Follow us on Instagram
Try our daily mini crossword
Subscribe to the newsletter
Download the app

Letters to the Editor

Another food option

Regarding 'Wild Oats on Nassau Street to close' (Tuesday, Feb. 27, 2007):

ADVERTISEMENT

I was really disappointed when I learned from the Wild Oats cashier that the store was set to close in May. My love for healthy snacks, organic produce and delicious free samples seemed destined to languish while Whole Foods flourished on U.S. Route 1.

Fortunately, I recently discovered the Whole Earth Market, a small natural grocery store just two blocks down from Wild Oats at the intersection of Harrison and Nassau. You can grind your own quart-sized jar of peanut butter for $2; you can buy milk and yogurt from local or regional producers; you can ask the guy spraying the vegetables with a gigantic hose which brand of jam you should buy and get an enthusiastic opinion from everyone standing in the checkout line.

I visited the Whole Earth Market for a class on American food systems, and returned to the Frist classroom with a $3 loaf of three-grain bread that had been baked the night before. I urge anyone who feels disheartened by Wild Oats' impending departure to switch their customership just two blocks farther east. It's worth it. Whole Earth Center made my day!

In addition, after spring break, Whole Foods is going to be offering a Wednesday night shuttle service from Princeton campus. The good stuff isn't as far away as we might think. Denali Barron '09

'Radical' tactic wrong

Regarding 'Letters to the Editor' (Tuesday, Feb. 27, 2007):

I find it humorous, in an annoyingly shrill way, that Professor Lee Silver and Jacob Savage '06 rely so heavily upon the tactic of hollering "extremist" and "radical" as loudly as they can so as to "prove" Professor Robert George wrong. As arguments go, this is perhaps the most contemptible (though Jacob Savage's brilliant "you're not getting any" line of reasoning is my favorite). Yet to Silver and Savage's credit, their sophomoric wailing is certainly understandable: Pitting their arguments (what were they again?) against those of George seems a bit unfair, almost cruel.

ADVERTISEMENT

I find the power of Silver's and Savage's lungs refreshing. We all know that George's ceaselessly polite and brilliantly reasoned points can sometimes get a bit exhausting in their correctness. A good loud burst of irrational name-calling by those who disagree with him always seems to clear the air and give the rest of us a bit of a chuckle before midterms. Tom Haine '08

Academics should articulate arguments

I've been noticing that, in quite a few recent letters to the editor, both professors and students have been quick to resort to satire, parody and ridicule of people they disagree with — particularly the letters about the "gay hooker" article in the recent humor issue. Is this appropriate? I would suggest drawing a distinction of roles.

Every citizen has the right of free speech, which I interpret broadly to allow almost any statement to be made in the public forum. A citizen has the right to believe, no matter how implausibly, that satire or ridicule is the most effective way to make an important point.

The academic's role is different. We should advocate and demonstrate methodologies of reasoned argument from ascertainable facts. To my mind, this will usually exclude ridicule, parody and other forms of non-rational argument. It is hard to resist the temptation to laugh at your opponents, but it is more productive to focus on showing why your position is better founded.

Subscribe
Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

When one Princeton professor or student writes about another one in our campus paper, then, even when the issue is of public interest to all citizens, I would prefer to see the academic's role take precedence over the citizen's role. There is a time and place for everything — shouldn't the University be an island of reason in the storm?

As for the joke article, I would place it in neither role. Surely the intent of college humor publications is to be sophomoric. I think a reasoned argument could be made that, in this case, The Daily Princetonian succeeded. Peter Jeffery Scheide Professor of Music History

Most Popular