Are our discussions really mediocre?
I'm in no way attacking your statement Anton but what you said really struck me. Before we discussed this in class I was always impressed with our discussions. From talking with people from other CIE classes, it always seemed as though our class held impressive discussions. I've heard a lot of complaints about classes where no one wants to contribute or where one person dominates or even where the professor dominates the discussion. We never have any of those issues. Our discussions always flow very well and everyone always seemed comfortable enough to share their honest opinions.
However, since Anton made this statement I have been thinking more about the actual content of our discussions. It is true that at times we talk about "significant" and interesting issues, but there are also many times when I feel like we are simply bantering back and forth. This seems to be what is bothering Anton. But for me, if we held serious, profound discussions all the time our discussions would falter. There needs to be times of lightheartedness and insignificance. I honestly don't believe that humans can be serious all the time; its against our nature. This is why we all need to let loose and have fun once in a while. The same must go for our discussions. We need to treat our mental state in the same manner as our physical state.
So as much as I understand Anton's frustration, I think that it is important to have these periods of mediocrity in our discussions. Without them, our discussions could become tired and worn out. The lightheartedness allows for interesting twists on our discussions and allows people to think about various issues in ways they normally wouldn't.