The PresidentSpeaksTO ERNEST LEISER“The optimistic hopes of ThomasJefferson have not been realized. Edu¬cation has not been the cure-all fordemocracy as he fondly anticipateda hundred and forty years ago.” saidPresident Hutchins yesterday.Quoting the statement of Plato that“what is honored in a country is culti¬vated there,” Mr. Hutchins asked howit could be possible to change educa¬tion against the wishes of the demo¬cratic majority that determines whatthe educational system'is to be?If Joe Were Apotheosis“If Joe Louis were the apotheosisof all the American virtues, thinkwhat would happen to any public.school which tried to de-emphasizeathletics,” remarked the President.“Since politics is prior to educa¬tion, it determines it. If by radical Voilq Tlh/ioonVol. 41, No. 25 Z-149 THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940 Price Three CentsAnnounce l-F Ball LeadersRoosevelt VictoryIs Democracy’sTriumph-Johnson Head l-F Grand March“Re-election of President FranklinDelano Roosevelt is a victory for thepeople,” jubilantly exclaimed T. Wal-changes in education, that education | ter Johnson as he heard the tidingstrios tc change the nature of the gov-! early this morning. “It is proof thaternment, it is doomed to failure.” A I the majority of the people were notgood public educational system is ab¬solutely necessary, however, to main¬tain the democracy we have,” thePresident stressed.Private School PioneerSince public education can only bechanged if the people desire change,or if the change is made without theirknowledge, and since neither of thesealternatives is very likely to occur, itfalls to the private educational insti¬tution to make such changes.“Even an endowed University likeChicago is dependent upon the peoplewho support it and the people whoattend it.” admitted Mr. Hutchins."Since the people who support a pri¬vate university represent fairly wellthe population as a whole, and sincestudents who attend a university area product of the enviroment, too radi¬cal changes mean a decline in thebacking of the university.Changes are Minorprivate school must be both richand venerated before it can pioneerin education,” the President comment¬ed. “Even then, the changes it canmake with impunity are relativelyminor ones, for it is rare in humannature to find trustees so stalwart orlil)eral-minded that they will allowwhat they thir’. is dangerous to betaught.”How could major changes to im¬prove democracy be made if educa¬tion probably couldn't make them? Mr.Hutchins expre8.sed the opinion thatthis might be done through some sortof spiritual revolution or very gradu¬ally, maybe, through private educa¬tion. fooled by the high-pressure crusadeof the advertising and utility men whotried to put Willkie over.”It is a victory of the many, overthe forces of the ‘few' who tried toseize control of this nation's govern¬ment. The power of the common-manin a democracy has once again reas¬serted itself,” continued Johnson.Nation in Safe HandsOur nation can now go forward se¬cure in the knowledge that our foreign(Continued on page 4)9 FraternitiesProtest Phi DeltPulse Add.Vine fraternities yesterday regis¬tered a protest with the Inter-Frater¬nity Council on the action of Phi DeltaTheta in securing space in Pulse byselling subscriptions for the magazine.The fraternities which protested theuetion w'ere Chi Psi, Phi Kappa Psi,Sigma Chi, Kappa Sigma, Phi KappaSigma, Delta Kappa Epsilon, Delta1 psilon. Beta Theta Phi, and AlphaDelta Phi.No Penalty Will Be ImposedWhen asked for a statement on thematter Chuck Percy,' I-F head re¬marked “The fact that these housesprotested shows that that the fra¬ternities as a whole look on the actionas an unethical publicity stunt. There:ire no regulations in the Inter-Fra¬ternity regulations which would pre¬vent such an act nor will any penaltybe imposed on Phi Delta Theta. Thecouncil, however, strongly recom¬mends that in the future fraternitiescarefully consider the means they usefor publicity.”The University has no ruleswhich would prohibit Pulse fromgiving space to any organization if it^0 de.sired according to William Ran¬dall, Assistant Dean of Students.Dean Randall remarked that in thepast several organizations such asDlackfriars have paid student publi¬cations for publicity.Actresses AppearIda Noyes TodayCharming Katherine Aldridge, Jud¬ith Allen, and Arleen W'^helan who areappearing currently in Chicago thea¬ters, will grace the rostrum at the first•'session of Pulse's “Charm School” to¬day at 2:30 in Ida Noyes.According to plans released simul¬taneously with the second issue ofPulse, the “Charm School” will bringactresses and beauty experts to theCampus to teach the girls how to beglamorous. Alumni ProfsDiscussU.S.-WarThree experts on international af¬fairs, two alumni of the Universityof Chicago and the third a PulitzerPrize-winning professor of history,will discuss “America and the War”in a special session of the AlumniSchool at the University's homecom¬ing celebration. The session will beheld Saturday at 3:45 in Mandel Hall.The speakers are Nathaniel Pef-fer, professor of international rela¬tions at Columbia University, and awidely recognized authority on theFar East; Hilmar Baukhage, radio!commentator and former foreign cor¬respondent ; and BernadottejE. Schmitt, Andrew MacLeish Dis¬tinguished Service Professor of Mod¬ern History at the University of Chi¬cago. Both Professor Peffer and Mr.Baukhage are University graduates.Dr. Schmitt was awarded the PulitzerPrize in 1931 for his book, “The Com¬ing of the World War—1914.”Special SessionThe special session of the AlumniSchool is held in recognition of thestart of the University’s fiftieth an¬niversary celebration. A six-day ses¬sion of the school has been held eachspring since 1936.The June gathering, the most con¬structive type of alumni reunion inthe country, also has become thelargest reunion activity of its kind inthe country.Other alumni activities scheduledfor Saturday include tours of exhibits Ruth Steel, Chuck Percy, Donna Culliton and Greg Huffaker.Slate All-Campus SingFor HomecomingDewey Bust GivenTo University byMorris CommitteeA bust of John Dewey, famed Ameri¬can philosopher, will be presented tothe University, Charles W. Morris,associate professor of Philosophy, an¬nounced yesterday. Morris, with PaulH. Douglas, professor of Economics,and Ralph Tyler, chairman of thedepartment of Education, has been incharge of raising funds with whichto finance the bust. Contributions canstill be made up to November 16.Portnoff’s WorkThe bust, whicn is the work ofAlexander Portnoff, is said by someof Dewey’s friends to be a better like¬ness than the Epstein bust at Colum¬bia University. Among those who con¬tributed to its erection were EdwardS. Ames, J. H. Tufts, Dr. Henry C.prepared for the University’s anni-' A. Mead, Harold L. Ickes, Dr. Antonversary celebration an alumni dinner,and performance of “The DeceitfulDean,” campus musical comedy origi¬nally presented in 1899. J. Carlson, George S. Counts, T. V.Smith, and Sewall Wright. It has notyet been decided where on campusthe bust will be placed.Psyche Says-University GraduateNext Illinois Governor A campus-wide fall quarter singhas been planned by the Homecomingj Committee to parallel the traditionalI Interfraternity Sing of the spring.Dale Tillei’y, Homecoming Chair¬man, announced yesterday that theidea behind this move was to institutea musical gathering for the entirecampus. The first of these will be heldSaturday evening in the circle justprior to the Gay Nineties Carnivalwhich comes off in the Fieldhouse.Big ProgramAccording to the schedule laid outby the Homecoming Committee, a pro¬cession will be led by the band aroundthe various gathering places on cam¬pus to collect a crowd for the sing.The girls’ dorms and the men’s res¬idence hall will be contacted first withthe following itinerary includingmarches along University and Wood-lawn avenues to pick up the fraternitymen.The procession ends at the circlewhere the bonfire will be lighted and(Continued on page 4) Culliton, Steel,Percy, HuffakerLead ParadePermit Freshmen to AttendBall for First Time.Donna Culliton, Ruth Steel, CharlesPercy, and Greg Huffaker will leadthe 1941 Inter-Fratemity ball to beheld November 20, Thanksgiving evein the Grand Ballroom of the HotelSherman. Only fraternity men are in¬vited to the ball. Each house is as¬sessed for each active member andpledge.Miss Culliton, president of the In-ter-Club council, is a member of Mor¬tar Board and leader of the Women’sDefense Council, Sigma presidentRuth Steel is chairman of the Mirror^Board. Percy is president of the Inter-Fraternity Council and Huffaker ofthe Council heads the Ball committee.Freshmen AttendFor the first time since deferredrushing was originated, freshmen willbe able to attend the ball. In yearspast pledging was in the winter quar¬ter and consequently the Ball waslimited strictly to upper-classmen.The orchestra playing this year isCharlie Barnett who will fly fromNew York to Chicago for this engage¬ment and booking at the State-LakeTheatre where his music has beenfeatured at the swank hotels.Bids for the dance, availablethrough fraternity houses, will beabout three dollars, Percy announced,which is less than they have formerlybeen.Transcript OnNewsstandsWith ReturnsMercury BlacksOut Part Of SunLast night Madame Guisaka MakaSchmeltzer, famous mystic extraordi¬naire, whizzed over to the Maroonoffice from her engagement at a down¬town theatre to call on her sixth senseto predict the election before sheheard any returns.Sweeping in, Madame Schmeltzerfell down. On her feet again she satin the middle of the floor as the lightsdimmed, pulled a small bottle fromher bosom, drank deeply, and then shesaid, “Ask me something.”“What’s the capital of South Da¬kota?” some sprightly freshmanasked.“Debutte”, answered Madame S.quick as a shot.Madame Knows AllThen the atmosphere thickened. Ayoung intellectual arose. “Who will bethe next governor of Illinois?” Ma¬dame S. said, in her own way, “YIP”.It was clearly a tough question. Shedrank of her small bottle again. Fi¬nally, her hand reaching heavenwardshe screamed, “The next governor ofIllinois is a graduate of the Univer¬sity of Chicago law school.”The atmosphhere was cracked bysomebody s a yi n g, “Remarkable”.Madame Schmeltzer left, her audience stupified by her clairvoyant power.Only later was It pointed out thatboth gentlemen, who ran for governor,are graduates of the University LawSchool.Reynolds ClubStarts Opera SeriesGiovanni Cardelli, Director of Pub¬lic Relations of the Chicago OperaCompany, will be the commentatoron the first Opera Hour, tomorrow.The opera to be reviewed is Verdi’s“Falstaff,” which is being revived thisyear by the Chicago Opera Company.The scene of activities will be theReynolds Club Lounge, beginning at4:30. This Opera Hour is the firstof five being presented under theauspices of the department of music,of the University.Besides the analytic comment to begiven by Mr. Cardelli, there also willbe musical illustrations. One of theattractions of the Hour will be theattendance of some of the singers tak¬ing part in the current production of“Falstaff.” The planet Mercury will appear asa small black disk crossing the face ofthe sun November 11 in the last“transit” of this type until 1963, Dr.Otto Struve, professor of astrophysicsat the University of Chicago, disclosedlast week. The passage will begin at2:46.The phenomena, which take placeapproximately thirteen times in acentury, will provide astronomers atthe University of Chicago’s Yerkesobservatory with an opportunity tocheck a part of Dr. Albert Einstein’stheory of relativity explaining an ir¬regularity of Mercury’s motion.Next Good Opportunity, 1973In this part of the world the 1953repetition of the transit will not be inas favorable a position for observa¬tion as this year’s; the next time as¬tronomers will have as favorable anopportunity to view the phenomenonwill be in 1973, Dr. Struve explained.Measurements of the angle of Mer¬cury’s orbit across the sun will checka slight “wandering” tendency, knownas “advance of the perihelion,” peri¬helion being the point at which theplanet’s path comes closest to thesun.He urged that visual observers ade¬quately protect their eyes whilewatching the transit, suggesting thatthe passage be watched in its reflec¬tion on a sheet of paper placed a fewinches beneath the eye-end of a tel¬escope. The Round Table Transcript willbeat Time Magazine to the newsstandswith elections returns today!For today’s edition, George Gallup,Princeton University election prog¬nosticator, Elmo Roper of the FortunePoll, and Harold Glasswell, formerPolitical Scientist here, and now re¬search student of propaganda, wiredexclusive statements to the Tran¬script as soon as the election resultswere in. Then Editor Brownlee Hay-don forsook some of his night’s restarranging publication for appearanceon the newsstands this afternoon.First Public SaleThis is the first time in its twoand a half years of life that the Tran¬script has been offered for sale on thepublic newsstands. Usually contentwith a small but exclusive subscrip¬tion list, many for use in civics class¬rooms throughout the country, the edi¬tors and the University are using to¬day’s edition as a sort of feeler to de¬termine if it could develop a moregeneral demand.Students will be able to buy copiesin the Bookstores at two this after-ASU Hears HowTo Keep Out of WarPolls show that most students wantto stay out of war, but don’t thinkthe country will be able to do so. TheASU feels there is a way, and thatit will be explained by Hugo Reich-ard, formerly vice-president of theStudent Senate, at the University ofMichigan, who will speak at 4:30 to¬dy in the Reynolds Club lounge A.Reichard is at present connectedwith the district staff of the ASU.The meeting is open to all studentsand time for discussion will be pro¬vided.Page Two THE DAILY MAROON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940%£ Oollq TJhAootiroUNDED IN 1901Tht Daily Maroon is the official student newspaper of the Uni-•’ersity of Chicago, published ntiornings except Saturday, Sunday,and Monday during the Autumn, Winter, and Spring quarters byThe Daily Maroon Company, 6831 University avenue. Telephones:Hyde Park 9221 and 9222. „ . .After 6:30 phone in stories to our printers. The Chief PrintingCumpanv, 148 West 62nd street Telephones: Wentworth 6123and OlM. ...The University of Chicago assumes no responsibility for anystatements appearing in The Daily Maroon, or for any contractentered into by The Daily Maroon. . . ,The Daily Maroon expressly reserves the rights of publication ofany material appearing in this paper. Subscription rates: $3 a year;|4 by mail. Single copies: three cents.Entered as second class matter March 18. 1908. at the post officeat Chicago. Illinois, under the act of March 3, 1879.MemberPissociotGd GollG6iatG PressDistributor ofCblle6iale Di6estBOARD OF CONTROLEditorialWILLIAM HANKLA PEARL C. RUBINSERNEST S. LEISER JOHN P. STEVENS. ChairmanBusinessJOHN E. BEX, Business ManagerWILLIAM LOVELL, Advertising ManagerEDITORIAL ASSOCIATESJames Burtle, Mark Fisher, Chester Hand, Richard Himmel, DanielMezlay, Richard Philbrick, Robert D. F. Reynolds, and DanielWinograd.BUSINESS ASSOCIATESRobert Dean, George Flanagan, Lyle Harper, and Myles Jarrow.Night Editor: Bob LawsonAssistant: Pearl C. RubinsWarningToday is the day after election. Probablyat least three-fourths of the editorial writersin the country are going to plead for nationalunity. Now that the election is over, they willsay, let us work together and fight together.After all, we are all Americans, whether Re¬publicans or New Dealers.It would be wrong, of course, to plead fornational disunity, just to be different. Thelesson of France is in the too recent past tomake any such plea even plausible.Danger of ‘American Fascism’But it is necessary to keep Americans fromall piling on one bandwagon and rolling alongto a kind of American fascism. National unitycan be made to mean unanimity through physi¬cal compulsion. We hope that the orators andeditorialists who are going to say today thatwe patch up our quarrels, and face our sacrificestogether for a common cause remember that.If the Socialists are to be wrong in theirclaim that already we are on the road to Fas¬cism, we must work with all our vigor to seethat civil liberties are maintained, that just be¬cause one candidate has won, all Americans arenot compelled to support his policies.We are living in days which are most dan¬gerous to our right to think freely. But theyare also days in which it is most imperativethat no government agent or no force of publicopinion forces us to maintain silence.E. S. L.Dear Old Fraternite-e-eWe feel that Phi Delta Theta should bedefended from the vicious attacks of the eightfraternities which have protested to the Inter-Fraternity Council. We resent any criticismof the ethics of the Pulse article on the “BigOne.”There is absolutely no reason why Pulseshould not have the right to plug the NumberOne house on campus. They did so withoutobligation or coercion. The fact tha^ the PhiDelts purchased numerous copies, sola numer¬ous subscriptions, and paid for numerous cutshad nothing whatsoever to do with the choiceof Phi Delta Theta as the “Chicago Frater-nite-e.”The fraternity men are prejudiced whenthey criticize either Pulse or Phi Delt. It can¬not be fairly said that the magazine’s shakyfinancial condition, or the fraternity’s desire toget pledges had anything to do with the article.We must all realize that Phi Delt is indeed“unique,” and therefore deserving of five anda half pages out of the 24 in the campus news¬magazine. J. P. S.What Goes Up—(This is the first of a series of articles in the Ma¬roon dedicated to some of the weightier problems pre¬sented by everyday university life. Ed.)Slacker is an ugly word these days. A slacker is onewho tries to avoid the draft. There are few male slack¬ers, but women seem to have no such compunctions.Figures show that there are a great many female slack¬ers.Fashion, the aim of women, and the bane of men isresponsible for the deplorable condition. What has fash¬ion got to do with it? Well, fashion decrees short skirts.The women wear short skirts. That puts them in thedraft. They don’t like it. They put on slacks and be¬come slackers.It is a shame, says one male student, that womenaren’t content to remain in “skirts,” which is their nat- I The Traveling Bazaar[ by JOHN STEVENSI Since fraternity rushing is practically the onlyI thing going on in the world today, (except for a presi-' dential election, a world war, and other such insignifi-j cant matters,) it seems appropriate to write a columnentirely about fraternity men and dedicate it to the“Kings for a Week,” the freshmen. We will thereforej take a tour of the 16 houses and select a good man fromeach, assuming, of course, that there is a good manjin each.I Starting with Phi Psi, because it is off-campus ac-j cording to the Inter-Fraternity Council rules, we could' choose any one of the myriad of key-men, who insistthat there is a Big Four, or atypical BMOC’S Hanklaand Molkup. Instead Paul Reynolds is the man.Next house south on Woodlawn is Sigma Chi. Jun¬ior Bob Bowers is the man for the freshmen to meetthere. House President Joe Stampf is ineligible for thechoice because everybody knows him anyway.Green Shutters iNext comes Phi Sigma Delta, home of Milt Weissfriend of Hymie Hesselberg, w’here we pounce on BillBartman. He undoubtedly deseiwes the title because hisgreat uncle w’as a white Russian. Across the street anddown the block is Delta Upsilon, home of the saviors ofthe attacked Paul Harrison .... When they saved himhe had the aggressor flat on his back, but since it’sRush Week, we give the credit to the fraternity men.George Rinder would have downed the aggressor if he’dbeen there, so he is our DU key man.Across the street is the Kappa Sig House. They areobviously all super-men because they are in the VictoryVanities finals, but towering above the rest like a verit-: able Goliath is amiable and rotund A1 Schnoor.I The Dekes are next on the list. Everybody knows II their 27 BMOC’s, but few appreciate sophomore George '* Lauerman. We might mention Clayton Traeger, but it i; seems that the brothers want him kept quiet, since they >; chain him to the furnace during rushing functions. |Vibrant Youth |I Next door is the Deke Annex, home of the finest;fraternity in the world. (In spite of Pulse, they just nose jout the Omsk chapter of Phi Delt.) Here the choice is jobviou.s—Ruth “Smorgasbord” Ahlquist, because of her |superb porti'ayal of “vibrant youth” in “Death Takes |a Holiday.” Whenever you feel the urge, just drop in |and watch her vibrate.We hate to skip Lambda .\1pha, but we know only86*^ of their membership so do not feel that we canmake an intelligent choice. Now comes that paragon of ,fraternities. Phi Delta Theta. For information on this |organization see Pulse. We do not feel that we can find ;words that will adequately describe the institution, jLooking for the key-man here it seems unfair to disre- 'gard John Bex since “The house and the man are inex-ti’icably interwined, the story of one is the saga of theother.” However, we boldly ignore the modern Nie-belungenlied and name Hatten Yoder, national oboechampion, as our key-man. ^Zeta Beta Tau, which remains on* campus only be¬cause Jay Fox has his pin on Chloe Roth, who is secret-'ly in love with Bob Atkins, is the final fraternity. HereMort Slobin, Shaker Heights essayist, is undoubtedlyour man. During chapter meeting debates he is contin- |ually rising to his full height to emphasize points. |1Some SwedeComing to University Avenue we start with Alpha jDelt. Here Chuck Percy, enamoured of Pauline Levy, 1who is better known as Epaulette Goddard, is ineligible. iThe key-man is Ash Taylor, who is a fine fellow be¬cause he has been in Sw'eden.The Betas are next door and Earl Ratzer is their starman because he bought beer for three girls in Foster.Anyone who buys beer for three girls in Foster is ob¬viously a key-man. Since he is a Beta he is also intel¬lectual. Of the beer-drinking Chi Psi’s we favor BobLawson because he is an excellent Chi Psi. Since he is aChi Psi, he also drinks beer.Phi Kappa Sigma, home of J. Wilson Reilly, chair¬man of Transfer Orientation, which orients transfers,boasts of Charley Hoeppehen as its “diamond-in-the-rough.”Crossing 57th street we approach the Psi U house,which is noteworthy because it is next door to Pi Lam.There are no good men in this house except Ray Taylor,who is undoubtedly the best houseman on campus, so wecan move on to Pi Lam. In spite of the fact that he hasa dual personality, one male, one female. Bill Hochmanis the man to meet. Farther north we come to Phi Gam,home of sarongs and Fiji’s. Since Art Lopatka lookshis best in a sarong, and since his great uncle was aFiji chieftain, he is our man. Last but by no meansleast is Sigma Alpha Epsilon. The SAE house, if youinclude the adjoining rooms, is the largest on campus.Consequently George Ramspeck is a fine fellow.Blackfriar's BooksAll those considering writing books for this year’sBlackfriars should plan to have them in the handsof Dick Salzmann, Abbot, by the third week in No¬vember.ural calling. There is debate on this subject too. Oneauthority says that short skirts make girls cold, buthave an opposite effect on him. Another student, a math¬ematician, states that the length of women’s skirtsshould be inversely proportionate to the shapeliness oftheir legs.Comes the revolution, everybody loses their shirts,and the skirt problem will be forgotten. Sigma AlphaEpsilonBy ALLAN DREYFUSSSAE is unique in several respects.First, it is the largest national Greekletter fraternity in the country. Sec¬ond, it is the only dormitory chapterat the University. And third, but byno means last, it is the only fraternityin the world that has both George“purple pants” Hand and D. CletonBergus of the Indiana Berguses andpotential supreme court justice asbrothers.Well, now we know that IllinoisTheta of Sigma Alpha Epsilon ain’tlike the other Greek assemblages oncampus in a few respects. After asleeping beauty snooze of some fouryears as an inactive house on thiscampus, the chapter was revived byan interested group of Burtonitesknown simply as the “Joe Club.”Ten ActivesAs far as this department can as¬certain, SAE has about ten actives.George Ramspeck’s chief activitiesconsist of SAEing, studying and beingGeorge Ramspeckish. Beside Rmn-speck the other brothers number BobZolad of the Business School, ErnestFitz-Hugh who is described as a po¬tential BMOC who only needs softwarm rain, and fertile ground to at¬tain this end; Harold Bauman, acephotographer and son of Chicago’sDanish Consul, and bashful CarlPritchett of the band.Additional “Violets” include A1 Curiof the six man football squad, GeorgeHand, possessor of a pair of purplepants and an infectious grin, and Don¬ald Bergus, an amiable combinationof wit and .sagacity. Because of theproximity of national headquarters inEvanston the local chapter can utilizethe excellent facilities which theNorthwestern branch offers.Future is PromisingThus far the chapter, because of thenature of its renaissance, has beenforced to limit its sphere of activity,but the establishment of the nucleusthat it now possesses gives promise ofa season full of all activities whichother houses are wont to munchausen-ize about to incoming freshmen. Ini¬tiation fee is ^.lO, actives pay fourdollars a month while pledges paytwo dollars.Officers are George Ramspeck, pres¬ident, Walter Louise, vice-president,and treasurer, Robert Zolad.CLASSIFIED Chem StudentsTake To ToysGraduate students in chemistry areplaying with tinkertoys, or at leastthey appear to be. It seems that theway in which the elements in organicchemical compounds fit together isbest demonstrated by putting coloredwooden balls representing differentelements together with wooden sticksrepresenting the “chemical bonds” be¬tween them.In this way an organic compoundcan be illustrated in the third dimen¬sion instead of in the second dimen¬sion as is done in the structural for¬mulae in the Phy. Sci. survey coursesyllabus.According to Morris S. Kharasch,professor of chemistry, the progressof structural theory in organic chem¬istry was held up for 25 years beforescientists learned to play with thesetoys.ClassifiedROOMMATE WANTED (female) for two roomapartment plus kitchen facilities. $11.00per month. Gertrude Reizman, 6514 EllisAve. Mid. 2640.Showing This Week at theSTUDIO THEATREVan Buren St. at Michigan Are."SISTERS"Bette Davis, Errol Flynn, Anita Louiseand"TRUE CONFESSION"Carol Lombard, Fred McMurray,John BarrymoreM£fT Ml atTHERIINCHWANTED I’niversily woman denirinK homeand xmall sialary to ahsist with baby andlilfht housework. Tel. Plaza 2294. Mrs. 1Joe Khrnstein, 1447 K. 62nd. b COURSE DINNERS FROM 7ScOriginators of the Round-Up SkilletGeorfe T. Drake, Mer.123 E. OAK ST. AT MICH. AVE.STUDENTSYou save 20'^ to 40*0 discount on alllaundry brought in and caHod tor.CASH ami CARRYMETROPOLE LAUNDRY1219-1221 East 55th St.Batwoon Woodlawn and Kimbark Ava.—Open 7 A. M. to 8 P. M.—There is something delight¬ful about the clean, exhilaratingtaste of ice-cold Coca-Cola.The minute it passes your lipsyou know it for what it is,—pure, wholesome, delicious.And you welcome the refreshedfeeling that follows.^4 us E THAT REFRESHESBottled under authority of The Coca.Cola Co. byTHE DAILY MAROON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940 Page Three\GOD AND THE PROFESSORSBy MORTIMER ADLERMr. Adler’s address was givenat the Conferente of Science,Philosophy and Religion in NewYork City in middle September.Rights for this text belong to theConference.I—IntroductionThe F’ounding Members of thisConference are, for the most part,piofessors in American colleges anduniversities. They are eminent rep¬resentatives of the various aca¬demic disciplines, among which arethe three mentioned as most relevantto this Conference—science, philos¬ophy. and religion. The presence ofhistorians and humanistic scholars isjustified by the modern extension ofscience to include the so-called social^ciences, with which all research abouthuman affairs and culture can beafiiliated. Most of these professorsbelong to one or more of the severallearned societies which meet annuallyfor the reading and discussion of pa¬pers that purport to make contribu¬tions to truth, or at least do what isacademically recognized as learning.Hence, the reason for this Conference,for this additional meeting at whichmore pai)ers are being read and dis-cussinI, must be some need for the pro¬fessors to get together in a differentway and for a different purpose. If thepublic wonders why we are gatheringhere this Septemlnr, we must justifythis Conference as trying to do some¬thing which is not. and perhaps can¬not be, accomplished in the ordinaryproces.ses of our academic life—inclassrooms, faculty meetings or the.sessions of learned societies.Some explanations have alreadybeen given. We have come togetherbecause we all share, for different rea¬sons and in varying degrees, an un¬easiness about something we call thepresent situation. Whether or not woare ready to say that God’s in hisheaven, we cry with one voice thatall’s not right with the world. I wish1 could credit my colleagues with onefurther agreement, namely, that thepresent crisis is only superficially aconflict between democracy and total-itaiianism in the |)olitical arena, orIxtween individualism and collect¬ivism in the economic sphere. If thatwere the full nature of the crisis, whyshould we waste time talking aboutscience, philo.sophy and religion? Thefact that w’e have chosen to considerthiee major components of human cul¬ture should indicate' that W’e all havea vague sense of cultural disorder asthe root of our troubles, as the j^ourceof a threatening doom. Far from be¬ing prime movers. Hitler and Mus¬solini. or. if you wish, the Stalins and( hamherlains', are but paranoiac pup¬pets, dancing for a moment on thecrest of the wave—the wave that isthe historic motion of modern cultureto its own destruction.culture is not killed by politicalconflicts, even when they attain theshattering violence of mo<lern war¬fare; nor by economic revolutions,even when they involve the disloca¬tions of modern mass uprisings. Acult lire diett of (line<(srs which aretlicmaclreH cultural. It may be bornJ"-ck, as modern culture was, or it maytiecay through insufficient vitality toovercome the disruptive forces pres¬ent in every culture; but, in any case,cultural (liHorder is a cause and not aneffect of the j)olitical and economicdisturbances which beset the worldtoday.1 he health of a culture, like thehealth of the body, consists in the har¬monious functioning of its parts. Sci¬ence, philosoi)hy and religion are cer¬tainly major parts of European cul-fiire; their distinction from another«iuite separate parts is certainlyfhe most characteristic culturalachievement of modern times. But ifthey have not been j)roperly disting-uishe<l, they cannot be jcroperly re¬lated ; and unless they are properly'elated, properly ordered to one an¬other, cultural (ii.sorder, such as thatof modern times, inevitably results.I his Conference, one might suppose,has been called to consider the illnessof our culture; more than that, to seekand effect remedies. One of the trou¬bles is that scientists, philosophers,and theologians, or teachers of re-hgion, have long failed to communi¬cate with one another. The structureof a modern university, with its de¬partmental separations, and its totallack of order among specialized dis¬ciplines, represents perfectly the dis-*^aity and chaos of modern culture.Since nothing can be expected of theprofessors locked up in their depart¬ mental cells, since reforming our in¬stitutions of higher learning (to makethem truly universities) seems to beimpossible, since the ordinary proc¬esses of academic life manifest thevery defects which must be remedied,the professors have been assembledunder the special auspices of this C* r •ference with the hope that lines ofcommunication can be established.That done, one might even hope forcommunication to lead to mutual un¬derstanding, and thence to agreementabout the truths which could unify ourculture.II—The Purpose of theConferenceIf w’hat I have said is not the pur¬pose of this Conference, I can see nojustification for it whatsoever. Thefact that all the professors gatheredmention that Present Crisis, withouttrying to agree about its nature andcauses; the fact that they manifestsome concern about Democracy, with¬out trying to define it and understandits roots; the fact that, in a bafflingvariety of senses, they refer to Sci¬ence, Philosophy and Religion, with¬out trying to .solve the intricate prob¬lem of the relationship of the^a dis¬ciplines,—all this amounts to notnuig.An undertaking of this sort is notneeded to make professors think ortalk this way. Nor is it needed to givethem an opportunity to write andread papers which do credit to theirspecialized scholaijly schievementsuUnless this be a Conference in morethan name only, unless it be concert¬ed effort to reach a common under¬standing of our cultural failure and acommon program for its reform, thisgathering will be as vacuous and fu¬tile as many another solemn conclaveof professors, advertised by high-sounding and promising titles.But if I have stated the only pur¬pose which might justify this Confer¬ence, then I must also say that it can¬not possibly succeed. I do not bother tosay that a conference, however good,cannot suceed in reforming modernculture, or even in correcting one ofthe main causes of its disorder, name¬ly, modern e<lucation. That goes with¬out saying. To expect such resultswould be ask too much from even thebest of all possible conferences. Imean, much more directly, that onecannot expect the professors to under¬stand what is wrong with modern cul¬ture and modern education, for thesimple reason that that would requirethem to understand what is wrongwith their own mentality. If such amiracle could be hoped for, I wouldnot be without hope for a peacefuldeliverance from our manifold con¬fusions. Since professors come to aconference of this sort with the in¬tention of speaking their minds butnot of changing them, with a willing¬ness to listen but not to learn, withthe kind of tolerance which delightsin a variety of opinions and abomi¬nates the unanimity of agreement, itis preposterous to suppose that thisConference can even begin to realizethe only ends which justify the enter¬prise.Instead of a conference about sci¬ence, phiosophy and religion in rela¬tion to a democracy, what is needed isa conference about the professors ofscience, philosophy and religion, es¬pecially American professors whoseintellectual attitudes express a falseconception of democracy. The defectsof modern culture are the defects ofits intellectual leaders, its teachersand savants. The disorder of modernculture is a disorder in their minds,a disorder which manifests itself inthe universities they have built, in theeducational system they have devised,in the teaching they do, and which,through that teaching, perpetuatesitself and spreads out in ever widen¬ing circles from generation to gener¬ation. It is a little naive, therefore, tosuppose that the professors can becalled upon to solve the problem of therelationship of science, philosophyand religion in our education and inour culture—as naive as it would beto invite the professors to participatein a conference about what is wrongwith the professors.Ill—The Failure of Mr. HutchinsWe do not even have to wait untilthis Conference is over to discover itsfutility and the reasons therefor.The glorious, Quixotic failure ofPresident Hutchins to accomplish anyof the essential reforms which Amer¬ican education so badly needs, dem¬onstrates the point to us. In fact, ifhe could have succeeded, this Confer¬ence would not be necessary now. The fact that he did not succeed may makethis Conference necessary, in thesense that fundamental rectificationsof modern culture are imperative; butif we understand why, in the natureof the situation, Hutchins could notsucceed, we also see why a conferenceof professors about the defects of themodern mentality must be self-defeat¬ing.What did Mr. Hutchins propose ?He proposed, in the first place, thatman is a rational animal, essentiallydistinct from the brutes, and hence,that education should cultivate themoral and intellectual virtues. Heproposed, in the second place, thatscience, philosophy and theology aredistinct bodies of knowledge, radicallydifferent as to methods of knowing aswell as with respect to objects known.But he went further. He said thattheoretic philosophy delves more deep¬ly into the nature of things than allthe empirical sciences; that, as theo¬retic knowledge, philosophy of supe¬rior to the sciences by reason of thequestions it can answer. He said thatpractical philosophy, dealing withethical and political problems, is su¬perior to applied science, because thelatter at best gives us control over thephysical means to be used, whereaspractical philosophy determines theends to be sought, and the orderingof all means thereto. Hence thestructure of a university should notbe a miscellaneous collection of de¬partments from astronomy to zoology,with all treated as equally importanttheoretically and practically, but aheirarchy of studies, ordered educa¬tionally according to their intrinsicmerits. Because of the fact that oursecular universities harbor a diver¬sity of religious faiths, Mr. Hutchinsplaced metaphysics at the summit in¬stead of theology. For man thehighest knowledge, and the most in¬dispensable to his well-being, is theknowledge of God; and since the ulti¬mate conclusions of metaphysics com¬prise a natural theology, metaphysicsis the supreme subject-matter in thedomain of natural knowledge. ButMr. Hutchins would have to admit(and he indicated his willingness todo so) that if there is a better knowl¬edge of God, and man’s relation toGod, than metaphysics offers, thensuch knowledge is superior to phil¬osophy, both theoretically and prac¬tically just as philosophy is superiorto science. Traditional Judaism andChristianity do, of course, claim thatthere is such knowledge, the sacredtheology that rests on faith in God’srevelation of Himself. It is proper¬ly distinguished from both scienceand philosophy as a supernaturalknowledge which man cannot havewithout God’s direct aid.Why did Mr. Hutchins fail? Any¬one who has ever attended a facultymeeting knows the answer. It can bediscovered by anyone who will readthe reviews of The Higher Learningin America, written by the professors,or what is worse, the professionaleducators. He failed not because hisanaylsis was patiently demonstratedto be in error; not because someoneproved that philosophy does not existor is inferior to science; or that re¬ligion is superstition, and sacredtheology a rationalization of somemake-believe. He failed because hewas asking the professors to changetheir minds and to agree about some¬thing. He failed as much with theprofessors of philosophy as with theprofessors of science; he failed evenmope with those teachers of religionwho regard themselves as liberal.What Hutchins proposed ran counterto every prejudice that constitutesthe modern frame of mind, and itstemper. The professors being in thevast majority, and ultimately con¬trolling, as they should, educationalpolicy, it was naive of Mr. Hutchinsto suppose that he could reform edu¬cation by appealing to truths the pro¬fessors ignored or denied. Worse thannaive, he had the effrontery to assumethat if the professors were ignorantof certain truths or had neglected theimplications of others, they wouldsubmit themselves to teaching onthese points. Since the professorscannot conceive themselves as beingtaught, certainly not by anyone with¬out a Ph.D. in their field, the manwho tries to argue with the plainintention of winning agreement mustreally be trying to impose his doc¬trine. The simplest way to deal witha fellow like Hutchins is to call hima fascist.IV—The Academic MindNow I want to make one thing ab¬solutely clear. I am not begging the question in this issue between Mr.Hutchins and his opponents, by pro¬ceeding as if I have proved the form¬er right and the latter wrong. I knowI have not proved the truth of any ofthe theses mentioned, nor have Iproved the falsity of their contraries.With the time at my disposal thatwould be impossible to do under anycircumstances; and even with muchmore time I would not try with thisaudience. With a few notable excep¬tions, the members of this Conferencerepresent the American academicmind. It is that fact itself whichmakes it unneessary, as well as un¬wise, for me to make any effortin the way of reasoning. I know toowell, from much experience, the opin¬ions of this audience, and of all theprofessors they represent—about thenature and relationship of science,philosophy and religion. I also know,because I have tried so many timesto present an analysis with the fullestof supporting arguments, preciselywhat reactions such procedure callsforth. Fortunately, there is no needto verify this once again, because onthis occasion I am concerned only toshow the futility of a conference ofprofessors about science, philosophyand religion.That can be shown very simply.Either the prevailing opinions of theprofessors are right or they arewrong. Let us suppose, for the mo¬ment, that they are right, that what isnow generally taught in Americanschools about the relation of science,philosophy and religion, is the trueaccount. If it is true, there is noth¬ing wrong with modern culture, formodern culture, in all its practicesand institutions, embodies theseopinions. On this alternative, there¬fore, it is difficult to see why thereshould be any conference aboutscience, philosophy and religion. If,however, on the other alternative, theprevailing professorial opinions onthese matters are wrong, and if, inaddition, modern culture suffers gravedisorders precisely because it em¬bodies these opinions, then there issome point to a conference whichwould seek to correct the prevalenterrors. But then it is pointless toask the professors to consider theproblem. They have already consider¬ed it and told us their answers inall their teaching and all their edu¬cational decisions. The same major¬ity point of view will dominate thisConference, as in the Hutchins con¬troversy. Of course, the minorityview will get a hearing, with all thatindifference about the truth whichhides behind the mask of intolerance,but it is a foregone conclusion thatnobody’s mind will be changed; infact, everyone knows that is not theaim of a conference, anyway. Hence,when all is said and done, the rela¬tive weights of majority and minorityopinion will be registered once more.The Conference will have exhibitedthe characteristic mentality of ourculture, and those who are deeplyconcerned about changing that men¬tality will be confirmed in theirpessimism that nothing, simply noth¬ing, can be done to reform our educa¬tion or to reorient our culture.Now I am well aware that my col¬leagues do not think there is any suchclear-cut division between a majori¬ty and a minority view of rcience,philosophy and religion. For onething, they do not like to acknowl¬edge the existence of clear-cut is¬sues, with truth on one side, anderror on the other; if there weresuch issues, then anyone who under¬took to think about them might beobliged to risk his academic reputa¬tion by coming to a definite conclu¬sion. For another thing, the profes¬sors do not like to feel that theyshare even a common majority opin¬ion with each other. The sacred in¬dividuality of each professor can bepreserved only by differing. Whenone is in substantial sympathy withwhat a colleague has to say, he stillsafeguards his freedom of opinion bysaying the same thing some otherway. Most professors seem to feelthat agreement, even if freely reach¬ed, violates their personal integrity.V—The Prevalence ofPositivismNevertheless, I charge the profes¬sors—and here I am speaking of thevast majority—with being in sub¬stantial agreement on one side of thecrucial issues this Conference faces.I say that most of them are positiv¬ists. 7 know that there are enoughvarieties of positivism to permit theprofessors to retain their individual¬ity, but I insist that behind the multi¬ plicity of technical jargons there isa single doctrine. The essential pointof that doctrine is simply the affirma¬tion of science, and the denial ofphilosophy _ and religion. Again Iam aware that the pi’ofessors willsmile at my simplicity. Whoeverheard anyone, except a few violentextremists, flatly denying philosophyand religion; as a matter of fact,such dogmatic denials are made onlyby a small circle of “philosophers”who blatantly advertise themselvesas positivists. The very presence atthis Conference of scientists, philoso¬phers and theologians shows that therepresentatives of the several discip¬lines respect each other; the fact thatthey are willing to listen to eachother’s papers shows the spirit of co¬operation which prevails among them.One even begins to wonder about thesanity of those who talk about thedisorder and disunity of modern cul¬ture. The real problem of this Con¬ference must be the perils of De¬mocracy; it certainly cannot be theissue of positivism.Despite such blandishments, I re¬peat my charge. The professors, byand large, are positivists. And,furthermore, I say that the most se¬rious threat to Democracy is thepositivism of the professors, whichdominates evet'y aspect of modemeducation and is the central corrup¬tion of modern culture. Democracyhas much more to fear from the men¬tality of its teachers than from thenihilism of Hitler. It is the samenihilism in both cases, but Hitler’s ismore honest and consistent, lessblurred by subtleties and queasyqualifications, and hence less dan¬gerous. I shall return to this pointafter I have supported my charge.Within brief scope, the easiest wayto force the professors into the openis by making the issue sharp andclear. Let me do this first with re¬spect to philosophy, and then withrespect to religion.VI—The Issue About PhilosophyWith respect to philosophy, thefollowing propositions must be af¬firmed. He who denies any one ofthem denies philosophy. (1) Philos¬ophy is public knowledge, not pri¬vate opinion, in the same sense thatscience is knowledge, not opinion. (2)Philosophical knowledge answersquestions which science cannot an¬swer, now or ever, because its methodis not adapted to answering suchquestions. (3) Because their methodsare thus distinct, each being adaptedto a different object of inquiry, phil¬osophical and scientific knowledge arelogically independent of one another,which means that the truth and falsi¬ty of philosophical principles or con¬clusions does not depend upon thechanging content of scientific knowl¬edge. (4) Philosophy is superior toscience, both theoretically and prac¬tically: theoretically, because it isknowledge of the being of thingswhereas science studies only theirphenomenal manifestations; practi¬cally because philosophy establishesmoral conclusions, whereas scientificknowledge yields only technologicalapplications; this last point meansthat science can give us only a con¬trol over operable means, but it can¬not make a single judgment aboutgood and bad, right and wrong, interms of the ends of human life. (5)There can be no conflict between sci¬entific and philosophic truths, al¬though philosophers may correct theerrors of scientists who try to an¬swer questions beyond their profes¬sional competence, just as scientistscan correct the errors of philosophersguilty of a similar transgression. (6)There are no systems of philosophy,each of which may be consideredtrue in its own way by criteria of in¬ternal consistency, each differingfrom the others, as so many systemsof geometry, in terms of differentorigins in diverse, but equally arbi¬trary, postulates or definitions. (7)The first principles of all philosophi¬cal knowledge are metaphysical, andmetaphysics is valid knowledge ofboth sensible and supra-sensible be¬ing. (8) Metaphysics is able to dem¬onstrate the existence of supra-sensible being, for it can demonstratethe existence of God, by appealing tothe evidence of the senses and theprinciples of reason, and without anyreliance upon articles of religiousfaith.These eight propositions are notoffered as an exhaustive account ofthe nature of philosophy, its distinc¬tion from, and relation to, science. Ihave chosen them simply because theyPage Four THE DAILY MAROON. WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940will serve like intellectual litmus pa¬per to bring out the acid of positiv¬ism. Let the professors who claim torespect philosophy—and this goes asmuch for the professors of philos¬ophy as for the others—decide wheth¬er they affirm every one of thesepropositions. Those who say thatphilosophy is just another kind ofknowledge but not superior to sciencemight just as well call philosophyopinion and deny its existence. Thosewho suppose that philosophical prin¬ciples or conclusions are dependent onthe findings of science; those whosuppose that real technical compe¬tence is necessary in order to solvescientific problems, whereas none isneeded for philosophical problems;those who think that philosophycomprises a variety of logically con¬structed systems, among which youcan take your choice according toyour preference among postulates;those who say philosophy is. all right,but metaphysics is nonsense, andthere is no rational knowledge of God—all these deny philosophy. They arepositivists. If the professors wereclear of mind and forthright ofspeech, they would come right out andsay that they regard philosophy asopinion, not knowledge. But the pro¬fessors are unaccustomed to simpleaffirmations and denials. They givetrue~false tests, but never take them.They will, therefore, avoid the testI have presented by saying that it isall a matter of how you use the words,or that it all depends on your pointof view, or something equally evas¬ive. Yet, by their evasions shall youknow them, for those who affirmphilosophy to be knowledge neitherhesitate nor quibble on any of thesepoints.VII—The Issue About ReligionWith respect to religion, the fol¬lowing propositions must be affirmed.He who denies any one of them de¬nies religion, in any sense whichmakes it distinct in character fromscience and philosophy. (1) Religioninvolves knowledge of God and ofman’s destiny, knowledge which is notnaturally acquired in the sense inwhich both science and philosophyare natural knowledge. (2) Religiousfaith, on which sacred theology rests,is itself a supernatural act of thehuman intellect, and is thus a Divinegift. (3) Because God is its cause,faith-"is more certain than knowledgeresulting from the purely natural ac¬tion of the human faculties. (4)What is known by faith about God’snature and man’s destiny is knowl¬edge which exceeds the power of thehuman intellect to attain withoutGod’s revelation of Himself and HisProvidence. (6) Sacred theology isindependent of philosophy, in that itsprinciples are truths of faith, where¬as philosophical principles are truthsof reason, but this does not mean thattheology can be speculatively de¬veloped without reason serving faith.(6) There can be no conflict betweenphilosophical and theological truths,although theologians may correct theerrors of philosophers who try to an¬swer questions beyond the compe¬tence of natural reason, just as phil¬osophers can correct the errors oftheologians who violate the auton¬omy of reason. (7) Sacred theologyis superior to philosophy, both theo¬retically and practically: theoretical¬ly, because it is more perfect knowl¬edge of God and His creatures; prac¬tically, because moral philosophy isinsufficient to direct man to God ashis last end. (8) Just as there are nosystems of philosophy, but only phil¬osophical knowledge less or more ade¬quately possessed by different men, sothere is only one true religion, less ormore adequately embodied in the ex¬isting diversity of creeds.These eight propositions, like thoseconcerning philosophy, are far fromexhaustive. They are intended simp¬ly as a device to bring professionalpositivism—or shall I call it “negativ¬ism”?—out into the open. Those whoclaim to respect the distinct place ofreligion in modern culture, but refuseto grant that religion rests upon su¬pernatural knowledge, or that it issuperior to both philosophy and sci¬ence, either know not what they sayor are guilty of profound hypocrisy;For unless religion involves superna¬tural knowledge, it has no separatestatus whatsoever; and if it restsupon supernatural knowledge, itmust be accorded the supreme placein the cultural hierarchy. Religioncannot be regarded as just anotheraspect of culture, one among manyhuman occupations, of indifferent im¬portance along with science and art,history and philosophy. Religion iseither the supreme human discipline,because it is God’s discipline of man,and as such dominates our culture, orit has no place at all. The mere tol¬eration of religion, which implies in¬difference to or denial of its claims,produces a secularized culture asmuch as militant atheism or Nazi ni¬ hilism. Philosophers who think thatall the significant questions men askare either answerable by reason -ornot at all, are naturalists in a senseanalogous to the positivism of sci¬entists who think that science aloneis valid knowledge, and that scienceis enough for the conduct of life. Ifthe professors are positivists, theyare certainly naturalists. They dis¬honor themselves as well as religionby tolerating it when, all equivoca¬tions overcome, they really think thatfaith is superstition, just as they real¬ly think philosophy is opinion. Thekind of positivism and naturalismwhich is revealed in all their worksand all their teaching, is at the rootof modern securalized culture.VIII—The Professional PositionNow let me guard against misun¬derstanding once more. The variouspropositions I have enumerated I donot regard as matters of opinion. Ithink their truth can be proved. ButI have not done so. I have done ab¬solutely nothing to show that positiv¬ism and naturalism are false doc¬trines. My only aim was to showthat the professors are, whether rightor wrong, positivists and naturalists.My only hope was that the profes¬sors might examine their consciencein the light of clearly defined issues,and acknowledge plainly what theyIdeally think. I know, of course, thatthat is too much to hope for. Butsince actions speak louder thanwords, no one who understands theissues will be deceived by what theprofessors have to say, however muchthey fool themselves. The professor¬ial reaction to the proposals of Mr.Hutchins, the professorial conduct ofthis very Conference, give the lie toprofessional speech, the polite dis¬course, the insultmg tolerance, W'hichconceals the dismissal of philosophyas opinion and religion as supersti-tution behind expressions of speciousrespect.IX—Medieval and ModernCultureThe central problem of mediaevalculture was the relation of faith andreason, religion and philosophy, su¬pernatural and natural knowledge.The so-called mediaeval synthesis, thecultural hai*mony and unity of themediaeval world, depended on the so¬lution of that problem. It was notsolved by conferences, although in themiddle ages something much betterthan conferences of this sort tookplace: patient, honest, forthright,hard-thinking discussion. Centuries ofearnest disputation, despised by mod¬ern professors as logic-chopping andwordy dialectic, prepared the way, be¬cause in every case the disputantswere seeking to agree about the truth,not to maintain their individuality byholding to a difference of opinion.When, after such preparation, thetime was ripe, two men solved theproblem by sheer intellectual masteryof every relevant truth: Moses Maim-onides solved it for the Jewish com¬munity, and St. Thomas Aquinas forthe Christian world. That later Jewsand Christians did not sustain the so¬lution, or even repudiated it, was partof the cultural tragedy which themodern era went through at itsbirth.The central problem of modernculture is more complicated, andmuch more difficult, than the medi¬aeval, because in our times sciencehas become a distinct and importantenterprise, both theoretically andpractically. The modern culture, willbe achieved only when all the good¬ness of science can be praised with¬out sacrificing any of the goodness inphilosophy and religion, only whenthe truths of philosophy and religioncan be integrally retained withoutlosing any of the genuine advancesin knowledge or production that sci¬ence has contributed. The modernsynthesis must necessarily include themediaevel solution, but it can do soonly by carrying the mediaeval prin¬ciples to a higher level of compre¬hension. In order that every cultur¬al good shall be preserved to thefullness of its own unique value, eachmust be recognized precisely forwhat it is, and according to its dis¬tinctive character it must be orderedto the others. Since in the world ofvaluec, there is no order without hier¬archy, science, philosophy and religioncan never be liarmonized so long asthey are all asked to lie down to¬gether, but only when each is calledupon to perform its proper function,whether that be to serve or to rule.The time is obviously not yet ripefor a modern solution. There are notenough scientists who understand thetruths of philosophy and religion, notenough philosophers and men of faithwho are at home in the domain ofscience. Much v/ork by representa¬tives of all three disciplines is requir¬ed to prepare the way for the modern analogue of Maimonides or Aquinas,perhaps even centuries of patient dis¬cussion and incisive disputation. ThisConference might have been an occa¬sion for such work. That it was calledat all indicates a vague realization ofthe task to be understaken. But if Iam right about the professorial mind—and I look to the actual proceedingsof this Conference for confirmation—there will be no discussion of funda¬mental issues, nor even a formulationof them. The members of this Con¬ference are not cooperatively seekingto agree about the truth, through thepainful ordeal of intellectual debate.Each is content to express his ownopinions, and to indulge everyone elsein the opportunity for similar self-expression.X—The Present Crisis -The various propositions ‘I haveenumerated are either true or false.Each, therefore, can be regarded asconstituting a problem, a two-sidedissue at least. Should it not be thebusiness of this Conference to take upsuch problems in a definite order, andto direct all its intellectual energiesto their solution? If a group of mendo not come together because theyhave common problems, and ultimate¬ly seek to reach common answers,there is no more community amongthem than there is in a modern uni¬versity, or in modern culture itself.As I have already said, the failure ofthis Conference to do the only workwhich justifies its existence, perfectlysymbolizes the absence of culturalcommunity in the modern world;worse than that, it justifies the mostextreme pessimism about an impend¬ing catastrophe, for until the profes¬sors and their culture are liquidated,the resolution of modern problems—aresolution which history demands shallbe made—will not even begin. Thetower of Babel ive are building invitesanother flood.The failure of this Conference isdue not only to the fact that the pro¬fessors are, for the most part, posi¬tivists; but even more so to theiravoidance of what is demanded forfruitful intellectual procedure. Un¬like the mediaeval man of learning,the modern professor will not subjecthimself to the rigors of public dispu¬tation. He emasculates discussion bytreating it as an exchange of opinions,in which no one gains or loses becauseeveryone keeps his own. He is indo¬cile in the sense that, beyond the fieldof science, he cannot be instructed,because he acknowledges no ignorance.Hence anyone who would try to in¬struct him about philosophical or re¬ligious truths would be regarded asauthoritarian, as trying to impose adoctrine. He is scandalized by thevery notion of a commonly sharedtruth for all men. Even though suchtruth can be attained only by the freeactivity of each mind, the fact thatno mind is free to reject the truthseems like an infringement upon hissacred liberties. What he means bytruth in science and by agreementamong scientists permits him to talkas if he were a truth-seeker and will¬ing to agree; but that is because thecontingent and tentative character ofscientific knowledge so perfectly fitsthe egoism, the individualism, the lib¬ertinism, of the modern mind. Thegreater necessity and finality of truthin philosophy and religion oblige amind in ways it will not suffer. Onfundamental questions, which meansall the questions beyond the scope ofscience, he wishes to keep a thorough¬ly open mind foreVer; he wishes nei¬ther to be convinced of anything norto convince anyone. Hence he wouldnot participate in a conference whichrequired everyone to agree upon thefundamental questions to be answered,and measured its success by the de¬gree to which such answers were com¬monly achieved as a result of the mostpatient discussion.XI—The Roots of DemocracyI have so far pointed out the signifi¬cance of this Conference for the stateof our culture, and the doom its fore¬bodes. In conclusion, I wish to indi¬cate briefly the bearing of my anal¬ysis upon the crisis of Democracy. Letme say at once that I hold Democracyto be the greatest political good, themost perfect form of political com¬munity; and I hold this not as a mat¬ter of fine feeling or local opinion, butbecause I think it is a conclusionwhich can be demonstrated in termsof the truths of moral and politicalphilosophy. Now, what can positivistssay about such a demonstration? Ob¬viously, they must repudiate it. Out¬side the sphere of science nothing canbe demonstrated, and the propositionthat Democracy is the best politicalorder certainly lies outside the sphereof science. What is neither self-evi¬dent nor demonstrable must be anopinion, which attracts or repels usemotionally. Anyone who denies thatphilosophy is knowledge denies, ofcourse, the self-evidence of moral prin¬ ciples and the validity of moral dem¬onstrations. Hence the professors canbe for Demcoracy only because theylike it, not because they know it isright. They talk a great deal aboutnatural rights and the dignity of man,but this is loose and irresponsible talk,in W’hich they lightly indulge becausethey do not mind contradicting them¬selves. There are no natural rights ifthere is no natural moral law, whichis binding upon all men everywhere inthe same way. Man has no dignity ifhe is not a rational animal, essentiallydistinct from the brutes by reason ofthe spiritual dimension of his being.This should be enough to make clearthat positivists are forced to deny therights and dignity of man, or holdsuch views only as prejudice, ration¬ally no better than Hitler’s prejudicesto the contrary. But to reinforce thepoint that the professors have nogiounds for any of their fine feelings,let me add that the same facts whichwarrant man’s dignity as an end tobe served by the state also imply thatman has an immortal soul, and a des¬tiny beyond the temporal order. Inshort, one cannot have reasons foraffirming Democracy and at the sametime deny the truths of philosophyand religion.Of course, the .sort of democracy towhich the professors are sentimen¬tally attache<l can not be demon¬strably approved, for theirs is an es¬sentially false conception. The socialorder they would like to preserve isthe anarchic individualism, the cor¬rupt liberalism, which is the mostvicious caricature of Democracy. Ob¬jecting to any inequalities in value,objecting to any infringement of ab¬solute individual liberty by loyaltiesand obligations to superior g(X)ds, theywant a democracy w'ithout hierarchyand without authority. In short, theyw’ant chaos, not order, a society inwhich everyone will be as free as ifhe live<l alone, a community in whichcommon bonds will not bind the in¬dividual at all. Even when they speakenthusiastically about this fal.se ideal,the professors seldom claim that theyhave rational grounds for defense.The very fact that they so frequentlyrefer to democracy, not as governmentor as a political order, but as a wayof life, reveals them as exponents of afalse religion. This religion of de¬mocracy is no better than the religionof fascism. One is the idolatry ofindividual liberty as the other is theworship of collective might.XII—Democracy and ModernCultureOne of the greatest achievements ofthe modern world is the discovery ofthe moral and political reasons for thedemocratic ideal, as well as actual ex-|)erimentation in the field of demo¬cratic processes. Rut though it be inthis sense a child of modern times.Democracy will not be fully achievcnl until modern culture is radically re¬formed. Science contributes nothingwhatsoever to the understanding ofDemocracy, Without the truths ofphilosophy and religion, Democruciihas no rational foundation. In Amer¬ica at present it is at best a cult alocal prejudice, a traditional persua¬sion. Today it is challenged by othercults which seem to have more might,and no less right, so far as Americanability to defend democracy rationallyis concerned.For all these reasons I say we havemore to fear from our professors thanfrom Hitler. It is they who have ma<le.American education what it is, bothin content and method: in content, anindoctrination of positivism and nat¬uralism; in method, an exhibition ofanarchic individualism ma.squeradingas the democratic manner. WhetherHitler wins or not, the culture whichis formed by such education cannotsupport what democracy we haveagainst interior decay.If 1 dared to raise my voice as didthe prophets in ancient Israel, I wouhiask whether the tyrants of today arenot like the Babylonian and Assyriankings—instruments of Divine justice,chastening a people who had departedfrom the way of truth. In the in¬scrutable Providence of God, and ac¬cording to the nature of man, a civili¬zation may sometimes reach a rotten¬ness which only fire can expunge andcleanse. If the Babylonians and .As¬syrians were destroyers, they werealso deliverers. Through them, theprophets realized, God purified HispiHiple. Seeing the hopelessness ofworking peaceful reforms among apeople who had shut their eyes andhardened their hearts, the prophetsalmost prayed for such deliverance,through the darkness of destruction,to the light of a better day. So, per¬haps, the Hitlers in the world todayare preparing the agony throughwhich our culture shall be reborn.Certainly if it is part of the Divineplan to bless man's temporal civiliza¬tion with the goodness of Democracy,that civilization must be rectified. Itis probably not from Hitler, but fromthe professors, that we shall ulti¬mately be savt*d..Mortimer J. .Adler's attack on theprofessors will be answered in to¬morrow’s Maroon by Ronald S. Crane,chairman of the Department of Eng¬lish and outstanding authority oneighteenth century literature and phil¬osophy..Another answer to Mr. -Adler willbe presented in Friday’s Maroon withthe publication of a short paper byMalcolm Sharp, Professor in the I.awSchool. For the past few years Mr.Sharp has taught classes with .Mr..Adler in the Law School.Positivist 6r Not—You"II Want to Sign theINTERCOLLEGIATESIX-MAN FOOTBALLPETITIONS IAvailable Today at theDaily Maroon's Lexington Hall Office ^THE DAILY MAROON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940 Page FiveTHE DAILY MAROON SPORTSFootball TodoyThere will be an ll-man Foot¬ball same between the Universityand Armour College of the IllinoisInstitute of Technology on Staggat 3:15 today.The last encounter of the twoteams on October 25 resulted in a24-6 victory for Chicago.COLLEGENIGHT★EveryFridayAmerica’s FinestDance Music★Gay College andProfessionalFloor Shows★get special rate studentTICKETS AT MAROON OFFICEOR PRESS BLDG.★EDGEWATERBEACHHOTEL^300 Block Sheridan Road Red Devils TrounceUnexpecteds, 34-7Cooperrider, Harlan Star;Gophers Beat Bears, 26 to 0.By WERNER BAUMThe Red Devils literally burned upStagg Field in beating the Unex¬pecteds by a 34-7 score yesterday.Luke Cooperrider and Duke Harlanof the Red Devils just couldn’t bestopped. Harlan, who has had fouryears of college experience at Knoxand who is currently appearing withthe 11-man squad, made the Unex¬pecteds look like a grammar schoolteam.First ScoreThe first Red Devil score occurredafter 13 minutes of play when Rey¬nolds of the Unexpecteds fumbled anintended lateral on his own five yardline. The Red Devils then moved tothe one yard line on a penalty andscored on the third play.Harlan went to work after threeminutes of the second half. He tooka punt and ran it back 60 yards intothe end zone. After two more min¬utes Cooperrider intercepted a passon the Unexpecteds’ 20-yard line andran it back for a touchdown. The RedDevils then put their second team inand the Unexpecteds seized the op¬portunity to score. Bob Bean scoredon a line play and also accounted forthe extra point on a run.Cooperrider .AgainCooperrider .scored again after eightminutes of the half when he ran theball 40 yards. The final score camein 13 minutes of the half. After apass from the fifty yard line fromCooperrider to Ball, which would havebeen a touchdown, was called back onan otf-side penalty, Duke Harlan tookthe ball and ran the fifty yards for ascore. Final score: Red Devils 34—Unexpecteds 7.The other game of the afternoonfeatured the Gophers and the Bears.The Gophers won by a 26-0 score.Stan Sweeney was the Gophers’ star.He figured in 24 of the points by scor¬ing three touchdowns and throwing atouchdown pass. The game was playedalmost entirely in Bear territory. BobStein was again throwing the ball forthe Gophers and completing passescontinually. Bob Gruhn, Connie Kon-tos, and Julian Levinson were on thereceiving end. Gruhn took the touch¬down pass from Sweeney.The Gophers and Unexpecteds meetThursday. The loser will, for all prac¬tical purposes, be eliminated from therace. The Unexpecteds and Gophersare now praying that Duke Harlanmight return to a 11-man football.This is abtjut their only chance for thechampionship.Six-man FootballTeam W. L. I‘ct. P. O.P.Red Devils . . 5 1 .833 80 63Gophers . . . . 3 2 .600 100 35Unexpecteds . 3 2 .600 81 69Bear.s . 0 6 .000 36 138 As I WasSaying-By BOB LAWSONFigures released yesterday by theBig Ten Service Bureau reveal veryclearly the difficult job that lies aheadof the Michigan team Saturday.George Franck and Bruce Smith,Minnesota’s touchdown twins, are do¬ing even better than their notices saythey are. Franck and Bill Green,Iowa’s speedy fullback, are tied forleading scorer with 24 points. Franckhas played in only three games, how¬ever, to Green’s four.Smith in RushingIn rushing Green again leads in to¬tal yardage gained, but Smith has ahigher average per game and per in¬dividual try. Franck’s punting av¬erage of 39 yards per kick is secondonly to that of Don Scott of OhioState, who averages 40 yards.In making team comparisons, how¬ever, Michigan comes out ahead al¬though it has played only one con¬ference game to Minnesota’s three.Michigan gained 289 yards fromscrimmage against Illinois, 240 ofthem by rushing. The Gophers’ aver¬age per game is 264 net yards and235 by rushing. The inadequacy offigures on the Wolverine attack, how¬ever, makes any comparisons futile.Indiana UnderratedThese figures show that Indiana isa much better team than its recordsshow. Their average of 282 yardsfrom scrimmage as against 169 forthree opponents give them secondplace. The Hoosiers also follow Mich¬igan in first downs with an averageof 14.6 to 7.3 for opponents.Led by “Hurlin’ Hal’’ Hui’sh theIndiana passing attack has outstrip¬ped Ohio State, its closest rival, by anaverage of almost 30 yards a game,116 yards to 87. Hursh has thrown 45passes, completing 22 for 327 yards.Scott is close, having thrown the samenumber of passes, completing 21 for317 yards. Charley Anderson, OhioState’s fine Negro end, has caught 10passes for 162 yards to make him theleading pass receiver in the Confer¬ence to date.Figures InconclusiveThese figures do not prove much be¬cause of the difference in the numberof games played by the teams. Illi¬nois has played only two games, andMichigan one. This means that Tom¬my Harmon is not even in any of theindividual races so far, and this willobviously be changed before long.About all these half-time figuresshow is that there are a lot of goodteams and individual stars playing inthe Western Conference this year, andany inter-league games are bound tobe exciting.ClarkShaughnessyOnTop AgainBy Carl BueWith the ever-increasing success ofhis Stanford team, Clark Shaughnes-sy is again taking his place as oneof the greatest football coaches of thecountry.When Stanford announced thatShaughnessy had been signed to afive-year contract, howls went up fromtheir alumni as everyone asked, “Whois this Shaughnessy?’’ And now theyknow for “Shag” has coached histeam into a likely spot for the RoseBowl bid.Same MaterialTaking over the same material thatlost seven out of eight games lastyear, Shaughnessy fashioned asmooth-running, hard-blocking andtackling, razzle-dazzle football ma¬chine. Building his attack aroundFrankie Albert and Norm Standlee,his main job was developing a linethat would give these two backs ade¬quate protection. The team’s record offive victories and no defeats atteststo the splendid job he did.Having defeated San Francisco,Oregon, Santa Clara, Southern Cali¬ fornia, and U. C. L. A., the main ob¬stacle to the Cardinal hopes for aRose Bowl bid is the strong Washing¬ton team, defeated only by Minneso¬ta. The meeting of these two teamsSaturday rivals in importance theMichigan-Minnesota game the sameday.Not SurprisingShaughnessy’s success on the Coastis not surprising to those who havefollowed his record. Before coming toChicago he had turned out strongteams from Loyola of the South andTulane. Handicapped by poor materialall the time he was on the Midway,he was blamed by the public for Chi¬cago’s poor showing.Herb Blumer, line coach underShaughnessy here, says, “I considerClark Shaughnessy to be the finestfootball strategist in the country.”That from a man who worked withhim through those depressing years.It is indeed a good break for theman to once again be recognized forhis true worth after being made thebutt or. ridicule by an unthinking pub¬lic. Ski Club InvitesNovices, ExpertsLest the story in yesterday’s Ma¬roon give the wrong idea, the Ski Clubis not being organized solely for thebenefit of expert skiers.The Athletic Department is, in fact,more interested in the novice than inthe expert. The varsity ski team willbe only a part of the club. Women arealso more than welcome.The meeting Friday afternoon inthe Bartlett Trophy Room conflicts1 with Victory Vanities but will last un¬til after Vanities are over, giving anylate arrival a chance to meet the clubmembers and also be informed as tothe purposes and organization of thegroup.I Further information on the ski club1 may be obtained from Bob Howard atI the Alpha Delta Phi house.BOOK SALE!Making Room for Our ManyHoliday Lines—Tables loaded withFICTION - POETRY - BIOGRAPHYand General Titles—All greatly reduced.-BUY and SAVE-All the newest and best books are here—We urge you to come in and browse.WOODWORTH'SBOOK STORE1311 E. 57th Street Open eveningsTouchball Games3:00 Deke vs. Phi PsiKappa Sig vs. Psi U. “B”Alpha Delt “C” vs. Sigma Chi4:00 Chi Psi vs. Phi Delt “B”Phi Gam vs. Phi SigD.U. vs. Phi Psi “B”-1 C Y “^2 E. 63rcl Sf.M C /\ Open 11:30 A. M. DailyThe U. of C.'s ChoiceTODAY . THURS. ^William Powell and Myrna Loy 1"1 Love You Again" 1Also 1"Tom Brown's School Days" 1with Freddie Bartholomew 1STARTS FRI. I"The Great McGinty" 1Relax in Pushback Seatsof I>OUBUMO" GUMimoothnes Delicious,aral fun of c mouth‘ OUIyour diges-IL., voui teethhealthful,Page Six THE DAILY MAROON, WEDNESDAY, NOVEMBER 6, 1940SigmaChiBy ALLAN DREYFUSS“She’s the sweetheart of SigmaChi.” This attachment of endearmentmight be well applied to the architec¬tural glory of their new house, thehazy loveliness of their psychic girlfriend, and the huge imaginary schol¬arship cup which rests on their mentalmantlepieces which they snaggled forfourth place.With ninety-eight chapters spreadthroughout the width and breadth ofthe states, and a theme song known toboth Greeks and people alike. SigmaChi nationally has achieved a famewhich few other campus houses canjustly claim.Stampf Heads ChapterHouse president Joe Stampf, alsocaptain of the varsity basketball team,heads the list of 27 active brothers.Other Sig Chi athletes are Win Alsop,who is termed the cagers’ most im¬proved player, and Bill McLean of thesame team, Walter Fairservice, track¬man and former New York Statecross-country champion and Lee Ten¬nyson of the gymnastic team. Stampfis also a member of O. and S., whileBill Harper and Tom Cotrell are Skulland Crescenters, Fred Waugelin and,he of the beauteous scarf. Bob Bowersare both junior managers in Black-friars.Lavish New HouseThe new house which boasts themost lavishly ornate interior of anycampus dwelling will give a new andeven smoother setting for their fea¬ture functions which include the Hal¬lowe’en Party, the Mistletoe Rambleand, in the spring quarter, the Black-friars Dance. Closed parties take theform of radio and tea dances andWinter and Spring Formals.Over a five year period the boysrated about fourth in book crackingand pencil pushing.Initiation fee is $50. The active cityman pays $22.50 a month, a pledge$17.50 which includes six meals perweek, and $55 for a house dweller.House officers include Joe Stampf,president; Win Alsop, vice-president;Bob Bowers, treasurer; Tom Cottrell,secretary, and Web Cash, Steward.PU Liberals MeetThe Liberal Party of PoliticalUnion will hold an importantcaucus tomorrow at 3:30 in Cobb312. Plans for the next meeting ofthe Union, and the question offilling the party quota will be dis¬cussed. Oriental InstituteFeatu res Mesopota miaSocial ScienceStudents to SeeInland SteelSecond of the series of field tripsorganized for students in the Sociali Science I Survey Course is to be ai trip to the steel mills of the Inlandj Steel Company at Indiana Harbor, In¬diana. To permit a more complete un¬derstanding of the workings of themill, two separate groups will visit themills; one group today and the otheron next Wednesday, November 13.Each group will be composed of fiftystudents.As the number of students takingthis trip is limited, due to both trans¬portation problems and the size of thegroup permitted to tour the mills atone time, all places in both bussesand private cars making the trip arealready assigned. Students who takethis field trip will have the opportu¬nity to study blast and open hearthfurnaces and the various types ofrolling mills.Future PlansFuture plans for other field tripsinclude a morning at the Board ofTrade on Saturday, November 30. OnMonday afternoon, December 9, theChicago Daily News will be visited,and that evening a tour of the Chi¬cago Tribune is to be offered. Thefirst in this series of tours was a tripto Chicago’s famous stockyards onSaturday, October 19.George Probst is in charge of ar¬rangements and scheduling of all fieldtrips for the survey course.Homecoming(Continued from page 1)the singing brought into play. Follow¬ing the vocal efforts, the Iron MaskBeauty Court, made up of Jean Roff,Mike Rathje, Margaret Peacock, andPatty Wolfehope, and the yet to beselected queen will make the presen¬tations. Loving cups will be dispensedto the Victory Vanity and decorationwinners and a lover’s knot wovenfrom the rope used in the contest willbe given the victors of the freshmen-sophomore tug-of-war.All Campus AffairTillery said he wished that all un¬derstand this affair is not out and outimitation of the Interfraternity Sing. By NANCY LESSERFifty years may be a long time inthe life of a university but its a mereinstant to the Oriental Institute whichis doing its share in the Anniversaryby staging an exhibit to show thedaily life of a Mesopotamian some5000 years ago.Letters in those days weren’t typedon paper but laboriously inscribed onclay tablets and then thrown into anoven for a couple of hours of baking.The finished products were known toweigh as much as five pounds whichno doubt greatly limited the numberthe mailman could carry.Beer and wine were used even thenbut they usud to all gather around acommunity bowl and drink out of cop¬per straws. Another fascinating habitof the Mesopotamians was the prac¬tice of milking their cows from be¬hind with the tails flowing gracefullyover the milkers head.The exhibit will be on display allmonth and those who lack enoughimagination to piece together an hourby hour account of life in those dayswill probably find Dr. Duberstein’slecture on “Capitalists and Workers inBabylonia” which will occur late inthe month of great use.Anticipate BigReynolds ClubBridge TourneyAnticipating a greater success thanever before for their third annualbridge tournament to be held No¬vember 11, 12, and 13, the ReynoldsClub council, represented by HaroldSteffee and Ken Cornwall, has scoreda “coup” by bringing in for thoseevenings the well-known bridge in¬structor and authority, Mr. HaroldR. Watson.Teams of four players each shouldbe registered at the Reynolds Clubdesk, with a fee of 25 cents beingcharged for each person entering. Thetime for registering has been extendedto Monday, November 11. at 12.Mr. Watson is said to be a formerassociate of Culbertson, and becauseof his presence, this year’s tournamentwill be run on a larger scale than inany previous year.Rather, the entire campus shouldconsider the sing their activity.All freshmen and sophomores work¬ing with the Homecoming Commit¬tee should report to Dale Tillery at2:30 today for instructions. Chi RhoI SigmaBy SHIRLEE SMITHand SALLY ADAMSChi Rho Sigma founded in 1903boasts of perhaps the largest alumnaegroup among the clubs. Because of itssize it was found necessary to divideit into six separate groups for regularsocial activities. Every four yearsthere is a new group formed; thegroups extend all over the UnitedStates from New York to California.All groups join in sponsoring the an¬nual bridge party, proceeds of whichare added to a loan fund available toactive members without interest.The present chapter includes 16members who participate i n manycampus activities. Sue Landes is headof Transfer Orientation and memberof Ida Noyes council. Mary Harvey,also a member of Ida Noyes council,works on the Student Health Com¬mittee, Youth for Democracy and theRed Cross Drive. Virginia Allen is amember of Student Publicity Boardand Y.W.C.A. cabinet.Other ActivesOther active women are Gerrie Bar-lick and Maxine Murphy, and MarieUllman. This year six members weretransfer counselors and two werefreshmen counselors. The club isproud of its two Victory Vanitiescups, won in 1937 and 1938.Weekly meetings held in Ida Noyesare usually preceded by a club din¬ner. The membership fees of Chi RhoSigma include a five dollar pledge fee,$25.00 initiation fee covering the costof t’ne pin and a quarterly assessmentof $10.00.Social FunctionsClub functions are in keeping withthe original purpose, that of a socialorganization. There is a formal din¬ner-dance every quarter, club lunch¬eons monthly, cozies and social meet¬ings are interspersed throughout theyear. The alumnae join with the ac¬tive chapter in a Founder’s DayLuncheon, Harvest Home dinner andthe annual sing supper at which eachsenior receives a club bracelet.Roosevelt—(Continued from page 1)affairs are in safe hands. The millionswho have benefited from the social ilegislation of the New Deal can feel *assurred that those gains will not be |lost. I“It is the assurance of steady hands jon the foreign policy and the promise |of continued economic gain for the :masses of people that prompted the !electorate to retain the services of so !great a man as Franklin RooseveP ” 1 Women's AthleticAssociation PicksCaroline AllenWomen’s Athletic Association todayannounced the election of Caroline Al-len to its presidency. The election wasnecessary due to the fact that Dor¬othy Ingram, elected to the office lastspring, is no longer in residence atthe University.A similar vacancy existing in theoffice of secretary will be filled short¬ly. Eloise Proctor, elected last spring,has not returned to the University.EARN EXTRAMONETBiq Profit*. Soil friondt 50 attorfad e-nbotsod n«m« imprintod Chrlitmai cards$1.00. Fro# tamplot. 14 •uortmanti 30cup. Amaxing novalty fraa to cuitomtrswith laniational now 21 foldar $1 assort-mant—profit 50c. Raguait approval sam-plas. Exparianca unnacassary.EMPIRE CARD CO.Dept. C Elmira. N. Y.NEXT WEEKEAST LYNNETUESDAYWEDNESDAYTHURSDAYA Sparkling Cast ofNewcomersPlusGUEST STARSPAINE - RATHJEDOOLITTLE25 CentsA. Bludsucker, the Walking-Talking Cash Registrar! ^HE "Deceitful Dean" was born before Blackfriars. Heplayed to capacity crowds in 1899 and 1907. He isproduced by the Settlement Board and acted by facultymembers. If you don't see them in the classrooms, thisis your chance to see professors and their wives at ploy—and play it is!• William Rainey Harper, theUniversity's First President!Winifred Worthington, thePristine Queen of the Quad!SPECIALSTUDENT PREVIEW The Deceitful Dean's Remark¬able Leer as he Eyes Winifred!TOMORROW (THURSDAY)at 8 p. m.in Mandel HallTickets on sale in the Travel office in the Press Building(Coll Local 377 for reservations.)SPECIAL REDUCED RATES: $1, .75, and .50Proceeds to theUniversity Settlement