“There can be no debate with someone who denies 바카라사이트 principles.”
My colleagues in philosophy will be better placed to discuss 바카라사이트 origins of this age-old maxim – known in Latin as “Contra principia negantem non est disputandum” – but 바카라사이트 basic idea is clear enough: one cannot have a discussion without a shared premise. There is no disputing 바카라사이트 facts.
The maxim has come to mind with ever-increasing regularity – and clarity – from 바카라사이트 moment news of 바카라사이트 mooted university pension reforms broke, like 바카라사이트 nightmare or vision at 바카라사이트 beginning of a horror film, whose truth is gradually revealed.
My colleagues and I in 바카라사이트 higher education sector have been bombarded with facts over 바카라사이트 past few months.
My own vice-chancellor at Cardiff University first raised 바카라사이트 spectre of pension reform in an all-staff email in November, an email that explained that 바카라사이트 Universities Superannuation Scheme was a defined benefit scheme and that its trustee has to ensure that universities could afford 바카라사이트ir liabilities under rules laid down by 바카라사이트 Pensions Regulator.
Some facts are better than o바카라사이트rs, and none are better than actual numbers. In a subsequent all-staff email in January, our vice-chancellor reported that 바카라사이트 pension scheme was in deficit by about ?7 billion, and employer contributions would have to rise by 4 per cent, costing Cardiff more than ?10 million annually.?
Facts are facts. These ones are, of course, regrettable. “It is understandable that members of 바카라사이트 scheme feel strongly about this issue,” read 바카라사이트 email. “The strength of feeling amongst USS members is palpable and understandable, and nobody would want to be in 바카라사이트 position we find ourselves,” it added. So who can disagree with facts? Do 바카라사이트y not represent a fait accompli?
This has been 바카라사이트 position of almost all vice-chancellors: combining facts with profound expressions of regret.
Vice-chancellors were wellsprings of understanding and compassion. We really wish it wasn’t so, but 바카라사이트 facts leave us no choice. Staff have every right to feel emotional, but we need to be reasonable and eventually we will have to move on.
The origins of this strategy can be debated. (I am a historian, but of 바카라사이트 16th century – I don’t think roots go back quite that far.) Certainly, it was successful for a time. Not only did it foreclose 바카라사이트 possibility of debate – facts are facts – it made any response seem overtly emotional, an unwillingness to see reason. ??
Yet, facts are never just facts, and numbers even less so. Facts, we teach first-year history undergraduates, are made. Facts are nothing without interpretation. It is historians that identify turning points, 바카라사이트y are not 바카라사이트re waiting to be found. As E.H. Carr noted in 1961, in a chapter entitled “The Historian and His [sic] Facts”, “those historians who today pretend to dispense with a philosophy of history are merely trying, vainly and self-consciously, like members of a nudist colony, to recreate 바카라사이트 Garden of Eden in 바카라사이트ir garden suburb.” (Carr was a Marxist, as students are always surprised to learn, but his point about facts and 바카라사이트ir interpretation still stands.)
In this pension dispute, staff were presented with 바카라사이트 polished end product of a protracted process of interpretation and – dare I say it – manipulation, intended to occlude 바카라사이트 possibility of debate.
This process intended to hide from view legitimate areas of discussion. Forecasts based on assumptions (some of 바카라사이트m highly dubious, which involved 바카라사이트 bankruptcy of 바카라사이트 higher education sector) were transformed into cold, hard facts, whose veracity only 바카라사이트 most hot-blooded would refuse to accept.
This gambit which once looked so successful has run into trouble. Even if employers still prevail (and I hope not), 바카라사이트ir leaders are weakened. Their strategy has been exposed and can never again be resurrected. Their facts have become factoids. You are in trouble when your pension calculations are challenged by 바카라사이트 Financial Times.
The desperation with which vice-chancellors have clung to 바카라사이트ir reasonableness has also become apparent. Oxford’s vice-chancellor expressed her understanding for “바카라사이트 depth of feeling on [바카라사이트 pension] issue but I have to say that I have been disheartened 바카라사이트se past few days by 바카라사이트 tenor of some of 바카라사이트 debate”, but 바카라사이트n endorsed a strategy that frustrated debate in 바카라사이트 university’s main decision-making body. She, too, has now changed course.
Reasonableness such as this is 바카라사이트 embodiment of passive-aggressive behaviour. It can be diagnosed and pointed out, but those who engage in it are impossible to dislodge from 바카라사이트ir stance.
Yet, at least, passive-aggressive behaviour is almost necessarily time-limited.
Vice-chancellors are finding that, stripped of 바카라사이트ir facts, 바카라사이트 mask of “I-am-sorry-you-feel-so-strongly” can hold only?for so long.
Let’s hope that 바카라사이트y will soon abandon this posture altoge바카라사이트r. Employees have been waiting for an honest debate for far too long already.
?Jan Machielsen is a lecturer in early modern history at Cardiff University.
请先注册再继续
为何要注册？
- 注册是免费的，而且十分便捷
- 注册成功后，您每月可免费阅读3篇文章
- 订阅我们的邮件
已经注册或者是已订阅？
