Faculty Needs MR 24

To the Editors of The Crimson:

If ever doubting students needed proof that education, especially philosophy pays, even in a technological era, it can be found in the Nadav Safran case. Professor Sissela Bok had hardly left the Yard when her wise words on ethics in general and secrecy in particular were forgotten. I hear that she has been invited to return to give Moral Reasoning 24. I do not know it this is in consequence of the Satran case; whether or not it is, it should be open not only to undergraduates, but to deans and faculty, who seem also to be in need of core courses.

Professor Bok's influence seems to have waned, but Richard Nixon's seemed to have waxed. Former Dean of the Faculty Henry Rosovsky says in connection with the finding that he did not pass on his knowledge of Safran's CIA funding (was that the result of oversight of was it policy?) that "it was an administrative error." Mortal sin and venial sin were good enough for St. Augustine but not for Dean Rosovsky, who has come up with a third theological category: administrative sin. What is the penance reuired for absolution? Or may it be obtained by presidential pardon or by silence? His phrase brings back memories of Nixon's plaintive comment at the time of Watergate: "I was responsible, but I'm not to blame." Thus do former presidents and deans square their shoulders and assume the burdens of their deeds, while others twist slowly in the wind.

Professor Safran, of course, may not feel that he has been victimized at all. He still has his $107,000. Giddings Professor of Sociology, Columbia