Ummmm...what the h*** does this mean?  Is he advocating a "graveyard" for SFT????

I read Mr. Richmond as a believer in the administrative university.

All he needs to add is a provision about students being dispensable, and he'll be all the way there.

Robert Campbell

quote:

---

Originally posted by: tvscene
"'The graveyards are full of indispensable men' In response to the May 16 letter, "USM cannot withstand large-scale faculty loss": Please see DeGaulle, Charles. Quote: "The graveyards are full of indispensable men." Of course, he said it in French so you could argue about the exact translation. But I feel the point is obvious and should be noted. BRILEY RICHMOND Ocean Springs "

---

Well the point (if there is only one) may be obvious to M. Richmond, but it escapes me. Perhaps, BR means to imply that the entire faculty is "disposable" and could be replaced. I would reply, "Yes, but at what cost?" Just to pick a random example, remember France prior to World War II.  The male population -- those indispensable men -- had been decimated (no, that means only one out of ten) after the Great War.  The defense of France was left for those who followed the indispensable men.  As it turns out, some of those were later buried at Normandy, Oise-Aisne, and Meuse-Argonne. (For more, Google, "American" "Cemetery" "France").  To me, DeGaulle's declaration could easily be understood as homage to the martyrs.

 

Perhaps BR just reminds us all to be humble, no one of us is indispensable; we are all eventually "dispensed".  My junior high coach used to say, "Just look at the hole left when you take your hand out of a bucket of water."  To which we students would always reply, "Hunh?" 

 

Oooh, Zen.

 

.

I go with the "you faculty are not indispenssible" interpretation.  He is right in that no ONE professor is indispensible.  However, ONE HUNDRED professors are a different matter.  He also misses the point that in any organization, there is a critical point at which the loss of experienced personnel cripples the organization.  (This happened in the military a few years ago when some genius decided to implement an "up or out" policy and gor rid of significant numbers of 15 - 20 year noncoms, leaving lower enlisted and officers. Does that scenario sound a little familiar?)

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"Has anyone else noticed the tendency of SFT supporters to substitute cliches for reasoned argument?"

---

  I think cliches probably work well for the audiences they are used to.  I doubt their families and the people that work for them can question their wisdom.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"Has anyone else noticed the tendency of SFT supporters to substitute cliches for reasoned argument?"

---

Yep, cliches are easy.  You hear a cliche, you can say, "Right on. That 'bout sums it up."  And you can stop thinking about it. Cliches have more to do with affiliation than ideas.

That's my story, and I'm sticking to it.