RIGHT THINKING AND THE WAR

President Conant, Archibald MacLeish, Raymond Gram Swing, and dozens of other educators and writers have had a shot during the past six months at explaining what's the matter with the American undergraduate. Two newcomers join their ranks this month: Mortimer Adler, Chicago professor, St. John's enthusiast, and author of "How to Read a Book"; and Paul P. Cram, straw-boss of History I.

Writing in the current issues of Harper's and the Atlantic Monthly respectively, Adler and Cram are in close agreement in their diagnoses of the ills of the younger generation. They state that the current undergraduate is skeptical of principles and moral issues and has no concept of the difference between right and wrong. The student of today has followed the broad path of science down into the smoking hell of positivism and empirical rationalism, a hell whose number one devil is John Dewey.

In other words, as Mr. Cram puts it, "the spiritual and ethical content has been exhausted from American education," leaving the entire field to science. Misused by intellectuals, according to Mr. Adler, experimental scientific methods have been applied indiscriminately to non-scientific fields, and have led students to question or deny the existence of absolute ethical and moral values. The solution of both men is a complete revamping of our educational system.

This sudden discovery of what Mr. Cram, terms "the dichotomy between two generations" occurred when a large and articulate section of American college students protested vigorously against involvement of this country in the war. Adler and Cram imply that if youth had the right training, the right ideals, and the right moral perceptions, they wouldn't think as they do about the War.

Actually, though Adler and Cram have delved into a fundamental educational problem, it is not one which has much bearing on current discussions of national policy. Questions of guns, tanks, production, naval bases, airplanes, the proper size for an army, the extent to which we should participate in the war, and the direction of our diplomacy are not to be solved merely by urging youth to stop disbelieving in ideals and principles. To decide the host of issues which confront him, the citizen must inform himself, and weigh and analyze the evidence in the light of possible alternatives and concrete, practical effect. Waldo Frank is a writer who agrees completely with Adler and Cram about the destruction wrought by the prevalence of empirical nationalism in intellectual circles and its penetration down through the educational system. Yet, in his latest book, "Chart for Rough Water", he takes the stand for which undergraduates are accused of being faithless and skeptical, and says, "We must try, it seems to me plain, by every intelligent means to avoid physical involvement in war."