also. So we label them by years' residence, which is neither insulting' nor inform ative. On to the main question: what is the role of the stu dent f in the. university . socie ty?, What the role presently is may be a suitable prelude to discussing several current proposals. In brief, the stu dent has no legal voice in the conduct of the academic af fairs of a university. In this respect he is only slightly worse off than . the faculty: the legal powers of a univer sity reside in the? trustees and the powers of the faculty are only those of which it is the custodian. Of course the faculty at any slightly respec table college or university has substantial powers which no board of trustees would dare withdraw. The students are also a po tent influence on the strictly academic side of the univer sity, despite their absence from the formal offices of con trol. The selection and pro motion of faculty members everywhere is influenced by their success or failure as teachers. An utterly distin guished research man who is a hopeless teacher will do all right but he is the remote ex ception: even the wealthiest universities in the country cannot afford to have 5 per cent of its faculty incompet ent to teach. But it is the student who determines whe ther the man is a successful teacher. Th courses which consti tue the curriculum are simi larly much influnced by stu dent wishes. In fact the pre scribed curriculum is rough ly six parts the recent past, one part what the faculty wishes it had studied, and two parts what the students wish to studv. Since the curriculum in the recent past was constructed much the same wav. past and present student desires constitute a major influence. Students, not faculty, drove the classical languages out of their pro minent place in higher edu cation and brought about such education. Both of these influences, I believe, are desirable. Good teaching is helpful to the re search man (as well as the reciprocal, better recognized influence of research on tea ching): it maintains a com prehensiveness in his knowl edge and encourages clarity and simplicity in all his work. The academic world must have roots in the empirical world and student curricular pressures are one part ,of this nourishment. Students now often demand a voice or to be heard, which means a listener precisely in these areas in which they are already very influential. In particular in stitutions and at particular times I have no doubt that of student opinion on teaching and curriculum become bloc ked or inefficient, but any new machinery will also have its bad days. Would formal organization of student opin ion on teachers and causes improve the workings on av erage? On the rating of teachers my inclination is to answer, no. A ballot is not really needed, and, what is more to the point, not really desir able. The formal vote on tea chers' abilities would have two objections. One is that good teaching is not a matter solely of majority opinion: if ( a, man is useful to 40 stud ents each quarter, his inef . fectiveness with 900, other sttK; dents need not be trouble some. The second objection is that such rankings easily become cruel. A tenure ap pointment may be embitter . ed and rendered even less useful, for no good gain. In formal communication serv es the function adequately. But I would not interfere if students wished to make such polls. On curriculum the answer is different. Only an inform ed student can give helpful criticism, and the best way to ' inform him is by putting him on a committee which stud ies the matter. Standing com mittees would be burdensome ?nd boring, but r joint stu dent - faculty review of the curriculum each five years is worth trying. It is worth trying partly because our cur ricula are based to an im mense degree on untested op inion. Does French or Ger man really contribute to the research abilities of a Ph.D.? Nobody knows, although sen sible and relevant investiga tions would be possible. Do we have too much or too lit tle specialization of training what are the criteria and the tests? Our progress in ev en raising such questions has been deplorably small, . and alert, fresh - minded students might help force a rethinking of many decisions. An exper iment could be conducted on both departmental and divis ional lines. . The question of procedures is perhaps more important than that of policies: n uni versity is an institution for the unfettered workings of ration al argument, not for the dis semination of some particu lar truths. Of course the applications of all principles eventually encounter excruciating cases. Suppose a set of students wishes to advance rational ar guments for a given academ ic policy but no one will lis ten? Has not the faculty or administration thn abandon ed the ideal of the Universi ty? Although, by hypothesis, the administration refuses . to engage in rational discourse, " this is no justification for co ercion. Men cannot be coer ced into voluntary discussion. . The students, to continue the example, must seek by non coercive methods to reopen the discourse. I arrive then, at the position that even when one party re . fuses to engage in open -minded discussion, the oth er party must use rational ar guments to open its mind. saker Ban 'Hit 1 By Federal Judge Sp (Editor's note The fol lowing are excerpts from the UNC Law School commence ment address delivered last June by Federal District Court Judge J. Braxton Cra ven, Jr.) By J. BRAXTON CRAVEN Jr. Well, I made it. To be in vited to make the address at one of the nation's outstand ing law schools is a splen did compliment, and, like Mark Twain, I can live two months on a good compli ment. Not only have I been invited, but it now looks like I am going to be allowed to speak. Last Febrcary when I re ceived your valued invitation, I was not so sure. State v. Aptheker was still pending be fore the Trustees; Students, et al, v. State, now pending in a three - judge federal court, had not even been be- gun. My wife reassured me: she suggested that I had been in vited to bridge the awful gap between Welch and Wilkinson sort of an Ovaltine in the Afternoon. We then reflected upon my unexciting and inno cuous life with some satisfac tion: surely, I said to myself, I have never publicly express ed, a thought interesting enough to require withdraw al or cancellation of the invi tation. Anyway, as I have said, I made it. I do not believe Mr. Apthe ker can make communists out of you or even out of the sup posedly tender - minded un dergraduates, but I firmly be lieve he is entitled to try. I do not know what Mr. Welch., wants to make but of you whether necfascists or hotten tots but whatever it is, I also think he is entitled to try. More importantly, I think you shuold have the right -unbridled - to hear both saints and sinners wise men and fools and decide for your selves, which is which. You are a 1 r e a d y sohpisticated enough to know that you can't tell a book by its cover nor a man by his hood. Sophistica tion is a fine thing: it has. been defined as "knowing enough to keep your feet cut of the crack of the theater seat in front of you." I think ;;your imndsrchave beenTpiach- -ed often ""enough; so that 'ydu won't be caught, in a crack by me, or Wilkinson, or Welch, or Aptheker. Yet, there must be, I sup pose, some limitations on free speech, if only the minimal suggested by Holmes: that no one has the right to shout fire in a crowded theater. But it was the same Holmes who said: "If there is any prin ciple of the Constitution that more inseperatively calls for attachment than any other it is the principle of free thought not free thought for those who agree with us but free- Ernest Robl dom for the thought that we hate." J , But I am deliberately not talking about .the Constitu tion, nor are my remarks ad dressed to my colleagues de signated to try the constitu tionality of the Speaker Ban Law. Cynics the more ig norant ones may doubt my restraint. Even sophisticated people who ought to know tetter sometimes confuse what is wise with what is con stitutional. There is little, if any, such relationship. Some very stupid and very terrible things including slavery and child labor have been held constitutional. Whether or not the Speaker Ban Law is constitutional and I express no opinion out of deference to the designated three - judge court such legislation, in my opinion, is foolishly un wise and plainly immoral, tested by the standards of an enlightened society. Yet, the Speaker Ban Law may be or may not be constitutional. '. Professor Frankfurter, be fore his appointment to the Supreme Court, explained it very well: . "It must never be forgotten that our constant preoccupa tion with the constitutionality , of legislation rather than its wisdom tends to preoccupa tion with the constituionality pf legislation rather than its wis dom tends to preoccupation of ; the American mind with a false value. The ten dency of focusing attention on constitutionality is to make constitutionality synonymous with propriety; to regard .a law as all right so long as 'it is 'constitutional'. Such an at titude is a great enemy of legislation affecting freedom of thought .and freedom of speech, much that is highly illiberal would be clearly con stitutional .... The real bat ties of liberalism are not won in the Supreme Court. To : a large extent the Supreme Court . . ; is the reflector ;of that impalpable but controll ing thing, the general drift : of public opinion. Only a persis tent, positive translation !of the liberal faith into the thoughts and acts of the com munity is the real reliance against the unabated tempta tion to straight - jacket the human mind." Here at- Chapel Hill you .have been more , protected "against what JohrrStuart Mill calls "th 3 tyranny of the ma jority" than you ever will be again. As Mill has said, there is a "tendency of society: to impose (by means other than law) its own ideas and prac tices as rules of conduct on those who dissent from them." The yoke of law is relatively light, but the yoke of opin ion is still heavy in Ameri ca. Thought control, whether packaged as a Srjeaker Ran Law or otherwise, is contrary to the genius of a free people. IT For Undergraduates dn!v up the winding road, as the warm breeze pushes the first of the yellow ing leaves over the pave ment and swirls ihem back and forth. fewW611 aW,ay ust few short weeks, maybe somewhere in North Carolina or maybe even in Europe' where you've been doeSS Sg3tKU St that 'om The eolden rave of the late af- lernoon sun grope over the tops of campus buildings, and then, from the direction of the Bell Tower, the faint sound of chimes comes drifting through the air. This summer, while in Eu rope, someone asked mP about the University of North place is Chapel Hill I tried to describe the cam pus and Franklin Street- St" on a hot day, you might even see people walking gareloot tnfd to describe what a football game was like- -k! crowds roaring. The thl lSd about buildings' that Chapel Hill was a place where you found all kinSs of Ye,s 1 even told about thp th8?ker fn' and signs that said "Gov. Dan K Moore's Chapel Hill Wall i told how several thmiJ students stood onesided near a man who couldn't speak on their side of the wall. And I told about the night more C1?an. a thousand students mar ched across the campus to Present a petition to Presi dent Friday. I tried to describe the resi dence halls. t I Si)0ke about the courses 1 nad taken, and I mention ec 1 some of the professors and what they were like 1 mentioned this newspap er and how it operates entire- IL fp:ndent of control by ine administration. fnl t3lk,ed about Chapel Hill r a long time, because I nL tryulg t0 eive a com n, e.,and objective picture. -f2L hfn 11 is most impos- eim. objective about The person who had ask-in?S-luestion was a voung Z?1' He had Id me to fh V Pining to come hVeUn,ted states within he h?? yfar' That was hv veYsifv aS5ed about the Uni- At I 9nd ChaPel Hm- M rwards, he said that rnlino u Came t0 North Ca- ISfeA must be a very special place." . Yes, I thought, Chapel Hill ls a special place. And as I drove into town, I remembered the conversa tion. The as another small flur ry or leaves drifts to the ground, you suddenly realize Chapel Hill isn't just a nome away from home. It is A r - 5 -W
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Sept. 15, 1966, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75