Recommendations, looking forward, the wider implications

The conformication of learning is a trend that may be observed as universities and particularly degrees in humanities face large public spending cuts. This will cause less diversity of study and mergers between departments. George Orwell wrote that "Orthodoxy means not thinking - not having to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness." It was a consensus within the debates that it is socially beneficial to have choice and diversity of study lest we continue becoming a nation who ‘know the price of everything and the value of nothing’ racing in the direction of mass comodification.
The future role of politics and philosophy is a critical issue as the debates took a surprising turn in a very philosophical direction. Underlying concepts such as Utilitarianism and Kantianism define a person’s political persuasions and are thus crucial to the formation of strategic solutions and direction. The debate consensus appeared to be strongly in favour of reversing the trend towards detached and alienated individualism and in favour of more collectivism and the idea of a society based upon participation. The philosophy of Aristotle, that no one should be a completely private individual, was referenced several times and it seems as though a theme of Aristotelianism could add a deeper current of thought and distinctiveness to future discussions or social movements born of this debate.
The future role of faith was debated by contributors from a wide range of perspectives with the Bishop of Leicester rightly pointing out the religious origins of Universities in the UK. The question that now seems to be pertinent is whether religious groups will augment social interaction between Universities and wider society or whether, as Marx said, they will distract from the important economic, strategic, political and philosophical questions, fulfilling the role of ‘Opium of the masses’. The Vice Chancellor and Bishop concurred that faith group links were important and it is now time for the student voice to either add vigorous support or intelligent and constructive dissent.
Giving the debate shape direction, energy and most importantly an outcome could be achieved through the creation of a grassroots intellectual collective. Suggestion was made during the student debate that a ‘Leicester Citizens’ movement could be created –emulating the ‘London Citizens’ group. Indeed this would need to go through a intermediary stage of being ‘DMUCitizens’ -or similar- before Leicester Council and the leading stakeholders of Leicester would endorse, support and promote such a movement, however the initial stage has already been initiated as #dmu&me via social network site twitter. Encouragingly there is already a small group of active contributors to this vehicle of communication.
In terms of a direct answer to the question ‘are universities a public good?’, yes! was the overwhelming response from the audience. The policy debate now appears to be: ‘in what ratio should the private citizen and public pay for university?’

Benjamin J Harrison