Tuesday, November 29, 2005

Argumentation versus Discussion, or the Essay versus Shared Inquiry

I have been trying to figure out the problem of how the board and the administration are handling this proposal to move to IIT. While there are many problems, including the issue of transparency, which one of the Shimer College bloggers pointed out, one way to interpret the problem of this proposal to move to IIT is that we are looking for a discussion, and the administration is treating this as an argument. In an argument, you essentially assume the position, and then you persuade the reader to agree with your position, anticipating and responding to your reader's doubts mainly in order to further your argument. This is essentially what Shimer College was trying to teach us to do in our papers from semester one to the final semester. But it seems as if what we are looking for is a discussion, a process of shared inquiry into the issue and problems, in order to arrive at a shared consensus. This is what we were doing in the classroom, and this is why, I would assume, most people came to Shimer College and stayed at Shimer College, including myself, and that is what will most likely remain true about Shimer College, since it's Shimer College's unique selling point, if it moves to IIT. The problem, then, for most students and alums, is that this proposal isn't a discussion. This proposal is an argument.

The question then, if my reading is correct, is should the administration change its approach from argumentation to shared inquiry? Should the administration have started with a discussion approach instead of an argument? Since it's too late for the administration to change how it began, which was how we were expected to begin an essay at Shimer College, with a position, should the administration shift from the essay to the discussion group, by joining this discussion for example? If you follow the metaphor of the essay to its logical conclusion, then can't we treat everything that led up to announcing the proposal to move to IIT as rough drafts, prep work, and research that you would not turn in to the professor for a grade or submit to the academic community for consideration of being published? If the administration sustains its approach of arguing its main point of moving to IIT being the best solution to the Problem of Shimer College, if Shimer College is indeed an emergency, should we assume the role of the skeptical, reasonable educated citizen who is poking holes in the argument in order to make certain this argument is indeed good for the college and the students? If we are to treat this as an argument for moving to IIT by the board and the administration, should we prepare an "un-official" list of counter-arguments against moving to IIT and a list of arguments for staying in Waukegan, since there is no evidence that we have to accept that staying in Waukegan isn't an option, in addition to bombarding the administration with questions and doubts, which is absolutely appropriate if this is in fact an argument? Why is this argument so strangely problematic, puzzling, and irritating?


Letter to President Bill Rice:
A Critique of the Move to IIT on Aesthetic Grounds

I am having trouble reconciling the campaign to "Beautify Shimer" with the facilities that IIT has offered to Shimer College and that were presented to us at the recent alum meeting. I strongly believe that the cozy aesthetics of the Shimer College campus in Waukegan are a far more beautiful learning environment than the ugly factory, warehouse, institutional, corporate setting and space that we are being offered to lease for the next 30 years.

Since I sincerely believe that you have a highly developed aesthetic sensibility, which is demonstrated in your diction and in your lecture on Oscar Wilde, and since we are now being sold what I believe to be a very ugly building on the unattractive IIT campus, I can't help thinking that this proposal must be a hoax.
Although some people may believe that the poetics of place and aesthetic values are superficial compared to the more serious considerations regarding this move, I have to personally oppose this move to IIT on aesthetic grounds. The poetics of space and the beauty of the place are fundamental values in a liberal arts experience. I can't tolerate considering this proposed facility as a future home for Shimer College. This proposal insults the sense of aesthetics that I developed at Shimer College through study and appreciation of beautiful works of arts and the great books. Schiller and Kant, I suspect, would agree with my position.
In the name of Oscar Wilde, consider looking for a more aesthetically pleasing space for Shimer College. If a school of adult education, such as The Feltre School, can create such a beautiful home for itself, even though it is mainly selling grammar courses, I don't understand why Shimer College should relocate to a space that one can't simply say that it is a beautiful place to read and discuss the great books.
Tell IIT that we refuse this lease because Shimer College deserves a beautiful home.


What does it mean that "[Waukegan] wants Shimer College to stay"?

1) Will the upcoming discussion with the mayor of Waukegan be a serious attempt to discuss with the City of Waukegan the possibility of how the City of Waukegan can potentially financially support the college--if the board and administration have already decided that the move to IIT is the best solution to the problem of increasing its revenue? (In a discussion, you arrive at a decision at the end of the discussion by shared consensus; in an argument, you begin with a decision.)

2) How can we find out what the City of Waukegan is willing to offer to Shimer College, if there is no informed transparency by the board and administration?

3) When is the President of Shimer College meeting with the City of Waukegan?

4) Will Shimer College and the City of Waukegan benefit from (and laugh at) the hoax?

Michael Dubensky '03

5 comments :

David Shiner said...

Bill Rice met with the Mayor and a Waukegan city councilman this morning. He just returned and told me that the meeting went quite well. The mayor is looking into possibilities that would help make it easier for Shimer to stay in Waukegan. I don't have more details (and I don't think there are any at this point), but I can say for certain that Bill was happy about this result, and if that if he was dedicated to moving the College he wouldn't have been.

Anonymous said...

Dear Ed,

I’m not one for mincing words, so I’ll be brief.

I said what I said in response to a public announcement of the college’s imminent move to Chicago. The public nature of the announcement, I feel, was premature. I’m still leery of the publicity that the college has gotten in the past weeks. The fact that the announcement was a bald-faced lie was what made me mad.

I wrote things in the heat of temper that I now regret. I apologize for my words contributing to the feeling that this whole thing is garbed in secrecy. I hope that my current actions are making up in some small way for the poor communication that I have used.

Also, I appreciate your condescension to Owen. He is indeed a fairly nice and inoffensive guy. With manners and tact, two things that Owen has that I’m working on, I could have said better things in a better way. With manners and tact, people could be addressed directly rather than through anonymous letters sent through indirect means. With manners and tact, the President and Chair of the Board could have presented this proposal to the community in a better way.

Hell, if we all had manners and tact, we’d be discussing this civilly.

Frankly, I aspire to be like Owen and I hope that the rest of us do too.

Yours truly,

Noah Kippley-Ogman

Anonymous said...

Ed,

Could you or Tim contact the Mayor's office to find out how that meeting went with Bill. Will they make a statement? Will they provide any information? Someone needs to keep an eye out on the Mayor's office. We need to simply know what the City of Waukegan is willing to offer to Shimer in order to make certain that it is on the bargaining table. We have to assume that the decision to relocate has already been made, but that it may be possibly to convince the board to stay.

Michael

Anonymous said...

Michael -

Why do you say "We have to assume that the decision to relocate has already been made, but that it may be possibly to convince the board to stay"?

I think that the members of the board who have posted here are clearly as conflicted about the possible move as anyone, and I'd venture to say that the other members of the board are similarly conflicted.

The assembly hasn't yet met to discuss the proposed move. Any decision of the assembly, as has been said several times, will weigh heavily on a decision of the board - a board without a college couldn't very well move anywhere.

Nu? I'm confused as to what your intent here is.

Noah

Anonymous said...

Noah and Owen---
Me and my anecdotes again.

Was I wrong in assuming that when you, Noah, e-mailed me and told me it was imperative not to speak of this to anyone (too late, I had asked a friend of mine who spoke to faculty if the rumor that we were closing had any merit--- he said it hadn't, and we were just "looking at alternatives"), I assumed I was being asked not to speak of this to anyone. I e-mailed you back and asked if I might pass on your response to my question to people who had told me the school was closing (or merging with ITT, a very different institution than IIT). You didn't respond. I e-mailed you again. No response. I asked you in response to your lj comment. Technically, I am still forbidden to speak of this.

I, myself, believe the board members who say they are undecided. However, Bill Rice anmd Young Kim have both made statements that sound like "all the alums of substance are behind it," (a statement I believe not 100 % accurate--- I would like to ask Barry Carroll his opinioon directly, as he seemed somewhat undecided at the meeting) and I understand that family members of alumni were contacted (before alumni themselves) saying that the school was moving, and that they needed money for it. I realize that getting people to think of things as if they are destiny manifest (to coin a phrase) is a common business sales tactic--- but the general feeling seems to be that even if the board has not made up its mind, this is something that is happening anyway.

I apologize if I am being rude or inflammatory, but, hell, we're Socratics, here, and that means gadflies...