Drops of Dust

they say becareful what you wish for. i think i understand why now. in my last rather incoherent post(what else is new) i lamented the demise of a vigoruos discouse amonsgt students. i called on those 'opinionated' people in the student population to stimulate debate and discussion. never did i expect this to happen the very next morning, and in the way that it did.

i got to campus in my usual fowl early morning mood, pounded down the corridors of senate house, and from the corner of my eye i glimpsed it - a public debate appraising the performance of the SRC. But thats not what the poster said - rather it read something along the lines of public debate to 'discuss relevance of SRC' and another poster blurting out the words, 'debate centering around the failure of SRC in its mandate.'

Now correct me if i am wrong, but the purpose of a public debate is to allow different sides of a debate to express themselves to the larger population, and in so doing allow the public to make up their own minds on the contentious subject. this is atleast my rough understanding of the objective of a public debate.

The posters advertising this particular public debate seem to have already come to a comprehensive conclusion on the issue, and are now merely informing (more like propogating) the general public of this view. The failure of SRC, if one if to believe the posters, is an already established fact. How i ask?

The decorum which accompanies discourse has been severly violated here, and i am at pains to point out that discourse is only effective when conducted within the correct framework. mutual respect is of paramount importance within this framework!

-hopefully i will steal some time from my other commitments to truly and comprehensively reflect this particular situation.

Labels: debate, discourse, src