There had been a flood. Trinity was sinking. Only one building could be saved – the Arts Block or the Hamilton. “Which would you save?” That was the question posed to the packed GMB Chamber last night, as lectures from the Arts Block and Hamilton descended upon the chamber to participate in the University Philosophical Society’s (The Phil) annual liferaft debate. As this was the Phil’s Fourth Week event, entry was open to all students and staff free of charge.
The evening began with minutes being read by Registrar, Sheila Naughton. The minutes were a nice warm up for the crowd and successfully worked to set the tone for the evening. First to the podium was Prof John Stalker, head of the School of Mathematics. Doubts could be raised as to whether Prof Stalker understood the purpose of the debate. He appeared to concede that in the new world full of hunters and gatherers, an in-depth knowledge of mathematics might not be relevant. He remarked that the debate as a whole was a microcosm for the Trinity annual budgeting cycle where the various departments battle for funding and as a result of his experience with this process, he decided that it would be best to accept defeat and resume his seat. After their first pitch, the Hamilton was in trouble.
Enter Dr Matthew Causey, head of the School of Drama, Film and Music. This was the Arts Block’s first opportunity to pitch for their survival. Dr Causey was highly critical of his STEM colleagues, commenting that the “advances” in the world of technology have fuelled the “corrupt materialism” which plagues our world today. In order to prevent a relapse back into this dreary world where “our technology has exceeded our humanity”, Causey advocated that the Arts Block should be saved. He reasoned that the knowledge of Arts Block lecturers would show us how to think and inspire us to question how we should restructure our world, once water levels had returned to normal.
Dr Causey’s Hamilton colleague, Prof Sylvia Draper, head of the School of Chemistry, was unimpressed. Draper emphasised that the Hamilton works in the real world, as opposed to the “fictitious” world that the Arts Block inhabits. She resorted to practical demonstrations to highlight the practical usefulness of chemistry, emphasising her ability to purify the dirty flood water to make it drinkable. Indeed, Draper continued this focus in this new post-apocalyptic world. She contested that the Hamilton should be saved as it is haven of knowledge which will be vital for the reconstruction of life after the flood. In her last-ditch attempt to save the Hamilton, Draper broke into an altered rendition of the well-known Frozen song, “Do You Want to Build a Meth Lab”.
Next up was Dr Peter Stone of the Department of Political Science. In a truly political form, Stone was quick to point out that the political science department is located on College Green and that he and his colleagues were in no real danger. As a result of this safe position, Stone argued that he could provide an impartial and unbiased viewpoint. He pleaded for the Arts Block to be saved as politics are an intrinsically difficult process that “we are just about to understand” and to lose of all of this knowledge would have unimaginable consequences. He argued that the current political situation in the US and Britain is testament to the importance of having an in-depth understanding of politics and human nature and, that in the new post-flood world, this understanding would be incredibly useful. He concluded with a quote from the Republican party conference which saw Jimmy Carter being nominated to re-run for president, “don’t dump him now, he’s beginning to get the hang of it”.
The Hamilton delegation robustly responded in the form of Prof James Lucey. Lucey, a psychiatrist, suggested that there is an overemphasis in today’s world on division. Trinity is divided into arts and science and within this division are many subdivisions. Lucey relied on his thorough understanding of the mind to argue that in the post-apocalyptic world, a holistic person with a multitude of talents would be most beneficial. A scientist who can sing and unlock the beauty of the arts would be humanity’s best chance, according to the charismatic medical professor. In what at this point of the night had become a regular feature of the debate, Lucey also decided to end in song. The audience were treated to a rendition of several verses of Charlie and the Chocolate Factory’s “Pure Imagination”. Lucey pleaded with the chamber to “imagine” and “put a scientist in the raft” at the same time.
Dr Daragh Downes of the School of English was not wooed over by Lucey’s attempts to serenade the chamber, however. Downes seemed pretty content with his position with regard to the rising water levels. As a lecturer in the English department, Downes works on the fourth floor of the Arts Block – a reasonably safe position. Should the flood levels rise further however, Downes also works in the German department, and therefore would be able to migrate up to their offices on the fifth floor of the Arts Block. And should the waters rise further still, Downes’s own office is located on the sixth floor – a position of real safety. It was only if the waters rose up the sixth floor of the Arts Block that Downes was willing to begin to fight for his survival. Downes conceded that the if the Arts Block was saved, it probably would only last a few more hours. However, Downes then told the crowd that he would rather spend his last few hours with a person learned in literature and art rather than a biochemist – this was warmly received by the chamber.
Closing the case for the Hamilton was Dr Richard Porter, Head of Biochemistry. Porter argued that in the new world, new buildings and structures would need to be designed and built. Hence, engineers from the Hamilton would be needed. Moreover, biochemists, with their intricate knowledge of the fundamentals of life, would be enormously helpful as we begin to rebuild following the Great Flood of 2016. Porter refused to let his Hamilton colleagues down, and as such decided to treat the chamber to a song. He took the liberty to alter the Dolly Parton’s classic “Islands in the Stream” and opened with the lyrics “biochemistry, that is what we are, no one in between, how can we go wrong… and we rely on each other, uh ha”.
And now the time came for our devil’s advocate. Senior sophister law and political science student, Hannah Beresford, was of the opinion that no building should be saved. One by one, Beresford went down both the Hamilton and Arts Block benches and pointed out the flaws in each of the lecturers’ arguments.
The debate then came to a close and the crowd were asked to fill out the oratory returns on their chairs which required voting for both the best speaker and the building which should be saved. It was announced that the best speaker of the night was Dr Downes of the English department and that the Hamilton building would be the building saved, leaving the Arts Block to drown. The debate was a resounding success by all accounts and truly lived up to the ethos of Fourth Week – to showcase Trinity’s societies.
Next week, the Phil will debate the motion “This House Believes that College Should Not Be a Safe Space”.
