c
 



      

 

 
 

As I envisage, the core course offers a tripartite system to student learning. The combination of
proctorials, tutorials and lectures help cover all philosophical bases to prepare the students for
second and third years. In this essay I will begin by examining the aims of the philosophy core
course. Then I¶ll examine proctorials through the lens of Mill¶s µOn Liberty.¶ Firstly, I¶ll argue
that proctorials allow for the widest scope for the generation of ideas, allowing students to
actively engage in philosophical debate, as well as critically analyse a plurality of views.
Secondly I¶ll argue that the skills of philosophising often come under the sphere of µtacit
knowledge¶ which cannot be learnt by rote. Proctorials encourage µactive philosophy¶ which is
the only way to gain these tacit skills.

!

The aims of the core course are to introduce students to philosophical ideas and philosophical
thinking. Students examine the concepts and techniques philosophers use in constructing and
assessing arguments: the concepts of consistency and validity, conditional statements, necessary
and sufficient conditions, fallacy and paradox. It teaches students to actively engage in
philosophical debate, and to develop a range of analytical and argumentative skills. The
introduction to the history of philosophy module teaches students the value of exegesis and
hermeneutics in looking at a work of philosophy in context. The core course focuses on critical
analysis and argument by encouraging students to make up their own mind on what they think
about these questions and allow them to assess the means of arguing for your view.







In µOn Liberty¶ Mill writes:

Mankind are not infallible; that their truths, for the most part, are only half-truths; that unity of
opinion, unless resulting from the fullest and freest comparison of opposite opinions,is not
desirable, and diversity not an evil, but a good, until mankind are much more capable than at
present of recognizing all sides of the truth, are principles applicable to men's modes of action,
not less than to their opinions. As it is useful that while mankind are imperfect there should be
different opinions, so is it that there should be different experiments of living.
ŒMill, 1859)

Since humans first gained the ability to think philosophically they have begun an experiment.
This experiment has been ongoing for at least the last 10,000 years. The fundamental purpose of
this experiment is to discover answers to primary interlinked questions. Some of these
fundamental questions include: "What is there? Why is there is what there is? How should one
live? Philosophy is a process of experimentation and evolution. It is the academic manifestation
of Mill¶s proposal of µexperiments in living¶. A current that has run against philosophy since the
earliest times is that of dogmatism. Dogma stagnates, the dogmatic schools of the Platonists,
plagued and retarded science and thought till at least the Enlightenment. Things are held as
dogma because open discussion is not allowed. Proctorials teach students to reject dogma as
almost no opinion is disallowed and instead students come to coherent positions amongst each
other and not by appealing to dogma. Proctorials emphasize the anti-authoritarian nature of
philosophy, and they equip students with the skills to wrestle with, and argue lucidly for or
against the greats.
Proctorials provide an anti-authoritarian space to experiment with new ideas, reasoning
techniques and forms of expression. They can experiment with language too, whether using
informal talk or technical speech. Proctees come to sessions often with little knowledge of the
subject at hand and can develop and test their ideas amongst each other. Proctorials make the
students more self-reliant so they can become active philosophers, not passive listeners. Students
are more responsible for contributions to discussion in proctorials. If the group doesn¶t speak
there are no lecturers or tutors to step and fill the gap of conversation. Additionally, they must
come up with their own points and ideas, and not just repeat or uncritically agree with the tutor.
The biggest benefit in proctorials is that it teaches active philosophising; they are encouraged to
do the act of philosophy themselves and not passively sit absorbing and learning to parrot pre-
existing ideas ± they must formulate their own. Without lecturers and tutors who exercise real
power over the proctees and inflict a stultifying influence, proctees can really experiment in their
ideas and thought.

Proctorials encourage student discussion and debate which can follow areas anyone is interested
in or unsure about and thus foster a wider exploration of the discipline. Many of these students
haven¶t done philosophy before or have patchy knowledge. The comparative expertise of the
students who have followed the A- level curriculum is also beneficial for the group. The need for
proctees to explain their ideas or concepts to one another gives training to proctees in exposition
and rigorous argumentation on one hand, or give skills in understanding and critically analysing
complex verbal communication. The act of informal teaching not only increases the confidence of
the students, it also improve their command of the material. As Seneca says, ³the process [of
teaching] is mutual; for men learn while they teach.´ ŒSeneca, 2002)

Proctorials also provide a space where students don¶t become overawed. There may be students
that are more able than others but there is no expert in the room. No tutor is present who is
responsible for marks. The absence of an authority figure helps disabuse students of the idea that
there is going to be a particular right answer to a philosophical question. They provide a more
relaxed space for people to discuss the material without worrying about getting it wrong too
much. This relatively free environment allows students to test out new ideas which might be more
restricted in a more formal setting. The absence of an authority figure also fosters confidence
amongst the proctees.
In tutorials, tutors answer queries. They mop up any doubts that students might have about the
lecture and the topic. However, in doing that they necessarily restrict the range of thought a
student might have, and shut off avenues of thought by delineating right and wrong answers.
Shutting off avenues and limiting the range of possible answers a student might have is useful in
some cases, especially in later years to eliminate clearly fallacious reasoning. However, in earlier
years the mere exercise of thought is extremely valuable. Additionally, allowing students to
identify fallacious reasoning or bad arguments amongst themselves are useful skills to develop.

Proctorials not only emphasise the individualist nature of philosophy, they also emphasise
collaboration. In the first two modules in the autumn terms students work with, or against each
other on a particular philosophical problem. Often consensus emerges, sometimes binary
positions are held, and sometimes the answers are confused and in disarray. Sometimes confusion
is a helpful state for proctees to develop. It is important for them to get the sense of how
ridiculously difficult philosophy is. False surety in early years is dangerous. However, in the
second term during the Descartes module students are grouped into two µteams¶ ± A and B.
During proctorial lessons the teams must come up with a consensus position on a certain question
and then attempt to convince the other team of their solution. This may be slightly contrived but
the circumstance of enforced agreements allows students to build on each others¶ arguments
while appreciating how they may come to hold contrary views from the same raw material.
The consensus building process allows students to lay bare arguments and explore the nuts and
bolts of their formation by dissecting a range of positions to come to a mutually agreeable
position. Furthermore, arguing about differences of opinion and collaboration are not mutually
exclusive. Fruitful collaboration is the discussion of differences in a friendly way, in the hope that
the outcome will be better than either side would have produced independently1. To pervert an
aphorism that Kanye West popularised ± often what does not kill an argument only makes it
stronger. Even when a thesis is struck a mortal wound, the very practice a proctees has in
defending it will improve his/her philosophising.

 

 
 


In some ways philosophising is like riding a bike. It¶s very easy to explain in a superficial sense,
you might describe the art of balance, or discuss the rotational movement of pedalling, but to
truly learn to cycle one must do it. Philosophy is similar ± one may study Aristotelian syllogisms
for years but to truly learn to argue cogently one must practice. Much of philosophical technique
is non-communicable. Skills in argument and persuasion are very unlikely to be successfully
taught. Much of these skills cannot be µput into words¶ ± it is µtacit knowledge¶, which can only
be communicated by observing the practical results of what other people do and imitating
successful role models even when the µreasons¶ for this success cannot be articulated verbally.
Proctorials teach his tacit knowledge in philosophising. They allow students to get together and
demonstrate argument styles and techniques.

The differences in ability and knowledge do cause problems in proctorials by creating informal
hierarchies which may suppress the expression of some proctees¶ valid thoughts or ideas but it
does have some benefits. This ability differential allows for the most successful argument
patterns and communication styles are mimicked by other students. As Mill writes ³free scope
should be given to varieties of character ... and that the worth of different modes of life should be
proved practically, when any one thinks fit to try them´ ŒMill, 1859). ³It is the individual vigor
and manifold diversity, which combine themselves in originality´ towards development ŒMill,
1859). It is this µtesting out¶ of ideas in the rough and tumble of philosophical debate that fuels
progress amongst proctees. They learn the discipline of philosophy by doing it. The mish-mash of
different ideas and ways of doing generated over the course of an hour by young philosophers
mesh together to form concepts and arguments superior to the sum of their parts.

The most successful speakers, in argument or in content are mimicked by other proctees but none
are regarded infallible. It is this process of mimicking success, avoiding failure and constantly
questioning which contributes to the philosophers¶ personal grown and the evolution of the level
of discourse throughout the proctorials2.

O
 


Of course, proctorials couldn¶t be all there is. The department would be severely impoverished if
this were the case. However, within a diversity of practices I believe proctorials provide needed
spaces for active philosophising; Proctorials are all about doing philosophy. The skills I¶ve
described above are basic philosophical skills. These are skills of constantly questioning, skills of
arguing, explaining ideas, defending arguments. These are skills which cannot be learnt in a
lecture theatre. They must be done. While essays enhance one¶s written philosophical skills,

1
I am grateful to George Macdonald-Ross for pointing this out.
2
These thoughts are indebted to Hayek͛s discussion of market processes in ͚The use of Knowledge in Society͛
(Hayek, 1945)
proctorials excel in oral philosophical training. Proctorials do not just create students µwho just
know about philosophy, they produce philosophers.¶3

Words: 1648


 

Hayek, F. A. (1945). The Use of Knowledge in Society. !
  


   ,
American Economic Review.

Mill, J. (1859). 
 Digireads.com.

Seneca, L. (2002 - trans). 
 (R. M. Gummere, Trans.) Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard
University Press.

!




For this essay I want to thank Ceri Williams and Rachael Harrington for their input on how
proctorials are from a current proctee¶s perspective, George Macdonald-Ross for telling me
about the genesis and purpose of the proctorial system and of course all my lovely proctees
over the last year for the privilege of listening i3n on their conversations.

3
Quote from first year handbook