FROM THE UNDERGRADUATE CHAIR

Sitting in his chair talking with members of the alumni gets to be more of a real pleasure month after month, when it is vividly recalled that these few words are the only tangible link between the undergraduate mind and that mind so essentially different in viewpoint, the alumni mind. The recollection is not always pleasant, when remembering how futile it is to attempt a totally accurate picture of the campus today. After all, it can only be the opinion of an individual.

These words are mentioned to allay any feeling on the part of the alumni that the undergraduate of today has a tolerance "for Dartmouth," as one alumni paper reaching Hanover has hinted. Whatever impressions individual undergraduates give to their respective alumni acquaintances notwithstanding, the 1925 student body is every bit as much wrapped up in the College, its past and future, as have been similar groups of former years.

The interest, however, manifests itself in a new way. Rallies have passed. Pennantwaving evidently is gone. But the 1925 undergraduate expresses his Dartmouth in what seems a far more valuable way. He is just beginning to look deeply into matters of educational policy, to arrange his values in a series far more significant, properly to adjust the importance of self-education as a part of his duty to the College.

He does not care to encourage the myths of campus life,—The Dartmouth this year has maintained a definite policy of pricking those bubbles of reputed fact which are mythical. He does not want to continue names, with regard to the life of the campus, when they have lost significance. This is one reason why The Dartmouth heretically some might say, has called for a redefinition of the position and duty of Palaeopitus.

Until now, "Senior governing body," has been a part of the title of Palaeopitus. The 1925 group has not concerned itself with many undergraduate matters, except in execution of such duties as collecting College Chest funds and waiting for chances to legislate. In three instances, at least, executive action anticipated or precluded action of this latter nature this fall. First, when overcuts were declared for leaving early for the Yale football game; second, the second year fraternity rushing rule; third, no stags to be allowed at the Carnival Ball.

At least two members of Palaeopitus assumed that "senior governing body" was a misnomer, and conferred with the Administration. The result might be judged by the following editorial from The Dartmouth, quoted in part:

"THE DARTMOUTH raised the issue of the value, power and place of Palaeopitus in the College. The crux of the entire matter was —-has Dartmouth any particle of student government or has it not? The Administration has replied, 'Practically none.' THE DARTMOUTH does not object to the reply. We were moved merely with a desire to clear the air of the dense fog which surrounded Palaeopitus. And now there is real foundation for the formation of new opinions on the subject.

"We have doubt as to the usefulness of continuing the institution of Palaeopitus now that this Administration attitude is known. There may, however, be some value in retaining a body to do the odd jobs of the campus, to act occasionally on student opinion, and to keep order by great seriousness. Then, too, Palaeopitus, empty honor that it may be, is a delightful blind goal to bring men out for campus competitions."

Needless to say, this viewpoint in the whole is not held by the majority of the College. In fact, the undergraduates did not concern themselves with the question to the point of perturbation. One junior, however, worried, lest the Administration take a too-definite stand regarding the uselessness of having a go-between body. He expressed hopes that the institution will be allowed to continue until next year, so that the 1926 class will have a chance. Doubtless he will get his wish.

The ruling out of stags at the Carnival Ball crystallized the Palaeopitus sentiment, or at least brought it into print as suggested. Several indignant communications to The Dartmouth resulted in the circulation of a petition to modify the ruling and talk of a forum where the matter should be discussed. The Outing Club Council, however, took the Administration ruling as final and to date nothing has come of the matter.

Reason would indicate that total exclusion of stags will not accomplish the desired effect of reforming student parties. A predominance of stags has a harmful effect, no doubt, but the total absence of them is just as likely to cast a damper on proceedings—from the student viewpoint, at least. The most logical pleas seem to be for allowance of senior stags, or for allowance of stags at the price of the regular couple ticket. Either method probably would serve the purpose.

In the meanwhile, the heat of the discussion abates as final examinations approach. In the distance, Carnival looms—a pleasant contemplation. Arrangements have gone ahead rapidly since the College reopened. Brace '25 has proven an excellent president for the Outing Club, and, under his direction, the various committees are working smoothly.

Much national interest has been attracted by a paper read by Professor H. T. Moore before the Psychologists section of the American Association for the Advancement of Science at Washington, D. C., recently. In that his study effectively stabs the bugaboo of Dartmouth student radicalism, and in view of the fear of such a bugaboo on the part of some alumni, it might be well here to print a summary of his paper, as follows:

By "radicalism" I mean a mental attitude that is peculiarably favorable to changes in existing social institutions, and by "conservatism" one that is unfavorable to such changes. The question raised is not whether the one attitude is better than the other, but simply whether there is such a thing as an innate disposition that naturally inclines one man in the direction of radical and another in the direction of conservative attitudes.

In raising this question I have tried as far as possible to get away from environment influences by taking subjects of the same sex, age, and general class of the population, —namely, male college upperclassmen, all from large Eastern institutions. Environment may be vastly more important than heredity in any given instance of radicalism or conservatism, but the particular point of these experiments is the attempt to discover whether there may be inborn psychological traits that influence an individual's attitude toward social problems.

The first step in the experiment was to obtain a group of certified "radicals" and "conservatives." For this purpose 20 questions, prepared largely by Professor Stuart A. Rice, were submitted to 168 Yale students, 400 Dartmouth students, and 46 Columbia students. The questions covered the widest range of topics, running all the way from sexual morals to the Soviet Republic. Conservative majorities were returned by the Yale men on 13 of the 20 questions; by Dartmouth men on 10 questions, and by Columbia men on six questions. The relation of "intelligence" to radical answers was examined for each separate question with many interesting results.

On the basis of the questionnaire 30 Dartmouth men who returned radical answers on at least 14 questions, and 30 others who returned conservative answers on at least 13 questions were selected as "radical" and "conservative" groups for intensive study. The intelligence test scores of these two groups of men gave exactly the same average, and a test used by Woodworth for detecting psycho-neurotic tendencies in soldiers indicated no difference in the emotional stability of the two groups. But further special tests brought to light some striking differences. The "radicals" were by far less easily influenced by majority opinion in making moral comparisons; they were by far more apt at breaking long-established habits; they were much readier to "take a chance" in a test in which the relative importance of speed and accuracy was unknown; and in a test of free association they responded with many more unusual words than did the conservatives. Their reaction time was distinctly quicker than that of the conservatives.

In brief, the Dartmouth "radicals" in these experiments present a picture of a neuromuscular machine by nature keyed up for speed and flexibility, whereas the "conservatives" seem distinctly more fitted by nature for regularity of function. If such differences are to be found in 'equal proportions throughout the world it is a point that must be taken account of in any theory of progress.

William Leffingwell Farnsworth today is the baby of the class of 1926.

The first 1926 youngster arrived in New York on the first day of 1925. He is the son of Mr. and Mrs. William Farnsworth, who have erected a home for him in Hanover.

The father wired news of the event as follows: "1926 Class Baby arrived January 1. Pespite all precedent it is a boy William Leffingwell Farnsworth. Mother doing very well."

Farnsworth (senior) enterad originally with the class of 1925. Following his marriage he spent a year traveling abroad. He is a member of the Sigma Alpha Epsilon fraternity. Mrs. Farnsworth is a sister of Henry Leffingwell '25.

Among the diversions of the past month have been lectures by Richard LeGallienn'e, poet; Grant Robertson, historian; William Webster Ellsworth, critic; Major Charles H. Mason, army officer; and the Rev. A. R. Petty, social worker. The musical program included concerts by the Community Orchestra and the Flonzaley Quartet.

Speaking of music, Professor Homer Whitford recently published an article in which he traced the change of student musical taste from melody to emotional pieces.

Jim Oberlander '26 and Nate Parker '26, halfback and tackle on the varsity eleven last fall, have been in demand as speakers to high school teams. They recently traveled to Barre, Vt., where they addressed a gathering of boys.

The football letter men were entertained at a dinner and awarded gold footballs just before finals.

The Outing Club is planning for the Mt. Washington trip on February 21-25. Precautions to assure the safety of the party are being taken, following the accident of last year.

The debating team won in Hanover and lost in New York, opposing Amherst and Columbia respectively, in their last contest.

Herring-bone and straight runs