用户中心
In the conflict with the forces within the college our teachers find themselves fighting essentially the same battle as against the foes without. In a hundred different ways the friends of the college, students, graduates, trustees, and even colleagues, seem to them so to misunderstand its mission as to minimize or to falsify its intellectual ideals. The college is a good place for making friends; it gives excellent experience in getting on with men; it has exceptional advantages as an athletic club; is a relatively safe place for a boy when he first leaves home; on a whole it may improve a student's manners;it gives acquaintance with lofty ideals of character, preaches the doctrine of social service, exalts the virtues and duties of citizenship. All these conceptions seem to the teacher to hide or to obscure the fact that the college is fundamentally a place of the mind, a time for thinking, an opportunity for knowing. And perhaps in proportion to their own loftiness of purpose and motive they are the more dangerous as tending all the more powerfully to replace or to nullify the underlying principle upon which they all depend. Here again when misconception clears away, one can have no doubt that the battle of the teacher is a righteous one. It is well that a boy should have four good years of athletic sport, playing his own games and watching the games of his fellows; it is well that his manners should be improved; it is worth while to make good friends; it is very desirable to develop the power of understanding and working with other men; it is surely good to grow in strength and purity of character, in devotion to the interests of society, in readiness to meet obligations and opportunities of citizenship. If any one of these be lacking from the fruits of a college course we may well complain of the harvest. And yet is it not true that by sheer pressure of these, by the driving and pulling of the social forces within and without the college, the mind of the student is constantly torn from its chief concern? Do not our social and practical interests distract our boys from the intellectual achievement which should dominate their imagination and command their zeal? I believe that one may take it as the deliberate judgment of the teachers of our colleges to-day that the function of the college is constantly misunderstood, and that it is subjected to demands which, however friendly in intent, are yet destructive of its intellectual efficiency and success.
在与大学内部势力纠缠的过程中，我们的教师们发现自己同样陷于与外部敌人的斗争之中。在他们看来，大学的赞助者、在校生、毕业生、董事会成员，甚至连他们的同事似乎都在以千姿百态的方式曲解着大学的使命，将它的知识思想性理想降到最低层次甚至予以歪曲。大学是一个结交朋友的绝佳之地；让人享受与人相处时的美好体验；拥有作为“体育俱乐部”的特殊优势；对于第一次离家的孩子来说，它是一个相对安全之地；总的来说，它会改善一个学生的行为举止；让崇高的理想和高尚的情操与人为伴，宣传社会服务的信条，赞扬公民的美德和职责。所有这些观点对一个教师来说似乎都是在隐藏或掩盖一个事实，即大学从根本上讲是一个思想的圣地，一段思考的时光，一次认知的机会。这些观点蕴藏着崇高的目的和动机，但与此相称，可能也愈发危险，因为它们在试图以更强有力的方式替代或抹除其赖以存在的基本原则。当这些错误观念得以清除时，就没有人能怀疑大学教师打的是一场正义之仗。确实，一个孩子应该进行整整四年的体育运动，或自己去参加比赛，或观看同伴的赛事；他的行为举止的确需要规范得体；结交益友乃意义非凡之事；理解力与协作的能力同样很有价值；身心得以不断成长，为社会福利做出更多贡献，更加愿意承担公民应尽的义务，善于抓住应有的机会，这些当然都是益事。如果其中任何一项从大学课程的教育成果中缺失，我们很可能抱怨收获不丰。然而，正是在诸如此类的重压之下，在被大学校园内外的社会力量的推拉撕扯之中，学生的思想常常偏离其主要关注点，这难道不是事实吗？难道我们的社会实际利益没有使我们的学生们从理应主宰他们的想象力和激情的思想成果中分心吗？我认为人们或许可以将此理解为今日之大学教师在深思熟虑后做出的判断，即大学的作用一直在被误解，认为其受制于现实需求，而这种需求虽然意图良好，却对思想教育的效率和成功产生毁灭性的作用。
在与大学内部势力纠缠的过程中，我们的教师们发现自己同样陷于与外部敌人的斗争之中。在他们看来，大学的赞助者、在校生、毕业生、董事会成员，甚至连他们的同事似乎都在以千姿百态的方式曲解着大学的使命，将它的知识思想性理想降到最低层次甚至予以歪曲。大学是一个结交朋友的绝佳之地；让人享受与人相处时的美好体验；拥有作为“体育俱乐部”的特殊优势；对于第一次离家的孩子来说，它是一个相对安全之地；总的来说，它会改善一个学生的行为举止；让崇高的理想和高尚的情操与人为伴，宣传社会服务的信条，赞扬公民的美德和职责。所有这些观点对一个教师来说似乎都是在隐藏或掩盖一个事实，即大学从根本上讲是一个思想的圣地，一段思考的时光，一次认知的机会。这些观点蕴藏着崇高的目的和动机，但与此相称，可能也愈发危险，因为它们在试图以更强有力的方式替代或抹除其赖以存在的基本原则。当这些错误观念得以清除时，就没有人能怀疑大学教师打的是一场正义之仗。确实，一个孩子应该进行整整四年的体育运动，或自己去参加比赛，或观看同伴的赛事；他的行为举止的确需要规范得体；结交益友乃意义非凡之事；理解力与协作的能力同样很有价值；身心得以不断成长，为社会福利做出更多贡献，更加愿意承担公民应尽的义务，善于抓住应有的机会，这些当然都是益事。如果其中任何一项从大学课程的教育成果中缺失，我们很可能抱怨收获不丰。然而，正是在诸如此类的重压之下，在被大学校园内外的社会力量的推拉撕扯之中，学生的思想常常偏离其主要关注点，这难道不是事实吗？难道我们的社会实际利益没有使我们的学生们从理应主宰他们的想象力和激情的思想成果中分心吗？我认为人们或许可以将此理解为今日之大学教师在深思熟虑后做出的判断，即大学的作用一直在被误解，认为其受制于现实需求，而这种需求虽然意图良好，却对思想教育的效率和成功产生毁灭性的作用。
