Regarding the Great Trayless Debate
by: Professor Alex WerthEditor, The Tiger:
I am writing to express my admiration for the way the great “trayless” debate was settled by the Student Senate (representing the student body), the College’s administration, and Jim Pohl, Director of Dining Services. To say that this was a heated controversy is perhaps the understatement of the year. We all know there were strong feelings on both sides of the issue, but I am very proud that the decision was ultimately made on the basis of solid empirical evidence rather than charged emotional pleas or ad hominem attacks and the weak argument that “we’ve always done things this way and we can’t ever change.”
No matter which side of the issue you supported, the claim that going trayless is impossible smacks of the argument often heard when children say they don’t like the taste of broccoli despite never having tried it. Yes, there are some dangerous things you know you won’t like without ever trying, but the fact that dining halls on many other campuses have gone trayless and lived to tell the tale (and in their cases, emerged stronger due to financial savings) weakens that line of reasoning in this case. However, given that the experiment was conducted here and that, as Mr. Pohl clearly demonstrated with quantifiable, factual results from our three day trial, such a move would not in fact be a money-saver at H-SC enables us to draw the safe conclusion that ultimately this would not be in our best interests.
I must admit that at the outset I was squarely on the side of those wanted to do away with the trays, but if there’s one thing we all must learn, it’s that it’s much easier to make a case when you have real evidence rather than mere ideological rhetoric on your side. I am very proud of the way everyone involved in this decision acted, and especially happy that it sets a great example for everyone on campus in how to settle a debate amicably and rationally.
- Professor Alex Werth
Related posts:
Loading ...