UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AND THE WAR

Press, Volume LXXVII, Issue 23362, 23 June 1941, Page 9

UNIVERSITY STUDENTS AND THE WAR

Sir,— Following upon some rather caustic observations by Mr Tracy there have been some interesting letters on the above subject. It Is generally admitted that the pacifist outlook is due to muddled thinking, but it is urged that the academic principle of freedom Of thought and conditions of fair play are priceless inheritances. . . It appears to me, however, that it is logical to view the matter from anr other angle. For instance, before a student is allowed to enter the teaching profession he must pass certain examinations at a secondary school or at the university if the student desires degrees. Should he or she, however, do some muddled thinking at the examinations it is likely that the student will, be considered unsuitable to instruct a class, but if the muddled thinking is merely about defence, it is not supposed to make any difference. In conclusion, I claim , that that aspect of the position is entirely wrong. Muddled, thinking on defence, which involves national existence, should be considered much more serious than in examinations. Lack of logic in defence some years t ago is now resulting in our boys having had to fight in Crete without proper air support—Yours, efc WILKmsON Mitcham, June 18, 1941. Sir,—lt is difflcult v to understand a graduate putting his name to the sweeping assertions of “Third Graduate.* One could surely not find more “dogmatic” totemtet ol the antitheeiogical position. The letter is a series of gross assumptions, not one of Which is backed by fTsiritflc argument "Chemistry consists memiy of facts While theology ,is all theory: and no facts”: How came “Third Graduate by this conclusion? It would directly follow that a particle of dust we tread upon, or a particle of steam which vapprlseS while we watch it; is a fact, God is hh| * fact at all' The cohs^tef, nobody his y?t <Uscpverea. Sir Jgmes Jeans says, ‘The universe begins to look more like a great thought than a great machine.” , „ . Theology takes its stand, like philosophical idealism,. updn an Interpretation/of reality whlih is essentially spiritual St(e has her chalfa in most

- ■»' y ■' of the great universities of the world and has had them through history. It Will not be long before they ate found in 'New Zealand. Whether they will "Split the student life into irreconcilable naturalism and mysticism* 1 remains to be seen. One may say just as emphatically that theology should reconcile the two. To wind up saying that the present “ghastly state’ is the fruit of antiquated theology is as swift a diagnosis of present troubles as one could hope to And In print. However that may be. I think "Third Graduate" Will flhd that a living and up-to-date theology will take its place in the spearhead of world reconstruction.—Yours, etc., WESLEY PARKER. June 20, 1941.

Sir,—Still more muddled thinkingl IThird Graduate" contrasts Chemistry with theology. Why did he not contrast it , with, say, philosophy or economics? Yet these subjects are taught at universities, and according to “Third Graduate’s’’ classification would be entirely theoretic. Furthermore, he is astray in asserting that chemistry consists mainly of facts and theology mainlv of theory. Chemistry is based upon facts, but the explanation of those facts is wholly theory, while theology is based upon the fact of God. If you like you may say that theology deals with the teal, while the other sciences deal only with appearances. 1 should hazard a guess that “Third Graduate" has a science degree, and is In like case to the young science graduate who, in a discussion with an old Quaker, was loudly boasting of scientific achievements, and wound up by saying that for his part he was not going to believe in anything he could not see. To which the old Quaker .replied quietly, “How dost thou know that thou hast any brains?" Theology instead of splitting the student life into “irreconcilable naturalism and mysticism" welds it into a consistent whole. If the post war world is to be naturalistic ' (whatever that might mean), then we shall not have seen the last of wars.—Yours, etc., ALSO GRADUATE. June 20, 1041. Sir, —Since the question of courage has been raised in regard to the signature of my letter last Monday, I think I should recall the fact that I wrote, not as an individual making a personal charge, but as a graduate of Canterbury College defending "the academic principle of freedom of thought and the student tradition of fair play.” If any correspondent should differ from me in considering my name as of more importance than my attachment to my old college,! should be glad to set his fears at rest by assuring him that I am neither a student nor a .teacher at the college. Having achieved my purpose in eliciting an authoritative statement from the Rector of the College, and thus, I hope, allaying the fears and misapprehensions of a large section of the public I have no other wish than to hold my peace, nor do I await t1.2 permission of any correspondent to do'so.—Yours, etc., GRADUATE. June 21, 1941.